SB 126 amends New Mexico’s State Rural Universal Service Fund law to increase the annual amount dedicated to the broadband program from $30 million to $40 million, after certain expenses, and raises the overall annual cap on fund obligations, administrative expenses, and a prudent fund balance from $30 million to $40 million. The bill keeps the fund focused on universal service in rural areas, including basic local exchange service, low-income telephone assistance, and broadband internet access service for unserved and underserved areas, while preserving the Public Regulation Commission’s authority to administer the fund through rules and a neutral third-party administrator.
The measure also reinforces how the fund is used and reported on. It requires at least 60% of support received by certain carriers to be spent deploying and maintaining rural broadband, directs the commission to prioritize technology-neutral applications and align awards with the statewide broadband plan through the Connect New Mexico Council, and requires annual reports to the legislature on implementation, digital equity, and funding awards. The bill further sets out a 2025 assessment of whether access reduction support should be repurposed into broadband support, how broadband support levels should be calculated, and whether prepaid telecommunications sellers should collect assessments at the point of sale.
Impact
SB 126 changes Section 63-9H-6 NMSA 1978 by increasing the amount of State Rural Universal Service Fund money dedicated to broadband infrastructure and by raising the fund’s annual cap to $40 million. It affects telecommunications carriers, the Public Regulation Commission, rural customers, and entities involved in broadband deployment, while continuing existing exemptions for governmental entities, schools, higher education institutions, tribal governments, and Native American customers on tribal or pueblo land. The bill also adds reporting and planning requirements that may influence future legislative or regulatory changes to the fund’s structure, size, and uses.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It passed the Senate 38-0 and the House 63-0, indicating strong consensus behind increasing rural broadband funding and maintaining the universal service framework. The lack of recorded committee transcript discussion suggests no major public controversy surfaced in the available record.
Contention
No significant contention is reflected in the available votes or transcripts. The main policy questions embedded in the bill concern how much of the fund should be devoted to broadband versus traditional access reduction support, how support levels should be calculated, and whether the fund’s cap should eventually be modified, maintained, or eliminated. Those issues are framed as future review items for the commission and legislature rather than immediate points of disagreement in the bill’s passage.