Who Could Read Or Write This Text?

The text in question is on a clay tablet found by Macalister at Gezer. Out of laziness, I follow Horowitz and Oshima’s translation,
1) Seal of Natanyahu
2) the owner of field being sold.
Three impressions of the same stamp seal
3) (comprising) an estate [ with a . ]tu (area) field adjacent to that of Sini
4) [and a . sūtu (area) field adj]acent to that of Sini
1’ Witness: . . . [(.)]
2’ Witness .. . . .
3’ Witness: Zer-ukin
4’ Witness: Nergal-šara-uur
5’ The month of Shevat, day 4
Lower Edge
1) The eponym year of Ahu-ilaya
2) The Governor of Carchemish
Natanyahu (mna-tan-ia-u) is fairly obviously a Hebrew name. If not specifically a Hebrew name, Sini is at least a likely Canaanite name. The readable names of the witnesses are Assyrian. Generally, scholars mark the eponym year of Ahu-ilaya as 649 BCE, during the reign of Ashurbanipal, right in the middle of the seventh century BCE. The script and language on the tablet is neo-Assyrian; the place of origin is unknown. A sūtu is a measurement of land area.
There is small literature on this tablet but as far as I can tell no one has an answer to my question. Who in the southern Levant in the seventh century BCE could read this thing? Was it good enough that some local Assyrian scribe or even one that was not so local could read it? Were there people with Hebrew names who could also read such a tablet? I think my question stands even if, as I think very likely, Gezer and many other cities were in Assyrian hands at the time.
There are several other neo-Assyrian tablets from the southern Levant, including another one from Gezer, but, because of the obviously Hebrew name, Natanyahu, I think, none of them raise the question of who could read such as tablet quite as strikingly as this one does.
Why am I raising this question? Well, Chris Heard favored us with one of his infrequent posts and it lunched a thought process that went from neo-Assyrian treaties to Aramaic translations of neo-Assyrian treaties to possible Hebrew translations of neo-Assyrian treaties and then back to the Assyrian language and then to this neo-Assyrian tablet and the other one from Gezer. If Deuteronomy’s literary structure is somehow related to neo-Assyrian vassal treaties, and I think it is, how did the Hebrew scribes come to know that structure: from Hebrew translations (possibly); from Aramaic translations (we know of some of these); or from Assyrian originals? You need not choose just one.
To help answer this last question, it would be nice to know something for certain about the training of Hebrew scribes in the seventh century BCE. Were they trained using a bilingual (or even trilingual, [biscriptal]) curriculum in the same fashion as were student scribes at Ugarit over a half millennium earlier?
PS: Is the tablet with drawings and erased signs from Gezer having an unquestioned Mesopotamian neo-Assyrian parallel (Horowitz and Oshima, 60) a school text? If so, what (whose) school?

Horowitz, Wayne and Takayoshi Oshima, Cuneiform in Canaan, Cuneiform Sources from the Land of Israel in Ancient Times, Jerusalem: Israel Exploration Society, 2006, 58-59