HF5217: labor and industry supplemental budget bill includes $1.3 million for Office of Broadband Development

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday the MN House Ways and Means committee met to talk about a broad range of topics in an effort to condense items for swift passing. The topic that might be of interest to readers, was the A9 Amendment, where the Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) asked for more FTEs for the Office of Broadband Development at $1.376 million. The amendment was approved.

Here’s more info from the House Journal...

From the budget…

$1,736,000 the second year is for implementation of the broadband provisions in article 10.

And more info on article 10…

ARTICLE 10
BROADBAND AND PIPELINE SAFETY
Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 116J.395, subdivision 6, is amended to read:
Subd. 6. Awarding grants. (a) In evaluating applications and awarding grants, the commissioner shall give
priority to applications that are constructed in areas identified by the director of the Office of Broadband
Development as unserved.
(b) In evaluating applications and awarding grants, the commissioner may give priority to applications that:
(1) are constructed in areas identified by the director of the Office of Broadband Development as underserved;
(2) offer new or substantially upgraded broadband service to important community institutions including, but not
limited to, libraries, educational institutions, public safety facilities, and healthcare facilities;
(3) facilitate the use of telehealth and electronic health records;
(4) serve economically distressed areas of the state, as measured by indices of unemployment, poverty, or
population loss that are significantly greater than the statewide average;

(5) provide technical support and train residents, businesses, and institutions in the community served by the
project to utilize broadband service;
(6) include a component to actively promote the adoption of the newly available broadband services in the
community;
(7) provide evidence of strong support for the project from citizens, government, businesses, and institutions in
the community;
(8) provide access to broadband service to a greater number of unserved or underserved households and
businesses; or
(9) leverage greater amounts of funding for the project from other private and public sources.
(c) The commissioner shall endeavor to award grants under this section to qualified applicants in all regions of
the state.
(d) No less than the following percentages of the total border-to-border broadband grant funds awarded in the
year indicated shall be reserved for applicants that agree to implement the workforce best practices as defined in
paragraph (e):
(1) 50 percent in 2024;
(2) 60 percent in 2025; and
(3) 70 percent in 2026 and thereafter.
The applicant’s agreement to implement the workforce best practices as defined in paragraph (e) must be an express
condition of providing the grant in the grant agreement.
(e) An applicant for a grant under this section is considered to implement workforce best practices only if the
applicant can demonstrate that:
(1) there is credible evidence of support for the application and the applicant’s workforce needs on the project for
which the grant is provided from one or more labor, labor-management, or other workforce organizations that have a
track record of representing and advocating for workers or recruiting, training, and securing employment for people
of color, Indigenous people, women, or people with disabilities in the construction industry; and
(2) all laborers and mechanics performing construction, installation, remodeling, or repairs on the project sites
for which the grant is provided:
(i) are paid the prevailing wage rate as defined in section 177.42, subdivision 6, and the applicant and all of its
construction contractors and subcontractors agree that the payment of prevailing wage to such laborers and
mechanics is subject to the requirements and enforcement provisions under sections 177.27, 177.30, 177.32, 177.41
to 177.435, and 177.45, which the commissioner of labor and industry shall have the authority to enforce; or
(ii) receive from their employer:
(A) at least 80 hours of skills training annually, of which at least 40 hours must consist of hands-on instruction;
(B) employer-paid family health insurance coverage; and

(C) employer-paid retirement benefit payments equal to no less than 15 percent of the employee’s total taxable
wages.
(f) In the event that the commissioner does not receive enough qualified applications to achieve the standards
under paragraph (d), the commissioner shall consult with prospective applicants and labor and workforce
organizations under paragraph (e), clause (1), to solicit additional qualified applications.
Sec. 2. [116J.3991] BROADBAND, EQUITY, ACCESS, AND DEPLOYMENT (BEAD).
Subdivision 1. Implementation. The commissioner shall implement a Broadband, Equity, Access, and
Deployment (BEAD) Program that prioritizes applicants for state funding that demonstrate the following:
(1) commitment by the applicant to robust training programs with established requirements that are tied to
uniform wage scales, job titles, and relevant certifications or skill codes;
(2) use of a directly employed workforce, as opposed to a subcontracted workforce, to perform broadband
placing, splicing, and maintenance work. Public entity applicants may meet this requirement by use of a directly
employed workforce or committing to contract with an Internet service provider that will use a directly employed
workforce;
(3) commitment to implement workforce best practices under section 116J.395, subdivision 6, paragraph (e), on
the project or projects for which the applicant seeks public funding; and
(4) commitment to retaining a locally based workforce and establishing programs to promote training and hiring
pipelines for underrepresented communities.
Subd. 2. Project evaluation. In projects funded by the BEAD Program, the criteria under subdivision 1 and
section 116J.395, subdivision 6, paragraph (e), shall receive a priority point allocation in the point scheme for
project applications, such that these criteria shall, together with points awarded for labor law compliance, constitute
no fewer than 25 points of the evaluation scheme, out of 100. No fewer than 20 points must be based on an
applicant’s forward-looking commitments regarding implementation of workforce best practices and other
commitments listed in this section.
Subd. 3. Disclosures. Applicants’ disclosures responding to the criteria in subdivision 1 and section 116J.395,
subdivision 6, paragraph (e), must be publicly available on the department website, and all workforce commitments
made under this section and section 116J.395 shall become enforceable, certified commitments and conditions of the
grant.
Subd. 4. Workforce plan data. (a) Grantees in projects funded by the program under this section and section
116J.395 are required to provide in biannual reports information on their workforce, including:
(1) whether the workforce will be directly employed by the grantee or the Internet service provider or whether
work will be performed by a subcontracted workforce;
(2) the entities that the contractor plans to subcontract with in carrying out the proposed work, if any, and the
entity employing the workforce in each job title;
(3) the job titles and size of the workforce, including the number of full-time equivalent positions that are
required to carry out the proposed work over the course of the project;

(4) for each job title required to carry out the proposed work, a description of wages, benefits, applicable wage
scales including overtime rates, and a description of how wages are calculated; and
(5) any other workforce plan information as determined by the commissioner.
(b) Following an award, the workforce plan and the requirement to submit ongoing workforce reports shall be
incorporated as material conditions of the contract with the department and become enforceable, certified
commitments. The commissioner must conduct regular reviews to assure compliance and take appropriate measures
for enforcement.
Subd. 5. Failure to meet requirements or falsification of data. If successful applicants fail to meet the
program requirements under this section, or otherwise falsify information regarding such requirements, the
commissioner shall investigate the failure and issue an appropriate action, up to and including a determination that
the applicant is ineligible for future participation in broadband grant programs funded by the department.
Subd. 6. Federal grant requirements. The commissioner shall have authority not to enforce or apply any
requirement of this section to the extent that the requirement would prevent the state from receiving federal
broadband grant funding.

