SACRAMENTO — After efforts to create net neutrality protections for California consumers appeared to fall apart last month, state lawmakers announced a deal Thursday to move forward with the widely watched bill.

State Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, introduced SB822 in January after the Federal Communications Commission voted to overturn regulations that banned companies from blocking or slowing down internet traffic.

After it was passed by the Senate, Wiener’s bill was gutted in an Assembly committee during a tense hearing in which the senator announced that he no longer supported his own legislation and internet regulation experts said it no longer qualified as a net neutrality bill.

On Thursday, Wiener said the key protections that were removed, making him want to walk away from the bill, will be restored. Wiener declined to make the exact language of the bill public until August, when the Legislature returns from summer recess and it can be officially amended into SB822.

“This will be the most comprehensive, strongest net neutrality protection in the United States,” Wiener said. “We are restoring what we lost when Donald Trump’s FCC obliterated net neutrality.”

Net neutrality bars broadband and wireless internet providers from using their networks to favor certain websites and apps, especially those they own or have financial ties to, over others.

The bill has drawn intense interest across the country, with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — who rarely weighs in on state legislation — pushing for California to pass the bill in hopes that other states will do the same as a backdoor to restoring the regulations.

Pelosi praised the deal Thursday.

“The rest of the country must now follow California’s lead,” she said in a statement. “State bills like California’s are urgently needed.”

Last month, the bill appeared to stall in a very public way.

The bill was “mutilated” — as Wiener characterized it — in an Assembly Communications and Conveyance Committee hearing June 20 by committee Chairman Miguel Santiago, D-Los Angeles. That led to a firestorm of criticism of Santiago, who reported that he was threatened and his family harassed over his decision to gut the bill.

On Thursday, Santiago and Wiener announced the deal that allows much of what was taken out of the bill to be put back in. Santiago sidestepped questions about his reversal and the aspects of the bill that had been changed to meet his concerns. He said it was never about whether he supports net neutrality — he does.

More Information California’s net neutrality fight The guiding principle of net neutrality is that internet service providers should not speed up, slow down or block online traffic , and treat all websites and apps equally. The Obama-era rules President Barack Obama described four key principles in 2014. The Federal Communications Commission adopted rules to implement them in 2015. No blocking: Internet service providers should not be allowed to block legal content requested by a consumer. No throttling: Providers should not be allowed to slow down certain types of traffic while letting others upload or download at full speed. Interconnection regulations: The internet relies on interconnections between service and content providers. At those interconnection points, traffic can also be sped up or slowed down, so net neutrality proponents believe those should be monitored. No paid priority: Broadband providers could speed up services they own — think of AT&T, which now owns HBO, speeding up “Game of Thrones” or Verizon favoring its Yahoo websites. They could also charge other businesses for faster delivery of web traffic. Net neutrality prohibits “fast lane” treatment like this. Wiener’s bill (SB822) In December, the commission, now led by Trump appointee Chairman Ajit Pai, voted to overturn those rules, arguing that they were n ot needed. In January, state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, introduced SB822 to reimplement and extend the Obama net neutrality principles. Here’s what he added. No zero rating: The original bill banned a controversial internet practice where providers give users access to certain services without having to use up their monthly data allotments or pay by the gigabyte, essentially making favored services cheaper than competitors. State regulation of interconnections: The bill gave California legal authority over agreements between internet providers. The Santiago amendments A n Assembly committee voted 8-0 June 20 to remove the zero rating ban and the regulation of interconnections from SB822. The July compromise Wiener and Santiago announced plans to amend SB822 that would restore some regulation of zero rating and interconnections. Sources: National Archives, California Legislature, office of state Sen. Scott Wiener

Read More

“I think, plain and simple, we ran out of time,” Santiago said of the committee forcing changes to the bill that watered it down. “We wanted to keep the bill moving and there was a disagreement about how to keep the bill moving.”

Among the provisions removed by Santiago’s committee — and now placed back into SB822 — is a ban on some forms of “zero rating,” where favored websites and apps don’t count against a customer’s data allotment, an effort to steer traffic to them.

Zero rating is opposed by those who say it is sometimes used to create a a pay-to-play system that gives a competitive advantage to big companies. However, zero-rating supporters argue that the allowances are popular and benefit lower-income communities. The bill allows zero rating when it’s not applied to a company’s own web properties, according to Wiener’s office.

Other provisions restored in the bill require that data be treated the same from the point it flows into an internet company’s network, and a ban on internet providers charging fees to access customers.

Ernesto Falcon, legislative counsel at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said changes to the bill prompted hundreds of people to call Santiago’s office to express their concerns, which he felt contributed to the assemblyman’s about-face.

“People spoke out across the state,” Falcon said. “It reminded the Legislature that this is an incredibly important issue to people. ... There was a demand to put the bill back the way it was.”

A separate net neutrality bill, SB460 by state Sen. Kevin de León, D-Los Angeles, will also move forward as part of the deal after it stalled in Santiago’s committee. That bill requires internet companies that contract with the state to comply with neutrality protections to receive taxpayer money.

“No company should have the power to slow down your connection,” de León said. “No company should be able to hold your ideas hostage, or demand a ransom to access your favorite streaming services or websites.”

Opponents of SB822 have argued that the bill would create conflicting state-by-state regulations for the telecommunications industry.

The California Cable and Telecommunications Association — which has called the bill “unlawful, discriminatory and unnecessary” — declined to comment Thursday because the language of the bill had not been released. The group’s president, Carolyn McIntyre, said its previous concerns about the bill remain.

“SB822 is a flawed and consumer unfriendly approach,” wireless industry group CTIA said. “By banning cost-saving programs that consumers have come to rely on, it will jeopardize the benefits of technology in the state and lead to increased costs for Californians. The best path forward is permanent, bipartisan federal legislation.”

The amended bill agreed to Thursday will be heard in the Assembly Appropriations Committee after lawmakers return from summer recess in August. The Legislature will have until Aug. 31 to pass the bill and send it to Gov. Jerry Brown for consideration.

“We aren’t out of the woods on this bill,” Wiener said. “This is going to be a fight.”

Melody Gutierrez is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: mgutierrez@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @MelodyGutierrez