We we are all ready to get started. In that case, let's go on the record. Good morning. This is the time set for the public comment and evidentiary hearing in the matter of the application of Fiber Connect LLC for approval of a certificate of convenience and necessity to provide competitive facility based local exchange and access telecommunication service in the state of Arizona. This is docket number TDash21317ADash24Dash0161.
My name is Donna Sansone, and I am the administrative law judge assigned to preside over today's hearing. I'm going to start by taking the appearances of the parties beginning with the company. If you would like to go ahead and unmute yourself and, just introduce who is on the line with us today. Hi. My name is Rebecca Lowe. I am the administrative assistant, for Fiber Connect LLC. And my name is William Lowe, and I'm a project manager for Fiber Connect LLC. I'm sorry. Could you repeat the name? William Lowe,
l o u g h. Thank you, mister Lowe. And, for the for staff? Eli Golub, staff attorney, and, eyewitnesses, Matt, McConney. Oh, wait. I I messed up your name. Alright. Before we begin, just so the court reporter, has this ahead of time, could I get, miss Lowe and mister Lowe to just confirm the spelling of their name? And then, do you need the same for staff? Okay. Just for the oral record, may I just say that, my witness's name is Matt Matthew Connolly.
Thank you. And, miss Lowe, would you mind spelling your name for the court reporter? R e b e c c a, and then Lowe, l o u g h. And then mister Lowe? My first name is William, w I l l I a n. Last name, Lowe, l o u g h. Thank you so much. Now before we move into public comment, we actually have a few procedural items that I wanted to address before we move forward.
The first thing I wanted to ask is I wanted to confirm who will be acting as the representative for the company in this case? That would be me, your honor. Rebecca Lowe. And miss Lowe, under the rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona, specifically rule 31.2 a, a person may not engage in the practice of law in Arizona such as representing an individual or an entity in an administrative proceeding unless they are authorized to practice law under rule 31.1 or rule 31.3. Now rule 31.1
is pretty clear in that it states that a person may engage in the practice of law only if that person is an active member in good standing with the State Bar of Arizona or that person is otherwise authorized to do so under certain listed exceptions in rule 31.3, 38, and 39. Now under rules 31.3 c five and six a person is allowed to to represent an entity in a proceeding before the commission if that individual meets certain requirements. So I'm going to ask you some questions,
miss Lowe, to ensure that your representation of fiber connect is authorized under those rules of the Supreme Court of Arizona. My first question is I want to confirm that you are not an active licensed attorney in good standing with the State Bar of Arizona. Is that correct? Correct, your honor. And are you an officer, partner, member, manager, and or employee of Fiber Connect? Employee of Fiber Connect. And has Fiber Connect specifically authorized you to represent the company in today's proceedings? Yes, your honor. And I want to confirm that your representation of FiberConnect is not your primary job
duty for the company. My no. No, your honor. Okay. And finally, are you receiving any separate or additional compensation for your representation of fiber connect in today's proceeding? No, your honor. Alright. Thank you. Now, for my second issue, I I'm just going to provide some background really quick so both of the parties understand, where I'm coming from. So in the 01/07/2026 procedural order that I issued related to the scheduling of this hearing and setting other procedural deadlines, the company was directed to provide public notice of the hearing in this matter.
That notice included a summary of the case, information about how to view or obtain a copy of the application, information about the information about the public hearing and about the ability to make public comment, information about intervening in the case, and ADA for equal access information. Now in fiberconnect's 01/28/2026 filing related to the public notice, the company provided a cover lever, cover letter, an affidavit of publication, and one page of text of the public notice. However, I noticed that on the one page of text it only included a summary of
the case, information about how to view or obtain a copy of the application, and the information about the public hearing and about the ability to make public comment. There was not evidence that the remaining part of the notice was published and that would be the parts that that include information about intervening in the case and the ADA or equal access information. Now the first thing that I wanna ask is, directed to the company. I'll ask you miss Lowe, to the best of your knowledge is the one page text, the very last page of the, affidavit that the company submitted for their public notice,
was that the entirety of what was published in Arizona Business Gazette Republic edition on 01/23/2026? To the best of my knowledge, yes. And do you have any knowledge as to why the company did not publish the entirety of the public notice text from the procedural order? That I am not aware of. Okay. Now, it appears to me at this time that the requisite publication of notice of hearings under Arizona Administrative Code r 14 dash two dash 11 o four e and r
14 dash three dash one zero nine b may not have been sufficiently met. Before I get into how I would like to proceed, I just wanted to ask staff if they have any position on the adequacy of the notice at this time that they would like to present. Alright. Just a moment, your honor, if I may. Of course. Thank you. No position from staff, your honor. Alright. Thank you. And would the company like to, say anything else related to the issue of the adequacy of the notice at this time before I go into, potential next steps?