And more info on the broadband installers training and compensation…

Sec. 3. [181.912] UNDERGROUND TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE.
Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this section:
(1) “directional drilling” means a drilling method that utilizes a steerable drill bit to cut a bore hole for installing
underground utilities;
(2) “safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer” means a person who has completed
underground utilities installation certification under subdivision 3;
(3) “underground telecommunications utilities” means buried broadband, telephone and other
telecommunications transmission, distribution and service lines, and associated facilities; and
(4) “underground utilities” means buried electric transmission and distribution lines, gas and hazardous liquids
pipelines and distribution lines, sewer and water pipelines, telephone or telecommunications lines, and associated
facilities.
Subd. 2. Installation requirements. The installation of underground telecommunications infrastructure that is
located within ten feet of existing underground utilities or that crosses said utilities must be performed by
safety-qualified underground telecommunications installers as follows:
(1) the location of existing utilities by hand or hydro excavation or other accepted methods must be performed
by a safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer;
(2) where telecommunications infrastructure is installed by means of directional drilling, the monitoring of the
location and depth of the drill head must be performed by a safety-qualified underground telecommunications
installer; and
(3) no less than two safety-qualified underground telecommunications installers must be present at all times at
any location where telecommunications infrastructure is being installed by means of directional drilling.

Subd. 3. Certification Standards. (a) The commissioner of labor and industry shall approve standards for a
safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer certification program that requires a person to:
(1) complete a 40-hour initial course that includes classroom and hands-on instruction covering proper work
procedures for safe installation of underground utilities, including:
(i) regulations applicable to excavation near existing utilities;
(ii) identification, location, and verification of utility lines using hand or hydro excavation or other accepted
methods;
(iii) response to line strike incidents;
(iv) traffic control procedures;
(v) use of a tracking device to safely guide directional drill equipment along a drill path; and
(vi) avoidance and mitigation of safety hazards posed by underground utility installation projects;
(2) demonstrate knowledge of the course material by successfully completing an examination approved by the
commissioner; and
(3) complete a four-hour refresher course within three years of completing the original course and every three
years thereafter in order to maintain certification.
(b) The commissioner must develop an approval process for training providers under this subdivision, and may
suspend or revoke the approval of any training provider that fails to demonstrate consistent delivery of approved
curriculum or success in preparing participants to complete the examination.
Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 216B.17, is amended by adding a subdivision to read:
Subd. 9. Telecommunications and cable communications systems. (a) The commission has authority under
this section to investigate, upon complaint or on its own motion, conduct by or on behalf of a telecommunications
carrier, telephone company, or cable communications system provider that impacts public utility or cooperative
electric association infrastructure. If the commission finds that the conduct damaged or unreasonably interfered
with the function of the infrastructure, the commission may take any action authorized under sections 216B.52 to
216B.61 with respect to the provider.
(b) For purposes of this subdivision:
(1) “telecommunications carrier” has the meaning given in section 237.01, subdivision 6;
(2) “telephone company” has the meaning given in section 237.01, subdivision 7; and
(3) “cable communications system provider” means an owner or operator of a cable communications system as
defined in section 238.02, subdivision 3.

 

FCC reports on broadband adoption in States and Counties

Posted on by
Reply

The FCC reports on the status of broadband access…

Access to affordable, reliable broadband is essential to full participation in modern life. Consumers rely on both their fixed and mobile connections to work, learn, access health care, and connect with each other. Today, we issue this Report pursuant to our obligation under section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, concluding our inquiry into whether “advanced telecommunications capability is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.”1 We find that more work remains to ensure that all Americans have access to advanced telecommunications capability.

They are using a new resource…

This Report also represents an important milestone with regard to the data that we use for our inquiry. For the first time, we use data from the Commission’s Broadband Data Collection (BDC). The Commission’s Section 706 Reports have for many years relied primarily on the FCC Form 477 deployment data to evaluate consumers’ broadband options for fixed and mobile services.3 The BDC data, unavailable for past section 706 inquiries, represent significant improvements over FCC Form 477 data, through the use of more precise location-by-location fixed data, mobile data based on standardized parameters, and the Commission’s ability to improve the data through public challenge processes and conducting verifications and audits of provider-reported data.

Based on our evaluation of the data, we find that our universal service goals for section 706 have not been met, and we therefore conclude that advanced telecommunications capability is not being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion. Most significantly, at present, 100/20 Mbps terrestrial fixed broadband service4 has not been physically deployed to approximately 7% of Americans. Rural areas and Tribal lands significantly trail more urban areas, with approximately 28% of people living in rural areas and approximately 23% of people living on Tribal lands lacking access to 100/20 Mbps fixed broadband services.5 While we expect the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program and other federal and state programs will narrow these divides in the coming years, at this time, we find that these physical deployment shortcomings are sufficient to warrant a negative finding under section 706 before we even begin to consider our other universal service goals, for which we hope to have more comprehensive data available in future inquiries.

At a high level here’s how Minnesota stands:

  25/3 Mbps 100/20 Mbps 940/500 Mbps
Including Fixed Wireless 76.5% 32.1% 8.3%
Excluding Fixed Wireless 76.1% 32.3% 8.3%

