Why AB 470 Threatens 911 Access and Puts Californians at Risk

Assembly Bill 470: What Californians Need to Know

Assembly Bill 470 (AB 470) could fundamentally reshape how emergency and basic phone services are provided across California. Here's what Californians need to know about the bill and why so many are raising concerns.

Key Takeaways

• More than 1 million emergency calls in California are still made each year over copper landlines, especially in areas where mobile service is unreliable or unavailable.
• AB 470 was written and sponsored by AT&T to override the CPUC process and eliminate its obligation to provide basic phone service – with no legal mandate to improve service.
• The bill does not guarantee that AT&T will expand its fiber build-out. 
• It would be the first law in California history to revoke the public’s right to communications services.
• The CPUC already has a plan to modernize service while protecting public safety. AB 470 would sideline that process and put Californians – especially those in rural and low-income communities – at risk.

What is AB 470 and why is it controversial?

In 2023, AT&T asked the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) for permission to end its role as a Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) – the legal obligation to provide phone service to anyone who requests it in its service territory.

This request sparked widespread concern, particularly in rural and low-income communities where residents rely on AT&T for basic communications and 911 access, especially during medical emergencies, disasters, and power outages.

AT&T then sponsored AB 470, legislation that would override the CPUC’s regulatory process and allow the company to discontinue essential service while securing billions in new profits – with no requirement to improve service.

What role does the CPUC and the Public Advocates Office play?

The CPUC has long prioritized access to reliable communications for all Californians, especially during emergencies. The Public Advocates Office has submitted a detailed plan that would allow AT&T to retire outdated copper networks while ensuring Californians do not lose access to essential services, all while still investing in modern infrastructure and earning long-term profits.

This balanced approach would disappear if AB 470 is signed into law. The Public Advocates Office joins dozens of opponents – including schools, libraries, local governments, consumer and disability rights groups, labor unions, and emergency service providers – in opposing the bill.

How many Californians still rely on landlines to call 911?

More than 1 million emergency calls in California are still made each year over copper landlines, often in areas where mobile service is unreliable or unavailable.

The CPUC’s public record includes powerful pleas from residents who survived life-threatening emergencies only because their landline worked when their cell phone failed. Any law that weakens universal service obligations must take these stories seriously and prioritize public safety.

According to data from the California Office of Emergency Services, even a 1% decline in service on copper networks could mean 10,000 emergency calls fail to connect. That’s not a risk the state can afford to take.

Source: Cal OES 9‑1‑1 Emergency Communications Branch Report, California State 9‑1‑1 Advisory Board meeting, May 14, 2025.

Does AB 470 rely on flawed data about 911 access?

Yes. Early versions of AB 470 would have required the CPUC to rely on a mobile coverage dataset that misleadingly suggests 911 is accessible everywhere – even in areas with no mobile service.

Though amended, the bill still directs the CPUC to use datasets handpicked by AT&T, introducing significant risk of error. And no reliable state or federal dataset currently confirms where 911 access is available via mobile service.

If California removes service obligations based on flawed data, an undeterminable number of people could be left without a way to reach 911 in an emergency.

Does AB 470 require AT&T to build more fiber?

Not in a meaningful or enforceable way.

AB 470 gives the false impression that AT&T would be required to expand broadband in exchange for deregulation. It requires fiber to be built to three times the number of basic phone service customers, but that number is set at the time AT&T applies to exit its COLR obligations. This creates a perverse incentive to reduce that number in advance by:

• Shifting customers to other plans through pricing or marketing
• Offering bundled deals to disguise basic service
• Illegally discontinuing service in hard-to-reach areas

As a result, AT&T could shrink its build-out requirements while maximizing profits, especially because the CPUC’s penalty structure is unlikely to outweigh the billions the company would gain.

What would a real fiber mandate look like?

A real mandate would directly require AT&T to build new fiber connections or reliable wireless broadband access in areas it wishes to discontinue its copper network without exceptions or loopholes.

Historically, mandates like this have balanced public needs with private incentives. But under AB 470, that obligation is vague and easily manipulated.  AT&T has already told investors it plans to deploy fiber to only half its wireline network – and AB 470 would give the company the ability to follow through on that limited build-out.

Isn’t the CPUC already modernizing service rules?

Yes. The CPUC’s process is well underway and includes detailed proposals to modernize the COLR framework while protecting public safety, affordability, and access.

AB 470 would sideline that process and impose an AT&T-prescribed outcome from Sacramento. It does not help the CPUC complete its ongoing work, nor does it provide any new tools, authorities, or consumer protections.

Meanwhile, AT&T already has the legal right to upgrade its copper network to fiber or wireless – but has simply chosen not to in hopes of gaining the ability to shut down networks in areas the company labels “low profit” or “low utilization."

So, who benefits if AB 470 becomes law?

Only AT&T.

The bill could potentially grant the company a multi-billion-dollar windfall by eliminating longstanding public service obligations without requiring better service, equitable access, or emergency protections. 

AT&T has spent a record-breaking amount of money to lobby for AB 470's passage, a fraction of the profits it stands to gain by cutting back its network. In investor calls, the company's CEO has openly stated that discontinuing service in rural and low-income areas could significantly boost profits, despite the fact that AT&T is not operating its copper network at a loss and California customers have already paid for the infrastructure many still rely on as their sole source of communication today.

AB 470 would clear the path for just that – with no accountability, no oversight, and no protections for Californians.

Communications networks are a public lifeline. Californians deserve a system built through transparent, accountable processes – not legislation designed to increase corporate profits at the expense of public safety.