SANTA CRUZ >> Last winter, amid a torrent of rainfall and thrashing winds that knocked out power lines across the Santa Cruz Mountains, Ann Thryft rushed to gather emergency information the most reliable way she knew how: She picked up her landline telephone.

Thryft, a 24-year resident of Boulder Creek, wanted to check the status of the roadways in her area in case she and her husband, John, needed to evacuate. But she had no generator and cellphone service is unreliable where she lives, so she dialed up a friend in the area she knew had a signal at her home and could check for closures.

“We thought we were blocked, but we weren’t sure,” said Thryft.

As another round of storms hit the county this year, Thryft once again picked up the landline to connect with the Sentinel for an interview, only this time she felt urgency for another reason.

The California Public Utilities Commission is reviewing an application from AT&T California that would allow the telecommunications giant to be relieved of its decades-old obligation to provide landline service in many regions across the state, including large swaths of Santa Cruz County.

Last resort

According to a filing from AT&T in March of last year, the company was tapped in 1996 as a carrier of last resort, or “COLR,” provider in the state. The state designation required AT&T to run its hardwired copper network, known as “plain old telephone service,” to designated locations in its service territory upon request as a way to ensure residents had easy access to safe, reliable and affordable telephone communications.

But as the telecommunications landscape has evolved in the 28 years since, AT&T California claims the number of last resort lines it provides to customers declined by 89% from 2000 to 2021 as customers have instead opted for newer offerings such as broadband service and mobile technology.

“Only AT&T California — not Comcast, not Charter, not Cox, Not Verizon Wireless, not T-Mobile — remains saddled with an obligation to provide a tariffed, standalone voice service to any requesting customer within its service area, even as demand for such standalone voice service has all but disappeared amid the plethora of alternatives available to consumers,” wrote AT&T in its 135-page application.

According to a webpage from the utilities commission dedicated to AT&T’s proposal, if the withdrawal request is approved, it could mean that for an area without a carrier of last resort “there would be no landline telephone company serving that area and that there could possibly be no landline telephone access for customers in that area.”

AT&T has proposed to withdraw from this obligation without a new carrier being designated as the last resort provider, according to the commission.

AT&T California has also requested to give up its designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier in light of it no longer receiving federal high-cost universal service support. Approval of that application would allow AT&T to relinquish its duty to participate in the federal Lifeline program, among others, meant to support low-income individuals in remote areas, according to the commission’s website.

“We are not canceling landline service in California, and none of our California customers will lose access to voice service if the CPUC approves our application,” wrote AT&T in a statement to the Sentinel. “We are focused on enhancing our network with more advanced, higher speed technologies like fiber and wireless, which consumers are demanding. And our proposal is consistent with the regulatory transition path that has been approved in every other state where we are the local phone provider.”

According to its application, AT&T pledged that if its proposal is approved, it would continue to provide plain old telephone service to its existing customers for at least six months. For customers without a voice service alternative — such as mobile wireless or voice over internet protocol, which requires broadband internet — AT&T said it would continue the landline service until an alternative is made available. However, it estimated that 99.95% of customers in its California service zone have access to at least one comparably or lower-priced broadband or mobile wireless voice alternative.

High stakes

But these promises haven’t alleviated the concerns of some in the Santa Cruz Mountains.

In a region that has been forced to confront numerous environmental disasters in recent years in the form of raging fires and crippling floods and mudslides, Thryft said she needs a reliable avenue for communication when the power goes out and in situations where the stakes can be life or death.

“There were many times last winter where I was the only person I knew who could communicate at all because everything was down and I had a landline and they didn’t,” said Thryft.

In the densely wooded area where Thryft lives, she said cellphone service is spotty at best and when the power goes out, which Boulder Creek residents have said happens to the tune of hundreds of hours a year, many broadband phone services become moot. Even her radio signal is fuzzy.

“There’s a bunch of alternative technology that doesn’t work when the power goes out,” said Thryft.

AT&T wrote that the rules were instituted in the 1990s to buffer against the development of monopolistic power in the telecommunications sphere. Now, it reasons, the requirement has become a competitive disadvantage and drains resources otherwise allocated to exploring expansion of newer technologies. It also said the landline service is bad for the environment, as extra fuel is consumed as crews work to repair “obsolete” copper line connections.

