Seems like a simple fix - require them to provide service at a normal installation fee at any location they've claimed within 10 days or be on the hook for the cost to that end user of getting equivalent or better service installed. Throw enough zeros at a different provider and they'll build out to you, and if that buildout is being paid for by a nominally-incumbent local provider? Even better.<p>"You don't actually have to provide fiber service within 10 days at the location you said you were already servicing - but if you don't you're going to be paying $100k+ to AT&T for their expedited buildout to that area."
It would be interesting to see if this sort of fine would also apply to ISPs that advertise connection speeds that are only seen when connecting to a speed test site.
Elect clowns, get a circus.<p>We need to introduce competition into the electoral process by passing comprehensive electoral reform at the state level.<p>Till then, enjoy the show.
Spectrum claims that they offer service at my address, but I've had their people out twice and they do not. They offer it to the rest of the neighborhood (which is a standard residential suburb) but never bothered to bring it to my side of the road and have no plans to do so.
It's a small ISP, so even though 10k is probably negligible, it's still non trivial probably. I can't imagine ISPs in Toronto, Ohio, a city of 5000, (2000 households paying $60 = $120k)