Here are the stats by county

  Pop Evaluated % with fixed 100/20 % with mobile 5G-NR 35/3 % with fixed & mobile Pop density Per capita income
Minnesota 5,717,184 94.3% 88.8% 85.4% 71.8 $44,947
Aitkin County 16,126 69.5% 48.5% 38.5% 8.9 $32,980
Anoka County 368,864 97.5% 97.0% 94.8% 874.2 $43,106
Becker County 35,371 81.0% 49.9% 44.2% 26.9 $38,444
Beltrami County 46,799 99.2% 54.5% 54.4% 18.7 $32,055
Benton County 41,463 88.4% 94.1% 83.1% 101.6 $35,885
Big Stone County 5,144 98.9% 24.3% 24.0% 10.3 $35,797
Blue Earth County 69,631 97.0% 82.9% 80.4% 93.1 $35,182
Brown County 25,723 94.5% 72.6% 70.9% 42.1 $35,340
Carlton County 36,708 60.6% 58.8% 41.7% 42.6 $35,642
Carver County 110,034 98.9% 99.0% 98.0% 310.8 $55,216
Cass County 31,274 63.7% 55.3% 39.9% 15.5 $34,505
Chippewa County 12,284 99.1% 66.4% 65.9% 21.1 $32,772
Chisago County 57,988 76.2% 92.4% 72.4% 139.8 $41,814
Clay County 65,929 99.3% 90.1% 89.9% 63.1 $36,586
Clearwater County 8,649 99.2% 53.3% 53.0% 8.7 $31,879
Cook County 5,708 95.2% 54.0% 53.3% 3.9 $44,316
Cottonwood County 11,356 88.7% 76.6% 71.1% 17.7 $32,818
Crow Wing County 67,948 88.2% 71.0% 65.6% 68.1 $36,878
Dakota County 443,341 99.2% 99.3% 98.6% 788.1 $48,894
Dodge County 20,981 99.9% 72.1% 72.1% 47.8 $42,838
Douglas County 39,668 84.6% 56.2% 51.2% 62.3 $41,889
Faribault County 13,926 86.2% 49.2% 43.2% 19.5 $35,307
Fillmore County 21,414 86.0% 63.4% 58.6% 24.9 $35,645
Freeborn County 30,718 99.4% 70.6% 70.2% 43.4 $36,751
Goodhue County 48,013 94.0% 73.5% 71.7% 63.5 $40,087
Grant County 6,136 82.2% 39.1% 36.7% 11.2 $36,750
Hennepin County 1,260,121 99.3% 99.8% 99.1% 2,274.4 $55,199
Houston County 18,800 84.5% 49.1% 46.9% 34.1 $39,340
Hubbard County 21,960 92.3% 56.2% 52.7% 23.7 $36,944
Isanti County 42,727 59.7% 83.9% 56.8% 98.1 $38,609
Itasca County 45,205 92.8% 62.3% 59.4% 16.9 $34,528
Jackson County 9,893 95.5% 56.6% 54.1% 14.1 $37,818
Kanabec County 16,463 27.4% 59.8% 25.1% 31.6 $33,805
Kandiyohi County 43,839 95.7% 85.8% 82.5% 55.0 $35,814
Kittson County 4,059 95.2% 34.0% 33.9% 3.7 $35,565
Koochiching County 11,844 83.1% 52.0% 49.2% 3.8 $36,515
Lac qui Parle County 6,689 100.0% 43.7% 43.7% 8.7 $37,520
Lake County 10,939 90.6% 75.2% 71.5% 5.2 $39,930
Lake of the Woods County 3,871 80.9% 57.6% 53.3% 3.0 $35,308
Le Sueur County 29,153 98.5% 78.0% 77.3% 65.0 $41,400
Lincoln County 5,580 99.1% 41.6% 41.1% 10.4 $35,638
Lyon County 25,262 99.9% 78.0% 77.9% 35.4 $35,256
Mahnomen County 5,328 71.3% 38.0% 32.8% 9.6 $24,710
Marshall County 8,861 94.6% 45.3% 44.7% 5.0 $35,920
Martin County 19,650 98.6% 62.1% 61.9% 27.6 $35,152
McLeod County 36,714 97.5% 97.2% 95.0% 74.7 $39,361
Meeker County 23,496 92.9% 80.5% 75.5% 38.6 $37,233
Mille Lacs County 27,280 81.7% 76.8% 65.9% 47.7 $33,933
Morrison County 34,246 82.0% 63.8% 54.0% 30.4 $34,269
Mower County 40,140 98.7% 75.6% 75.4% 56.4 $33,921
Murray County 8,060 98.8% 61.3% 60.8% 11.4 $38,783
Nicollet County 34,441 93.0% 83.4% 79.2% 76.8 $41,658
Nobles County 21,947 96.0% 79.7% 77.3% 30.7 $29,786
Norman County 6,377 87.7% 50.2% 46.9% 7.3 $36,245
Olmsted County 164,020 99.1% 97.5% 96.9% 251.0 $49,799
Otter Tail County 60,519 75.9% 49.4% 41.8% 30.7 $37,202
Pennington County 13,845 98.7% 75.0% 74.4% 22.5 $37,342
Pine County 29,446 48.8% 57.7% 37.6% 20.9 $32,335
Pipestone County 9,355 99.0% 59.8% 59.5% 20.1 $34,973
Polk County 30,731 99.0% 66.9% 66.7% 15.6 $34,273
Pope County 11,431 91.6% 35.0% 32.7% 17.1 $38,905
Ramsey County 536,413 99.6% 99.9% 99.5% 3,523.3 $43,203
Red Lake County 3,874 94.7% 62.2% 61.7% 9.0 $35,198
Redwood County 15,361 80.5% 54.7% 49.8% 17.5 $33,175
Renville County 14,525 97.9% 61.4% 60.7% 14.8 $34,554
Rice County 67,693 96.4% 93.5% 90.5% 136.5 $37,050
Rock County 9,537 97.7% 22.9% 21.9% 19.8 $38,472
Roseau County 15,292 94.8% 61.3% 58.8% 9.1 $36,125
Scott County 154,520 98.9% 99.2% 98.2% 433.7 $51,259
Sherburne County 100,824 89.1% 95.7% 85.9% 232.9 $41,412
Sibley County 14,955 94.6% 73.1% 71.3% 25.4 $37,919
St. Louis County 199,532 79.2% 86.3% 74.0% 31.9 $37,850
Stearns County 160,405 92.5% 95.3% 88.7% 119.5 $36,087
Steele County 37,398 100.0% 68.8% 68.8% 87.0 $40,146
Stevens County 9,637 98.2% 24.3% 24.2% 17.1 $38,425
Swift County 9,755 99.2% 27.4% 27.2% 13.1 $35,595
Todd County 25,538 63.9% 52.8% 39.9% 27.0 $30,812
Traverse County 3,275 82.3% 45.5% 43.3% 5.7 $36,023
Wabasha County 21,658 93.7% 57.9% 57.3% 41.4 $40,471
Wadena County 14,307 99.3% 36.9% 36.8% 26.7 $28,011
Waseca County 18,893 100.0% 77.5% 77.5% 44.6 $35,814
Washington County 275,912 94.8% 97.7% 93.2% 717.2 $54,418
Watonwan County 11,075 100.0% 76.0% 76.0% 25.5 $34,363
Wilkin County 6,350 84.5% 63.6% 58.8% 8.5 $38,317
Winona County 49,478 97.1% 51.7% 51.1% 79.0 $34,889
Wright County 148,003 86.9% 98.8% 86.5% 223.9 $43,067
Yellow Medicine County 9,486 99.5% 56.3% 56.0% 12.5 $36,737
             
Tribal Areas 39,095 78.7% 41.3% 31.7%    

And a deep dive into state stats…

Continue reading →

Today FCC Restores Net Neutrality

Posted on by
Reply

From the FCC...