“None of our California customers will be left without service. We are simply seeking an approved process to help consumers transition from an antiquated copper network to modern services,” wrote AT&T in the statement. “Our commitment is that customers currently in our California service territory will retain access to a service connection, whether from us or another provider.”

AT&T emphasized collaboration in transitioning the “few remaining consumers” away from the old technology and into “modern services which offer greater functionality and resiliency.”

‘Life-threatening proposition’

Longtime Santa Cruz County 2nd District Supervisor Zach Friend, who represents rural regions in Aptos and South County, told the Sentinel he has been in touch with the state’s utilities commission to express concerns he’s heard from constituents. He believes broadband investments are gaining momentum, but are not yet at the point where service is reliable enough in rural areas.

“Santa Cruz County’s repeated natural disasters have highlighted the life safety elements of telecommunications and for many rural residents that starts and ends with a traditional landline,” wrote Friend in an email. “Until a viable, reliable and robust alternative exists it seems premature to wind down this service and instead the efforts should be spent on investments in complementary options.”

At its meeting Feb. 13, the Board of Supervisors will consider adopting a resolution and letter in opposition to AT&T’s application that, if approved, would be sent to the utilities commission.

“Based on the level of service that cellular companies are providing currently in Santa Cruz County, this is nothing less than a dangerous and life-threatening proposition,” Santa Cruz County spokesperson Jason Hoppin told the Sentinel, adding that the county has serious public safety and emergency communications concerns. He said about 157,000 people — more than half of the county’s population — live in the Wildland Urban Interface, considered to be high-risk areas for wildfires.

According to the board’s agenda report, more than 260,000 county residents will be impacted if the commission approves AT&T’s applications including 44,000 seniors and 9,500 households below the federal poverty level. The county has experienced seven federally declared disasters since 2017, county officials reported.

Rural County Representatives of California, a service organization advocating for policies on behalf of rural counties across the state, is a formal party to the proceedings and is opposed to the application.

Tracy Rhine, a senior policy advocate with the 40-member county group, said there’s a lack of redundancy when it comes to telecommunications in rural areas and the organization fears customers wrongly identified as having access to reliable alternative services may fall through the cracks.

“If something goes wrong, unlike in an urban area where they can reroute the signal and it’s usually not as big of an issue, in the rural areas we don’t have that redundancy. A line is cut, some of our areas can be out of service for days to weeks and that has happened,” said Rhine. “Being without telephone service, without having a reliable and proficient alternative is not acceptable.”

According to the rural county group, 580,000 customers are affected by the statewide proposal. The vast majority of Santa Cruz County is included within the area that AT&T seeks to withdraw itself as the last provider designee, according to a proposal map.

Public forums

Rhine said proposals such as this one take a while to process, but guessed that a decision from the state could, conservatively, come late summer or early fall.

Tom Williams, 77, has had the same landline number at his home in the Scotts Valley hills for the past 40 years and keeps a cellphone as backup, though the service goes in and out. Williams said he relied on his landline while caring for his wife, who died last year, when she was critically ill. He said he made several 911 calls during her illness that he believes helped extend her life and he worries AT&T’s proposal “oversimplifies situations” to an extent that could leave some residents in the dark.

“I’m comfortable with the idea of technological progress. I’m not opposed to that,” said Williams, a former editor of a technology magazine. “I’m opposed to the way it’s being handled because it’s such a vital and necessary aspect of our lives.”

Williams said if the proposals go through, he may turn to exploring the voice over internet route. Asked what he’ll do when the power goes out, he replied, “Well, you’re stuck then aren’t you.”

As part of the application process, the state utilities commission is hosting a series of public forums this month and next. A virtual meeting is happening at 2 p.m. and 6 p.m. March 19. Attendance details are at cpuc.ca.gov/attcolr. Three in-person meetings were scheduled in Clovis, Ukiah and Indio. The two remaining in-person events are happening later this month and in March. Dates and locations of the meetings are on the commission’s website.

As of Thursday, more than 2,500 comments for the last resort application had been submitted online.