I’m not sure we’re talking about the same kinds of agreements; I’m not referring to agreements between providers and municipalities, but between providers and developers, large residential management companies, and HOA-type entities. I do not know whether those are illegal, but in my experience they are prevalent enough that it doesn’t seem to matter. They still get signed, and presumably at least one party believes such covenants are enforceable (I have no idea whether they are or not).

> If "industry lobbying power" was the problem, you'd expect Google would try to deploy fiber somewhere it had the leg-up lobbying-wise, like Seattle or San Francisco. It never did that. Under your theory, you have to assume that Comcast (based in Philadelphia) has more lobbying muscle in Google's own back yard than Google.

I would expect cities where incumbent ISPs’ political influence is weakest to already be benefiting from increased competition, and indeed, that seems to be the case.

I wouldn’t expect Google to prioritize cities that are already well served by multiple providers.