The Federal Communications Commission today voted to restore a national standard to ensure the internet is fast, open, and fair.  Today’s decision to reclassify broadband service as a Title II telecommunications service allows the FCC to protect consumers, defend national security, and advance public safety.

Through its actions today, the Commission creates a national standard by which it can ensure that broadband internet service is treated as an essential service.  Today’s vote also makes clear that the Commission will exercise its authority over broadband in a narrowly tailored fashion—without rate regulation, tariffing, or unbundling—to foster continued innovation and investment.

 With today’s vote, the Commission restores fundamental authority to provide effective oversight over broadband service providers, giving the Commission essential tools to:

  • Protect the Open Internet – Internet service providers will again be prohibited from blocking, throttling, or engaging in paid prioritization of lawful content, restoring the rules that were upheld by the D.C. Circuit in 2016.
  • Safeguard National Security – The Commission will have the ability to revoke the authorizations of foreign-owned entities who pose a threat to national security to operate broadband networks in the U.S. The Commission has previously exercised this authority under section 214 of the Communications Act to revoke the operating authorities of four Chinese state-owned carriers to provide voice services in the U.S.  Any provider without section 214 authorization for voice services must now also cease any fixed or mobile broadband service operations in the United States.
  • Monitor Internet Service Outages – When workers cannot telework, students cannot study, or businesses cannot market their products because their internet service is out, the FCC can now play an active role.

For further information on Net Neutrality, including the history of this proceeding starting in 2004 when the then Chairman of the agency challenged the broadband industry to preserve “Internet Freedoms” followed by more than a decade of work to secure these protections, visit: https://www.fcc.gov/net-neutrality.

Action by the Commission April 25, 2024 by Declaratory Ruling, Order, Report and Order, and Order on Reconsideration (FCC 24-52).  Chairwoman Rosenworcel, Commissioners Starks and Gomez approving.  Commissioners Carr and Simington dissenting.  Chairwoman Rosenworcel, Commissioners Carr, Starks, Simington, and Gomez issuing separate statements.

Thousands Attend GigaZone Gaming Championship & TechXpo in Bemidji MN

Posted on by
Reply

Fun news from Paul Bunyan Communications...

An estimated crowd of nearly 4,000 attended the GigaZone Gaming Championship & TechXpo on Saturday, April 20 at the Sanford Center. The event featured free gaming, numerous gaming tournaments, over 25 technology exhibitors, door prizes, and special guest Danielle Feinberg from Pixar Animation Studios.
This one-of-a-kind regional gaming event showcases Paul Bunyan Communications’ IT and web development team which custom built and integrated much of the online technology and leverages the speed of the GigaZone one of the largest rural all-fiber optic Gigabit networks in the country.
Team Mingle Master from Bemidji- Ayden Sander, Cameron Oakgrove, and Milo Collings won the seventh annual GigaZone Gaming Championship and the top team prize of $900. Team 50 Nations with Tyler Bos from Austin, David Bos from Brainerd, and Trevor Bos from Brainerd took home 2nd place and the $600 team prize. A total of 32 of northern Minnesota’s best Rocket League teams competed on the main stadium stage in the GigaZone Championship Arena.
In addition to the Rocket League Tournament, there was several other open tournaments including Fortnite, Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Madden 25, and Overwatch 2, Valorant, Super Smash Bros. plus high score competitions in Bemidji Drift, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Smugglers Revenge, Ms. Pac-Man, Galaga, and Donkey Kong. There were also two tournaments for juniors under 13 and Magic the Gathering Booster Drafts.
“Again this year I’m blown away by the talent and energy on display and how people, technology, and fun come together at our event. Everyone, including the participants, exhibitors, and our Paul Bunyan Communications team we’re all-in, showcasing the tech talent and enthusiasm that exists in our region. I’m proud our broadband cooperative can produce and host such an exciting event!”, said Gary Johnson, Paul Bunyan Communications CEO.
“Our cooperative continues to expand one of the largest rural fiber gigabit networks in the country and that brings many advantages to our members. The GigaZone provides extreme speed and low latency which are critical for the best online gaming experience and the GigaZone Gaming Championship & TechXpo showcases just that,” added Leo Anderson, Paul Bunyan Communications Technology Experience Manager.
“A huge shout out to our entire team for putting on one of the most unique events of this type in the country. Thank you to all of the exhibitors that were a part of the TechXpo and our local partners, we couldn’t do this without them. We’re already looking forward to next year!” added Brian Bissonette, Paul Bunyan Communications Marketing Supervisor.
This Paul Bunyan Communications event includes the talents of many local partners including NLFX, Accidently Cool Games, Northern Amusement, the Sanford Center as well support from several regional and national partners.
For more information on the GigaZone Gaming Championship visit www.gigazonegaming.com
For more information about the GigaZone TechXpo visit www.gigazonetechxpo.com

Second Reading of SF4942 including items related to broadband grant fund transfer and federal application

Posted on by
Reply

The MN Senate General Orders for April 25, 2024 reports…

S.SF. No. 4942: (SENATE AUTHORS: FRENTZ; Companion to H.F. No. 4975) A bill for an act relating to state government; authorizing supplemental agriculture appropriations; providing broadband appropriation transfer authority; making policy and technical changes to agriculture provisions; establishing and modifying agriculture programs; requiring an application for federal broadband aid; modifying appropriations to the Office of Cannabis Management and the Department of Health; modifying fees assessed by the Department of Commerce; adding the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act; adding and modifying consumer protection provisions; appropriating money for energy, utilities, environment, and climate; requiring utilities to accept an individual taxpayer identification number when new customers apply for utility service; allowing public utilities providing electric service to propose goals for fuel-switching improvement achievements to the commissioner of commerce; modifying the commercial property assessed clean energy program; making technical changes to various provisions governing or administered by the Department of Commerce; requiring reports; appropriating money; amending Minnesota Statutes 2022, sections 17.116, subdivision 2; 17.133, subdivision 1; 18C.70, subdivision 5; 18C.71, subdivision 4; 18C.80, subdivision 2; 28A.10; 31.94; 32D.30; 41B.047, subdivision 1; 45.0135, subdivision 7; 62Q.73, subdivision 3; 116J.396, by adding a subdivision; 216B.098, by adding a subdivision; 216B.16, subdivisions 6c, 8; 216B.2402, subdivision 10, by adding a subdivision; 216B.2403, subdivisions 2, 3, 5, 8; 216B.241, subdivisions 2, 11, 12; 216C.10; 216C.435, subdivisions 3a, 3b, 4, 10, by adding subdivisions; 216C.436, subdivisions 1, 4, 7, 8, 10; 325E.21, by adding a subdivision; Minnesota Statutes 2023 Supplement, sections 17.055, subdivision 3; 17.133, subdivision 3; 18C.425, subdivision 6; 35.155, subdivision 12; 41B.0391, subdivisions 1, 2, 4, 6; 116C.779, subdivision 1; 144.197; 216C.08; 216C.09; 216C.435, subdivision 8; 216C.436, subdivisions 1b, 2; 325E.21, subdivision 1b; 342.72; Laws 2023, chapter 43, article 1, section 2, subdivisions 1, 2, 3, 4, 5; Laws 2023, chapter 63, article 9, sections 5; 10; 15, subdivision 4; 20; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapters 13; 58B; 62J; 216C; proposing coding for new law as Minnesota Statutes, chapter 325O; repealing Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 34.07.

