Reading the bill, I'm not seeing where it bans community fiber; rather it seems to require local government to not use tax monies to subsidize the access, and to not abuse their position to hamper private competition. Both seem pretty reasonable to me. What am I missing?
Effectively makes it illegal, as far as I can tell, for a community to decide that internet access is similar to roads or water infrastructure and make it broadly available at low rates.
It depends if you think internet access should be treated as an infrastructural good. I personally think that makes a lot of sense. While I wouldn't want to see anyone make a law against private internet connectivity, if a town wants to pool their money and pay to build out infrastructure that should be legal.
"if a town wants to pool their money and pay to build out infrastructure that should be legal"
If people want to pool their own money together, they can. The only thing this bill prevents is the government from forcing an individual to pay for something.
Even if every individual was morally obligated to pay for something that the town wants (which is not the case), providing services is not the proper role of government.
