Pennsylvanians Demand Consumer Protections in Verizon-Frontier Merger Review

Feb. 21, 2025 – Pennsylvania broadband advocates pressed the state’s Public Utility Commission on Thursday to require state-specific consumer protections before approving Verizon’s proposed acquisition of Frontier Communications.

The push for conditions on the deal comes as residents report years of poor service from Frontier, including weeks-long outages, slow DSL speeds, and aging infrastructure. These advocates argued that Verizon must commit to expanding broadband access, improving service quality, and public safety conditions, before the deal moves forward.

Barrett Sheridan, an attorney with the Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate (OCA), emerged as the most vocal in calling for state-specific consumer benefits in the PUC’s review of the Verizon-Frontier merger. 

“Part of the question is, will there be public benefits?,” Sheridan questioned. “Consumers depend on Frontier and Verizon for critical telephone service and other communications.”

The OCA, alongside the Pennsylvania Office of Small Business Advocate (OSBA), filed a formal protest against the Verizon-Frontier application. Their reasoning: the PUC must determine if the transaction delivers specific, measurable benefits to Pennsylvanians, not just general corporate assurances.

Emergency communications a key concern

One of the most pressing issues raised during the hearing was 911 service reliability — or lack thereof in some Pennsylvania communities.

Lisa Rice, director of Tioga County 911 Services, said that Verizon must improve emergency communications, particularly in rural areas where Frontier’s failures have left communities vulnerable.

Rice highlighted persistent problems with 911 call reliability in parts of Pennsylvania served by Frontier. Some fire departments have had to station personnel at fire halls so that residents could drive to them for help when phones were down.

"We still struggle to receive 911 calls from certain areas, particularly around Potter County," Rice said. "Although we have seen some improvements, I'm hopeful that the Verizon acquisition, should that go through, will show some market improvements for the residents of the area that I serve.”

Steven Gray, an attorney with the OSBA, emphasized the need for specific guarantees that small businesses would not face higher costs or service disruptions. The OSBA urged the PUC to require Verizon to: expand broadband access in business districts; improve service reliability to prevent disruptions; and, ensure fair pricing for business customers post-merger.

Representing a development of 17 dwellings in Salt Lake County, Tom Sniscak, an energy and telecommunications attorney with Hawke McKeon & Sniscak, painted a picture of broadband inequity in rural Pennsylvania.

“There's fiber service on either side of us, but not here. We're still receiving 1993 levels of service here in 2025,” Sniscak said. “It's mainly over copper and DSL. It's slow. We have buffering. We have outages. People can't work from home. [Some residents] actually run independent small businesses from their homes. So it's a problem.”

An opportunity to vent frustrations

For many Pennsylvania residents, the hearing was an opportunity to voice long-standing frustrations with Frontier’s service.

One resident of Wellsboro, who has relied on Frontier for years, testified that service has only worsened despite prior PUC hearings promising improvements.

"If I had a chance to move away from Frontier, I would do it in a heartbeat," he said. "My landline used to be reliable, but for the past 18 months, it's been out more than it’s worked."

A former professor, living in Middlebury Center, Pa., described extreme measures he had to take to work remotely during the pandemic due to Frontier’s unreliable service.

"I had to drive miles up a mountain to teach a class from my truck because my internet was down," he said. "Frontier is still stealing from the customer because they advertise certain internet speeds, knowing full well they can’t provide them."

And, a property manager for senior citizens residing in Genes raised public safety concerns about landline outages leaving elderly residents unable to call for help.

"When my phone goes out, there’s no way for people to call 911 for help," she testified. "I have no cell service for a 30-minute drive through rural Pennsylvania. That’s unacceptable."

Verizon defended the deal

Verizon, represented by attorney Susan Paiva, defended the deal. "Our position is that because Verizon is a financially stronger company that has great experience in operating networks – including operating in many other parts of Pennsylvania – we would be good stewards of Frontier territories, and would help them operate stronger and better.”

Still, some residents remained doubtful, noting that Verizon previously sold these same assets to Frontier. “Verizon used to own these areas, then got rid of them. Why buy them back now?,” one participant questioned.

Next, the Pennsylvania PUC will review public input before deciding to approve the merger, reject it outright, or impose merger conditions. These conditions could include binding commitments to improve 911 reliability, mandates for service expansion in rural areas, or accountability measures if Verizon fails to meet certain benchmarks.

The public input process will be ongoing, with additional hearings scheduled in March in Pittsburgh, the Poconos, and Philadelphia. Meanwhile, Verizon and Frontier must still secure approval from the FCC and other state regulators before the deal can proceed. The Pennsylvania PUC’s final decision was expected by September 2025.