DATE D-PG OFFICIAL STATUS
03/13/2024 12195 Introduction and first reading
03/13/2024 Referred to State and Local Government and Veterans
04/11/2024 13655 Withdrawn and re-referred to Energy, Utilities, Environment, and Climate
04/18/2024 14300a Comm report: To pass as amended and re-refer to Finance
04/24/2024 Comm report: To pass as amended
04/24/2024 Second reading

 

Update on House bills related to broadband grant requirements and fund distribution

Posted on by
Reply

The Journal of the House (April 24, 2024) updates two items related to broadband. I have tried to pull out the pertinent information from the Reports of Standing Committees and Divisions.

  • At the very highest level the first item would give DEED and the Office of Broadband Development more authority for spending the money available for broadband grants.
  • The second would give unserved areas priority over underserved areas looking for broadband grants. It reserves a percent of funds for projects that agree to implement the workforce best practices, which includes prevailing wage and 80 hours of training. They also specify similar goals for BEAD funding; however, the Office of Broadband Development can eschew rules if that adhering to them would present the state from getting federal funding. The bill also recommends a standards for a safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer certification program.

ARTICLE 4 BROADBAND

Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 116J.396, is amended by adding a subdivision to read:

Subd. 4. Transfer. The commissioner may transfer up to $5,000,000 of a fiscal year appropriation between the border-to-border broadband program, low density population broadband program, and the broadband line extension program to meet demand. EFFECTIVE DATE. This section is effective the day following final enactment.

Sec. 2. BROADBAND DEVELOPMENT; APPLICATION FOR FEDERAL FUNDING; APPROPRIATION.

(a) The commissioner of employment and economic development must prepare and submit an application to the United States Department of Commerce requesting State Digital Equity Capacity Grant Funding made available under Public Law 117-58, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

(b) The amount awarded to Minnesota pursuant to the application submitted under paragraph (a) is appropriated to the commissioner of employment and economic development for purposes of the commissioner’s Minnesota Digital Opportunity Plan.”

Delete the title and insert:

“A bill for an act relating to state government; authorizing supplemental agriculture appropriations; modifying appropriations; providing broadband appropriation transfer authority; making policy and technical changes to agriculture provisions; establishing and modifying agriculture programs; requiring an application for federal broadband aid; requiring reports; appropriating money; amending Minnesota Statutes 2022, sections 3.7371, subdivisions 2, 3, by adding subdivisions; 17.133, subdivision 1; 18B.01, by adding a subdivision; 18B.26, subdivision 6; 18B.28, by adding a subdivision; 18B.305, subdivision 2; 18B.32, subdivisions 1, 3, 4, 5; 18B.33, subdivisions 1, 5, 6; 18B.34, subdivisions 1, 4; 18B.35, subdivision 1; 18B.36, subdivisions 1, 2; 18B.37, subdivisions 2, 3; 18C.005, subdivision 33, by adding subdivisions; 18C.115, subdivision 2; 18C.215, subdivision 1; 18C.221; 18C.70, subdivision 5; 18C.71, subdivision 4; 18C.80, subdivision 2; 18D.301, subdivision 1; 28A.10; 28A.21, subdivision 6; 31.74; 31.94; 32D.30; 41B.039, subdivision 2; 41B.04, subdivision 8; 41B.042, subdivision 4; 41B.043, subdivision 1b; 41B.045, subdivision 2; 41B.047, subdivision 1; 116J.396, by adding a subdivision; 223.17, subdivision 6; 232.21, subdivisions 3, 7, 11, 12, 13; Minnesota Statutes 2023 Supplement, sections 17.055, subdivision 3; 17.133, subdivision 3; 17.134, by adding a subdivision; 18C.421, subdivision 1; 18C.425, subdivision 6; 18K.06; 41A.19; Laws 2023, chapter 43, article 1, sections 2; 4; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapters 18B; 18C; repealing Minnesota Statutes 2022, sections 3.7371, subdivision 7; 34.07; Minnesota Rules, parts 1506.0010; 1506.0015; 1506.0020; 1506.0025; 1506.0030; 1506.0035; 1506.0040.”

With the recommendation that when so amended the bill be re-referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.

The report was adopted

ARTICLE 8

BROADBAND AND PIPELINE SAFETY

Section 1. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 116J.395, subdivision 6, is amended to read:

Subd. 6. Awarding grants. (a) In evaluating applications and awarding grants, the commissioner shall give priority to applications that are constructed in areas identified by the director of the Office of Broadband Development as unserved.

(b) In evaluating applications and awarding grants, the commissioner may give priority to applications that:

(1) are constructed in areas identified by the director of the Office of Broadband Development as underserved;

(2) offer new or substantially upgraded broadband service to important community institutions including, but not limited to, libraries, educational institutions, public safety facilities, and healthcare facilities;

(3) facilitate the use of telehealth and electronic health records;

(4) serve economically distressed areas of the state, as measured by indices of unemployment, poverty, or population loss that are significantly greater than the statewide average;

(5) provide technical support and train residents, businesses, and institutions in the community served by the project to utilize broadband service;

(6) include a component to actively promote the adoption of the newly available broadband services in the community;

(7) provide evidence of strong support for the project from citizens, government, businesses, and institutions in the community;

(8) provide access to broadband service to a greater number of unserved or underserved households and businesses; or

(9) leverage greater amounts of funding for the project from other private and public sources.

