Minnesota Fiber Dispute Escalates at FCC

WASHINGTON, May 19, 2026 — A dispute between Minnesota cities and broadband provider Gateway Fiber is escalating at the Federal Communications Commission, with both sides accusing the other of delaying fiber deployment and misrepresenting state franchising law.

Gateway Fiber, a Missouri-based broadband provider led by CEO Chris Surdo, recently asked the FCC to intervene after several Minnesota cities allegedly refused to issue right-of-way permits unless the company first obtained local cable franchise agreements.

Attorneys Danielle Burt, Patricia Cave and Loyaan Egal of Morgan Lewis argued the requirements improperly classify broadband internet service under rules traditionally applied to cable television providers and warned the dispute could delay fiber expansion to more than 20,000 consumers this year.

The dispute comes amid a FCC effort to reduce local barriers to broadband and wireless infrastructure deployment. Since 2018, the agency has adopted rules limiting local permitting fees and establishing “shot clocks” for reviewing wireless infrastructure applications. The FCC is also considering expanding those rules to larger wireless facilities as part of a nationwide push to accelerate broadband deployment.

Gateway said it has operated in Minnesota since 2023 and currently serves customers in  about 10 cities, bringing new fiber competition to more than 55,000 households.

But Minnesota local franchising authorities pushed back sharply in a filing submitted to the FCC earlier this month, arguing Gateway itself is responsible for the delays. 

The Northwest Suburbs Cable Communications Commission, the North Metro Telecommunications Commission and the City of Coon Rapids, represented by Bradley Werner, LLC, said Gateway’s claims were riddled with “factual inaccuracies and fundamental legal errors” in its presentation to the agency.

“The Minnesota LFAs have been, and remain, prepared to act at all relevant times,” attorneys representing the cities wrote, arguing Gateway had known since at least February that it would need a franchise agreement before occupying public rights-of-way.

The local authorities said Gateway had repeatedly refused to file the required franchise application despite months of notice and invitations to negotiate, adding that Minnesota cities routinely process franchise applications quickly.

The filing also disputes Gateway’s claim that the cities are imposing unreasonable buildout mandates. Minnesota officials said franchise agreements contain exceptions for “undue economic hardship” and argued Gateway improperly conflated Minnesota’s broad state-law definition of a cable communications system with the narrower federal Title VI standard governing cable operators.

Local officials further argued that most of the issues raised in Gateway’s filing fall outside FCC jurisdiction, contending that references to Title VI cable regulations are among the few areas the Commission could potentially address. They also urged the FCC to repeal its 2019 “Mixed-Use Rule,” arguing the policy conflicts with federal cable law.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has backed recent FCC efforts to streamline broadband permitting and preempt conflicting local regulations, arguing that predictable permitting policies are critical to encouraging private infrastructure investment.