No, your honor. Alright. So at this time, it appears that the notice was not provided. So we have a couple of pathways forward. Our first option is we could go forward with public comment today, but continue the hearing at a later date. This would allow the the company to address the public notice issues by requiring the company to republish notice that includes all of that requisite notice information. I also noticed that the company in their affidavit, they indicated that they may be filing a revised copy of their application.
But to date, I haven't seen that a updated copy of their application or any specific exhibit was filed on behalf of the company. So that would also allow for the company to if they would like to actually file an exhibit for the hearing, for it to be considered. So that's option one. We could continue the hearing. Essentially, what that would mean is really we would allow the public to speak. They've already been noticed for public comment, but we would continue the formal hearing at a later date. The other option that we have is we could go forward with public comment and
the hearing today, but require that the company issue an additional notice additional notice after the hearing. That additional notice would require anyone asking or anyone seeking to intervene to request an additional continued hearing date. So theoretically, the we may all come back at a later date anyway, if someone does opt to intervene in today's hearing. I wanted to hear from the parties, their perspectives or if they had any questions at this time about either route. I'll start with the company. Do you have any questions,
any comments, a position on how the company, believes would be the best route to proceed? We, if we were able to choose with, like, option two, that you provided. Okay. And do you have any questions related to what that process would look like? No. We would just need to add the additional information that was not added before. Okay. My understanding. Yes. And can I ask you really quick, did the company intend to provide any, exhibits that they were going to introduce formally in today's hearing? No. Okay. And then I would like to hear from staff what staff's position is.
Staff agrees that, we would prefer to pursue option two today. Okay. And was the microphone on? I I wanna make sure the court reporter got that. Alright. Perfect. Okay. Given, that the the parties agree that we could go forward with option two where we require the public notice of intervention on top of the company, not filing a formal exhibit in today's today's hearing. So I believe that would be, staff only provided exhibit, s one, which is their staff report. I'm comfortable moving forward at this time then,
and we will we'll go that second route then where we will require that additional notice. After the hearing, I will make sure that there is, clear instructions filed into the docket so that we are all on the same page. But I believe at this time, those are all of my procedural issues. But I wanna make sure does the company have any additional procedural issues or items that we would need to address before we move forward? No, your honor. And for staff? No, your honor. Alright. In that case, let's move on to public comment.
This is the time for any member of the public present to provide comments on this matter. Are there any members of the public who would like to provide comment today regarding FiberConnect's application? I do not see any in the hearing room. I do see we do have one call in user one. I just want to ensure that, they're not here to speak or provide public comment. If you are here to provide public comment, if you could enter 6 on your phone, if you are on the phone today,
that would unmute you, and you can go ahead and confirm whether you would like to provide public comment at this time. Alright. And, again, that would be 6 if you would like to speak. Seeing none in the hearing room today, and there does not appear to be any callers, waiting to speak on the phone. At this time, let the record reflect that no one has indicated a desire to speak. We'll move into opening statements at this time. I'd like to ask if either party would like to make an opening statement today. I'll start with the company, Fiber Connect.