(c) The commissioner shall endeavor to award grants under this section to qualified applicants in all regions of the state. 104TH DAY] WEDNESDAY, APRIL 24, 2024 14265

(d) No less than the following percentages of the total border-to-border broadband grant funds awarded in the year indicated shall be reserved for applicants that agree to implement the workforce best practices as defined in paragraph (e):

(1) 50 percent in 2024;

(2) 60 percent in 2025; and

(3) 70 percent in 2026 and thereafter.

The applicant’s agreement to implement the workforce best practices as defined in paragraph (e) must be an express condition of providing the grant in the grant agreement.

(e) An applicant for a grant under this section is considered to implement workforce best practices only if the applicant can demonstrate that:

(1) there is credible evidence of support for the application and the applicant’s workforce needs on the project for which the grant is provided from one or more labor, labor-management, or other workforce organizations that have a track record of representing and advocating for workers or recruiting, training, and securing employment for people of color, Indigenous people, women, or people with disabilities in the construction industry; and

(2) all laborers and mechanics performing construction, installation, remodeling, or repairs on the project sites for which the grant is provided:

(i) are paid the prevailing wage rate as defined in section 177.42, subdivision 6, and the applicant and all of its construction contractors and subcontractors agree that the payment of prevailing wage to such laborers and mechanics is subject to the requirements and enforcement provisions under sections 177.27, 177.30, 177.32, 177.41 to 177.435, and 177.45, which the commissioner of labor and industry shall have the authority to enforce; or

(ii) receive from their employer:

(A) at least 80 hours of skills training annually, of which at least 40 hours must consist of hands-on instruction;

(B) employer-paid family health insurance coverage; and

(C) employer-paid retirement benefit payments equal to no less than 15 percent of the employee’s total taxable wages.

(f) In the event that the commissioner does not receive enough qualified applications to achieve the standards under paragraph (d), the commissioner shall consult with prospective applicants and labor and workforce organizations under paragraph (e), clause (1), to solicit additional qualified applications.

Sec. 2. [116J.3991] BROADBAND, EQUITY, ACCESS, AND DEPLOYMENT (BEAD).

Subdivision 1. Implementation. The commissioner shall implement a Broadband, Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program that prioritizes applicants for state funding that demonstrate the following:

(1) commitment by the applicant to robust training programs with established requirements that are tied to uniform wage scales, job titles, and relevant certifications or skill codes

(2) use of a directly employed workforce, as opposed to a subcontracted workforce, to perform broadband placing, splicing, and maintenance work. Public entity applicants may meet this requirement by use of a directly employed workforce or committing to contract with an Internet service provider that will use a directly employed workforce;

(3) commitment to implement workforce best practices under section 116J.395, subdivision 6, paragraph (e), on the project or projects for which the applicant seeks public funding; and

(4) commitment to retaining a locally based workforce and establishing programs to promote training and hiring pipelines for underrepresented communities.

Subd. 2. Project evaluation. In projects funded by the BEAD Program, the criteria under subdivision 1 and section 116J.395, subdivision 6, paragraph (e), shall receive a priority point allocation in the point scheme for project applications, such that these criteria shall, together with points awarded for labor law compliance, constitute no fewer than 25 points of the evaluation scheme, out of 100. No fewer than 20 points must be based on an applicant’s forward-looking commitments regarding implementation of workforce best practices and other commitments listed in this section.

Subd. 3. Disclosures. Applicants’ disclosures responding to the criteria in subdivision 1 and section 116J.395, subdivision 6, paragraph (e), must be publicly available on the department website, and all workforce commitments made under this section and section 116J.395 shall become enforceable, certified commitments and conditions of the grant.

Subd. 4. Workforce plan data. (a) Grantees in projects funded by the program under this section and section 116J.395 are required to provide in biannual reports information on their workforce, including:

(1) whether the workforce will be directly employed by the grantee or the Internet service provider or whether work will be performed by a subcontracted workforce;

(2) the entities that the contractor plans to subcontract with in carrying out the proposed work, if any, and the entity employing the workforce in each job title;

(3) the job titles and size of the workforce, including the number of full-time equivalent positions that are required to carry out the proposed work over the course of the project;

(4) for each job title required to carry out the proposed work, a description of wages, benefits, applicable wage scales including overtime rates, and a description of how wages are calculated; and

(5) any other workforce plan information as determined by the commissioner.

(b) Following an award, the workforce plan and the requirement to submit ongoing workforce reports shall be incorporated as material conditions of the contract with the department and become enforceable, certified commitments. The commissioner must conduct regular reviews to assure compliance and take appropriate measures for enforcement.

Subd. 5. Failure to meet requirements or falsification of data. If successful applicants fail to meet the program requirements under this section, or otherwise falsify information regarding such requirements, the commissioner shall investigate the failure and issue an appropriate action, up to and including a determination that the applicant is ineligible for future participation in broadband grant programs funded by the department.

Subd. 6. Federal grant requirements. The commissioner shall have authority not to enforce or apply any requirement of this section to the extent that the requirement would prevent the state from receiving federal broadband grant funding.

Sec. 3. [181.912] UNDERGROUND TELECOMMUNICATIONS INFRASTRUCTURE.

Subdivision 1. Definitions. For the purposes of this section:

(1) “directional drilling” means a drilling method that utilizes a steerable drill bit to cut a bore hole for installing underground utilities;

(2) “safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer” means a person who has completed underground utilities installation certification under subdivision 3;

(3) “underground telecommunications utilities” means buried broadband, telephone and other telecommunications transmission, distribution and service lines, and associated facilities; and

(4) “underground utilities” means buried electric transmission and distribution lines, gas and hazardous liquids pipelines and distribution lines, sewer and water pipelines, telephone or telecommunications lines, and associated facilities.

Subd. 2. Installation requirements. The installation of underground telecommunications infrastructure that is located within ten feet of existing underground utilities or that crosses said utilities must be performed by safety-qualified underground telecommunications installers as follows:

(1) the location of existing utilities by hand or hydro excavation or other accepted methods must be performed by a safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer;

(2) where telecommunications infrastructure is installed by means of directional drilling, the monitoring of the location and depth of the drill head must be performed by a safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer; and

(3) no less than two safety-qualified underground telecommunications installers must be present at all times at any location where telecommunications infrastructure is being installed by means of directional drilling.

