And I'm sure your property value and property taxes reflect your access to services. If they don't, then you overpaid for your home. I live in literally the most expensive home market in the US and have the taxes to go with it. I have reasonable access to broadband and wireless. You want to switch?
This isn't rocket science. It's why homes in urban areas cost more, and why the property taxes in urban areas higher. You are paying for the infrastructure offered by the urban area. And yeah I know this isn't the only factory in home costs and taxes, but it's a big factor.
You're doing "that thing". I don't think that someone who is looking for a home, given the situation they're in or what's going on at the time, always thinks to call telecom companies to ask if service is prime in their area or not. Besides, companies lie to get your business.
Related to that, if I were to call ATT and Cincinnati Bell (the providers I use), they can both say they have service in the area. Caveat - it's hilly and ATT has four towers within range of the home I live in. It can barely find a stable signal from any of the 4, depending on where I am in the house, and if it does find one it's minimal data speed (below a megabit) and choppy voice. One of those "stand an inch to the left... now kneel down 5 inches...one more.. okay now I can understand you" things. Cincinnati Bell says there is "fioptics available" to the home. They leave out the part that the it is within a 1 block area of a medium density living area (not rural, not urban) where there is no fiber run. Literally, five houses up the street and I can get fiber with gigabit service. This home, I can get 30mb/s max via copper from the nearest FDH (can look at it from the house, less than a block up the road). For some reason they decided to run fiber up one side of the street and from the other side (east-west and west-east), but leave out a block. What the hell?
Also, what world are you living in where utility poles and what's run on them, by whom, are paid for/subsidized by taxing? I haven't seen one place where that's the case - the utility companies have the right because they purchased said right and pass that cost on to their customers. The city and taxes have absolutely nothing to do with it, "it" being the directly relational cost to the homeowner. It's the provider that passes their fees on, and BTW I also know people that work for the telecom company that can't explain why they didn't include my block in the fiber build-out, and those people have had conversations with me where I pulled a bit of info and they say laughingly that the cost of heavily dense areas is so much lower because the build-out and equipment generate loads of income for them, versus a non-dense area where said build-out generates little income.
These aren't things that you can expect every home buyer to check out in detail before they purchase a home, and their financials could even be a limiting factor. Availability of open homes might be a factor. Sure, I look at things like this when I'm considering moving, but they don't affect the decision; the cost of the place to live and other taxes (meaning $$$) determine the decision. If I were a multi-billionaire, then it wouldn't matter because I could be picky and choosy, but I could also pay the telecom and utility companies to build whatever I want them to to get what I want at my home. I'm not, you're not, mishehu is not.