Miss Lowe, would you do you have an opening statement? No, your honor. And for staff? No, your honor. Alright. In that case, we will move into the presentation of witnesses and evidence. Is Fiber Connect ready to call its first witness? We have no witnesses, your honor. Alright. So at this time, you you don't wish to have anyone speak. We may need someone available to ask questions. I know I have a couple of questions. I'm not certain if staff does as well. But are either you or mister Lowe prepared and able to answer a couple of
clarifying questions from myself? Yes, your honor. Okay. And which which of you would like to, do that? I I can do it, your honor. Okay. Alright. Miss Lowe, since you are the representative, I'm gonna, briefly explain the process. I'll have the court reporter swear you in. You'll give any statements that you'd like to make. Staff will be able to ask you any questions, then I'll move to my questions, and we'll go from there. So at this time, I will have the court reporter swear in miss Lowe. Good morning. Please raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be
the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? I do. Okay. Alright. And, miss Lowe, would you like to make any statements at this time on behalf of the company? No, your honor. Staff, do you have any questions for this witness? Just one or two. That's it. Go ahead. Alright. Does the company, intend to well, let me let me restate that. In in discussions with staff, fiber op FiberConnect stated that it may decide to offer its services case basis, contract, and petition the commission for, to offer its services on individual case basis contract I'm sorry,
and petition the commission for a waiver of the, requirement to file ICBs with the commission staff for review unless requested by the commission. Does that is that still true today, or has that changed? Yes. That's true. Okay. Thank you. That's all I have, your honor. Alright. Thank you. Now, miss Lowe, I have just a couple of clarifying questions, and, I'm gonna refer to some things that were in the original application filing just so I make sure, that what is in the staff report is accurate. So, I'll quote anything from the application
that that is necessary. So my first question is in connect's original application filing, if you'd like to look at it specifically on page seven of the application form in section a 19, there is a question asking if the applicant is seeking to have its services classified as competitive. The company originally shaded in the box for no. However, in the staff report which has been marked as exhibit s one for today's hearing on page one, staff indicated determination from the commission that its proposed services should be classified as competitive. I just wanna confirm whether the company is or is not seeking a commission determination
that its proposed services should be classified as competitive? We yes. We are seeking that it should be competitive. Alright. Thank you. Alright. I want to confirm, the only exhibit that we have for today is the staff report marked as exhibit s one. Have you, miss Lowe, or someone at the company had the opportunity to review the staff report that was, provided as an exhibit for today's hearing? I did review the staff report, your honor. And on pages, page seven of the staff report, staff provides six numbered recommendations,
to go along with their recommendation that the CCNN application be approved. Does the company agree to abide by the recommendation set forth in the staff report? Yes, your honor. And additionally, also on page seven of the staff report, staff provides four numbered compliance items that it recommends the company be ordered to follow. Now does the company agree to the compliance items set forth in the staff report? Yes, your honor. Alright. Thank you. Those are all of my questions. I just want to confirm, miss Lowe, at this time, are there any additional statements that you would like to make?
No, your honor. Steph, any additional questions for this witness? No, your honor. And, miss Lowe, I believe that is the conclusion of your testimony in that case. Would the company like to offer any other witnesses, or would they like to rest at this time? We'd like to rest, your honor. Alright. In that case, let's move over to staff. Staff, you are welcome to call your first witness at this time. Your honor, I call Matt Connolly. And, mister Connolly, I'll just have you go up to the witness stand. And once he's seated, I will have our court reporter swear him in. And for the record,
your honor, I've just given, mister Connolly a copy of proposed exhibit s one. Perfect. Thank you so much. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Thank you. Thank you so much. Mister Golub, when you're ready, you can go ahead and question, your witness. Sure. Thank you, your honor. Can you can you please tell us your name? Yes. My name is Matt Connolly. And where do you work? I work here at the commission. And, what's your position here at the commission?
Sure. I'm a public utilities manager in the telecom and energy section of the utilities division. Okay. Thank you. And how long have you been with the commission? I've been with the commission going on twelve years. Okay. Thank you. And as part of your employment, can you please describe your involvement in this case? Certainly. The original person who authored the report, who would normally have been the witness today is unavailable for this hearing. So as a result, I'm substituting for that witness. He prepared the report under my direction.