Subd. 3. Certification Standards. (a) The commissioner of labor and industry shall approve standards for a safety-qualified underground telecommunications installer certification program that requires a person to:

(1) complete a 40-hour initial course that includes classroom and hands-on instruction covering proper work procedures for safe installation of underground utilities, including:

(i) regulations applicable to excavation near existing utilities;

(ii) identification, location, and verification of utility lines using hand or hydro excavation or other accepted methods;

(iii) response to line strike incidents;

(iv) traffic control procedures;

(v) use of a tracking device to safely guide directional drill equipment along a drill path; and

(vi) avoidance and mitigation of safety hazards posed by underground utility installation projects;

(2) demonstrate knowledge of the course material by successfully completing an examination approved by the commissioner; and

(3) complete a four-hour refresher course within three years of completing the original course and every three years thereafter in order to maintain certification.

(b) The commissioner must develop an approval process for training providers under this subdivision, and may suspend or revoke the approval of any training provider that fails to demonstrate consistent delivery of approved curriculum or success in preparing participants to complete the examination.

Sec. 4. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 216B.17, is amended by adding a subdivision to read:

Subd. 9. Telecommunications and cable communications systems. (a) The commission has authority under this section to investigate, upon complaint or on its own motion, conduct by or on behalf of a telecommunications carrier, telephone company, or cable communications system provider that impacts public utility or cooperative electric association infrastructure. If the commission finds that the conduct damaged or unreasonably interfered with the function of the infrastructure, the commission may take any action authorized under sections 216B.52 to 216B.61 with respect to the provider.

(b) For purposes of this subdivision:

(1) “telecommunications carrier” has the meaning given in section 237.01, subdivision 6;

(2) “telephone company” has the meaning given in section 237.01, subdivision 7; and

(3) “cable communications system provider” means an owner or operator of a cable communications system as defined in section 238.02, subdivision 3.

Sec. 5. Minnesota Statutes 2022, section 299J.01, is amended to read: [The rest of the bill is focused on pipelines]

Office of Broadband Development gets nice nod from Christopher Ali

Posted on by
Reply

The Conversation is a nonprofit that strives to Inform public debate with knowledge-based journalism that is responsible, ethical and supported by evidence. They recently posted an article on why…

Millions of Americans still don’t have access to high-speed internet. Christopher Ali, a professor of telecommunications at Penn State University, discusses who lacks access to broadband and how the federal government – with a US$65 billion commitment – is trying to bring more people online.

Minnesota got a nice shout-out…

What states have done a particularly good job expanding broadband access?

Christopher Ali: Minnesota has done some amazing work over the past decade. As I discuss in my book “Farm Fresh Broadband: The Politics of Rural Connectivity,” Minnesota was one of the earliest states to create a broadband grant program – the Border-to-Border program – and has set really ambitious targets. Back in 2016, for instance, the state set up a goal of universal coverage at 100Mbps/20Mbps by 2026.

Nobles County to contribute $35,000 toward Lismore broadband project

Posted on by
Reply

The Worthington Globe reports on the Lismore Coop’s MN broadband grant application and Nobles County’s support. It’s an interesting glimpse at all of the moving pieces involved in the application…

The Nobles County Board of Commissioners agreed to financially support Lismore Cooperative Telephone Company’s “Fiber to Home” broadband project and include the community of Bigelow in the project. The project aims to expand broadband access throughout the county.

Project director Chris Koneche of Finley Engineering said the project has seen its share of progress in recent months.

“We really appreciate working with you guys all these years,” he told the board. “We’ve made tremendous strides. The most recent win has been with the USDA Connect Round Four program. I think that’s about a $28 million project that would cover the vast majority of the rural areas in the county with fiber.”

However, Konechne said they were initially unable to include Bigelow in the project due to application restrictions.

“Because of the eligibility restrictions and the sporting criteria in that Round Four application, we didn’t think it would be a wise decision to put the city of Bigelow in that application. That application scores things on rurality … we would have lost or been graded lower in that category with USDA. Additionally, we would’ve had some challenge work with the speeds that Frontier was claiming at the time. For those two reasons and due to the size of it… when you look at this potential project with a budget of somewhere around $675,000, we didn’t think it was really worth the risk to a $28 million project to put that in there.”

Based on a scoring system, Lismore Cooperative Telephone Company Secretary Mark Loosbrock said that in order to obtain a higher level of eligibility for the 30% grant, financial support in addition to a letter of support was recommended.

Second round of Line Extension awards announced

Posted on by
Reply

From the Office of Broadband Development…

The Office of Broadband Development announced the second round of Line Extension Connection Program awards on a rolling basis beginning March 29, 2024, and ending April 22, 2024. This second round of the program awarded $3,584,040.13 to expand wired broadband delivering at least 100 Mbps download and 100 Mbps upload, to 482 locations across 25 counties. Internet providers carrying out the projects matched $1,490,990.67 for a total investment of $5,075,030.80.

Provider Locations Grant Amount
Access Networks 15 $153,225.00
Arvig Tekstar 69 $543,244.99
Consolidated Tel Co (CTC) 147 $808,700.00
Farmers Mutual Tel Co. 1 $3,800.00
Federated REA 2 $8,169.72
Federated Telephone Coop 5 $58,200.00
Garden Valley Tel 17 $198,972.51
JTN 15 $68,398.23
Mediacom 25 $625,000.00
Meeker Vibrant 33 $202,423.82
Midco Midcontinent Comm. 136 $601,417.00
MLEC Mille Lacs Electric Coop 1 $17,946.00
Savage Communications (SCI) 10 $182,766.86
SE MN WIFI 2 $38,000.00
Sytek 4 $73,776.00
15 482 $3,584,040.13

Round 2 Line Extension Awards by County

County Locations
Aitkin 4
Anoka 17
Becker 55
Big Stone 1
Carver 9
Cass 2
Chippewa 1
Crow Wing 93
Dakota 17
Hennepin 27
Itasca 5
Kandiyohi 23
Mahnomen 17
Martin 2
Meeker 10
Morrison 7
Otter Tail 14
Pine 4
Scott 15
St. Louis 31
Stearns 16
Stevens 1
Swift 3
Todd 41
Washington 67
25 482

 

Updates From the Office of Broadband Development: Meeting and Line Extension Awards

Posted on by
Reply

From the Office of Broadband Development…

Office of Broadband Development’s April weekly webinar series, wrapping up

Register for the final session of the Broadband Development Tuesday Training Series: Navigating PLUS (Permitting, Land Use, and State Systems).

This final session will be Tuesday April 30th, 10-11:30am. In this training, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) will cover information on the utility license application and process.

Content from the series will be recorded and posted to the Office of Broadband Development’s webpage.

