Local governments were granted a one-year extension to comply with website accessibility standards required under the Americans with Disabilities Act while the American Broadband Deployment Act, which threatens local control, stalled in Congress this week.
ADA Website Compliance
The U.S. Department of Justice issued an interim final rule extending key compliance deadlines for state and local governments under the ADA’s web accessibility requirements.
Under this update, cities and other local governments with populations of 50,000 or more now have until April 26, 2027 to comply, while smaller jurisdictions and special districts have until April 26, 2028.
American Broadband Deployment Act
The American Broadband Deployment Act of 2025 (H.R. 2289) is proposed legislation aimed at accelerating broadband deployment by streamlining permitting, reducing environmental reviews, and limiting local government control over siting and rights-of-way. This approach is supported by industry groups but opposed by local officials and the National League of Cities.
The legislation was scheduled for a House Rules Committee vote on Monday. Targeted advocacy efforts explaining the harm to cities, however, led to its removal from the calendar and indefinite postponement.
The potential threats to Georgia cities include:
- Permitting Reforms: Establishing "shot clocks," or deadlines, for local government action on permits and creating a "deemed granted" rule if those timelines are missed.
- Reduced Regulatory Review: Limiting the application of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) reviews for many broadband projects.
- Rights-of-Way Access: Standardizing fees and limiting the authority of local governments to manage public rights-of-way for infrastructure deployment.
- Federal Authority: Shifting dispute resolution from local courts to the FCC.
These efforts come as state and local governments prepare to deploy the $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program.
Georgia cities, and local governments across the country, have expressed strong opposition, arguing the legislation overrides local authority, diminishes community input on infrastructure placement, and acts as an unfunded mandate by restricting local fees to "actual and direct costs."
Contact your member of Congress to oppose this legislation and urge that it remains off the calendar.