I reviewed the report and that's the role that I played. Okay. Thank you. Mhmm. And in front of you, you you have you should have, which I handed to you, a proposed, staff exhibit s one, which is, the staff report. Have you got that? I do. Thank you. And, was it, the individual that you just referred to, was that individual the the author of the report? That's correct. And that was Cameron Nance. Correct? That's correct. Thank you. And was mister Nance's preparation of the staff report within his business duties and responsibilities
as an employee of, of the commission? Yes. And just to clarify, he he was an employee of the commission. I mean, he is. I Correct. Mister Anson is still employed by the commission. Okay. Thank you. Have you thoroughly you you I think you just testified, but just to confirm, you have you thoroughly reviewed the report? Yes. Staff report? Thank you. Do you have any changes, modifications, or corrections, that you'd like to make to propose exhibit s one, the staff staff report? Not at this time. Okay. Thank you. Your honor, I introduced, proposed exhibit s one,
for admission into the record. Does the company have any objection to the admission of exhibit s one? No objections, your honor. With no objections, exhibit s one is hereby admitted. Thank you. And are you adopting s one as part of your testimony today? Yes. Thank you. Those are all the questions I have. Was there anything else you wanted to add? Not at this time. Alright. Thank you. Thank you. And then, miss Lowe, do you have any questions for staff's witness at this time? Not at this time, your honor. Okay. I have just a few questions, mister Connolly.
To confirm, since we're here under oath and you were not the individual that wrote the staff report, or authored the staff report, does staff believe that Fiber Connect possesses the technical capability to provide the proposed services in Arizona? Yes. In the staff report which, we've already marked as exhibit s one, staff provides certain information related to Fiber Connect's finances. However, staff does not directly confirm that it believes Fiber Connect possesses the financial capability to provide the proposed services. So at this time, to confirm,
does staff believe that Fiber Connect possesses the financial capability to provide the proposed services in Arizona? Yes. In that same vein, does staff believe that Fiber Connect possesses the managerial that that staff considered in coming to the conclusion that's the company possesses those managerial capabilities that you're aware of? I'm not. Alright. Thank you. I I want to confirm that that staff at this time is not seeking a performance bond from the company in this case. Is that correct? That's correct. And, does staff believe that the company's proposed services should be classified as competitive?
Yes. Now, in Fiber Connect's responses to staff's first set of data requests, specifically in SDR 1.15, I know you don't have a copy in front of you. But, essentially, Fiber Connect indicated that they had included a revised tariff or revised tariff pages to show a minimum and maximum rate. However, there were not any tariff pages included in what was filed in the docket for myself to review. So I just wanna confirm at this time that staff has had an opportunity to review Fiber Connect's proposed tariff including any revised pages.
Yes. Alright. Thank you. And then my final question, after reviewing the proposed rates and charges provided by Fiber Connect and its proposed tariff and then potentially comparing them to other carriers like United Commercial Telecom that provide similar services, Does staff believe that the company's proposed rates and charges are just and reasonable? Yes. Alright. Thank you, mister Connolly. Those are all of my questions. I just wanna make sure that staff doesn't have any additional questions. No additional questions, your honor. And anything from the company?
No, your honor. Alright. Mister Connolly, I believe those are all of the questions for you. Thank you. You may step down. Thank you. I wanna confirm that, staff does not have any additional witnesses at this time. That is correct, your honor. Alright. In that case, at this time, I believe we'll move to closing statements. I would like to ask if either party has a closing statement starting with the company. Thank you, your honor. We have no additional comments. And for staff, any closing? Staff, of course, recommends approval of this application. Beyond that, I I don't I will waive closing. Alright. Thank you.
Now I believe that we only had one exhibit, today that has already been admitted, exhibit s one. In that case, I'm going to ask that we briefly go off the record, so I can ask our court reporter, Jennifer, at this time, do you have any questions, or is there anything else that you need clarified today? Alright. In that case, we'll go back on the record. While we were off the record, I confirmed with the court reporter whether they needed anything clarified. They did not at this time. In that case, I want to ask finally, is there anything else that needs to be addressed before we adjourn starting with the
company? No, your honor. And for staff? No, your honor. Alright. In that case, I wanna thank you all for your participation today. This matter will be taken under advisement and a recommended opinion and order will be issued for the commission's consideration at a future open meeting. However, before that, obviously, I am going to be issuing, likely a procedural order in this case that will provide those additional directives related to providing notice of intervention. If someone does elect to intervene, they exercise their right, and that is granted. We may potentially have a continued hearing. So I just wanna make sure that all of the parties are aware of that.
With that, though, I believe that our hearing is adjoined. Thank you all. Thank you. Thank you.