Governor’s Task Force on Broadband, April meeting recap

The Governor’s Broadband ask Force was hosted by the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa at the Black Bear Casino Resort on Thursday April 11th. Band leaders spoke on and shared experiences with Broadband funding and access, updates were shared on BEAD and Digital Opportunity, and the Task Force continued discussion on the current legislative session. Materials from the meeting are available on the Broadband Task Force webpage.

A special thank you to those who hosted and shared at the meeting: Kevin Dupuis, Chairman, Fond du Lac Band; Jason Hollinday, Planning Director, Fond du Lac Band; Caleb Dunlap, Communications Director, Fond du Lac Band; and Marcia Dupuis, Business Manager, Fond du Lac Band; and Task Force Member Brian Hood, Operations Manager, Fond du Lac Communications.

Border-to-Border and Low-Density applications due May 10th

With $30 million available for Border-to-Border (B2B) grants and the remaining $20 million for the Lower Population Density (Low-Density) grants, DEED opened the application window for the tenth grant round on March 12, 2024. Applications are due by 1:30 p.m. Central Time on May 10, 2024.

More information, including an updated Round 10 FAQ, can be found on OBD’s Broadband Grant Program webpage.

Line Extension Round Two Awards

OBD announced the second round of Line Extension Connection Program awards on a rolling basis beginning March 29, 2024, and ending April 22, 2024. The program awarded $3,584,040.13 to expand wired broadband service delivering at least 100 Mbps download and 100 Mbps upload, to 482 locations across 25 counties. Internet providers carrying out the projects matched $1,490,990.67 for a total investment of $5,075,030.80. Find more on the round two awards and the Line Extension program on the Line Extension webpage.

MN5409 introduced: Requiring age verification for websites with material harmful to minors

Posted on by
Reply

Yesterday…

HF. 5409,A bill for an act relating to consumer protection; requiring age verification for websites with material harmful to minors; providing for enforcement by the attorney general; creating a private right of action; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 325F.

The bill was read for the first time and referred to the Committee on Commerce Finance and Policy.

Here’s the bill as introduced…

A bill for an act
relating to consumer protection; requiring age verification for websites with material
harmful to minors; providing for enforcement by the attorney general; creating a
private right of action; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter
325F.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1.

[325F.1791] AGE VERIFICATION FOR INTERNET CONTENT
HARMFUL TO MINORS.

Subdivision 1.

Definitions.

(a) For purposes of this section, the following terms have
the meanings given.

(b) “Host” means to provide the technology and resources necessary to store and maintain
the electronic files and applications associated with a website on a computer server, in order
for the website to be accessible via the Internet. For purposes of this section, an Internet
service provider does not host a website.

(c) “Identifying information” means any information that is linked or reasonably linkable
to an identified or identifiable natural person.

(d) “Interactive computer service” means any information service, system, or access
software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer
server, including (1) a service or system that provides access to the Internet, and (2) systems
operated or services offered by libraries or educational institutions.

(e) “Intimate parts” means the genitals, pubic area, or anus of an individual. If the
individual is female, intimate parts includes a partially or fully exposed nipple.

(f) “Material harmful to minors” means a text, sound recording, image, video, or similar
representation or depiction that:

(1) the average person, applying contemporary community standards and evaluating the
material (i) as a whole, and (ii) with respect to minors, would determine is designed to
appeal to or pander to the prurient interest;

(2) in a manner patently offensive with respect to minors, exploits, is devoted to, or
principally consists of representations or descriptions of actual, simulated, or animated
display or depiction of intimate parts, sexual contact, sexual penetration, bestiality,
sadomasochistic abuse, excretory functions, exhibitions, or other sexual acts; and

(3) taken as a whole lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.

(g) “Sexual contact” means the intentional touching of intimate parts or intentional
touching with seminal fluid or sperm onto another person’s body.

(h) “Sexual penetration” means any of the following acts:

(1) sexual intercourse, cunnilingus, fellatio, or anal intercourse; or

(2) any intrusion, however slight, into the genital or anal openings of an individual by
another’s body part or an object used by another for this purpose.

(i) “Shares or distributes” means to display or present material or make material available
for download, with or without consideration.

Subd. 2.

Age verification required.

(a) A person who knowingly (1) shares or distributes
material that is harmful to minors on a website where the material appears on 25 percent or
more of the webpages viewed on the website in any calendar month, or (2) hosts a website
that meets the criteria under clause (1) must verify that any individual who is a resident of
Minnesota or who is located in Minnesota at the time of the attempted access is 18 years
of age or older.

(b) It is a violation of this section to allow an individual to access a website identified
under paragraph (a) without verifying that the individual is 18 years of age or older. Required
age verification must be conducted through the use of:

(1) a commercially available database that is regularly used by businesses or governmental
entities to verify age and identity; or

(2) any other commercially reasonable method to verify age and identity approved by
the commissioner of commerce.

(c) The commissioner of commerce may review and approve reliable methods to verify
age and identity for purposes of this section. The commissioner’s approval under this
paragraph is not subject to the rulemaking provisions of chapter 14 and section 14.386 does
not apply.

Subd. 3.

Data privacy.

(a) A person who performs the age verification required by
subdivision 2 must not retain any identifying information submitted by an individual to
verify age.

(b) A person who knowingly retains identifying information of an individual in violation
of paragraph (a) is liable to the individual for damages resulting from the retention, including
reasonable attorney fees and costs as ordered by the court.

Subd. 4.

Enforcement; civil penalties.

(a) A person who accesses a website without
verifying the person’s age in violation of this section may report the violation to the attorney
general. Upon receipt of a report made under this paragraph, the attorney general must
investigate and may bring a civil enforcement action and recover the relief provided in
section 8.31. Each instance that a website is accessed in violation of this section constitutes
a separate violation.

(b) The parent or legal guardian of a minor who accesses a website without verifying
the minor’s age in violation of this section may bring a civil action against the person who
violated this section to recover damages, together with costs and disbursements, including
reasonable attorney fees, and receive other equitable relief determined by the court. In
addition to any other damages and relief awarded, a person who violates this section may
be liable for a civil penalty of not more than $25,000 per violation.

Subd. 5.

Limitations.

Nothing in this section imposes an obligation or liability on an
Internet service provider or the user of an interactive computer service.

New research looks a broadband adoption based on speeds and socioeconomic groups

Posted on by
Reply

Roberto Gallardo and Brian Whitacre haver released a new research report: An unexpected digital divide? A look at internet speeds and socioeconomic groups. It tracks broadband adoption across most of the US based on speeds and compares to census data. Most of their findings are similar to what we’ve been tracking for the last 20+ years, but there was once surprise…

This study attempted to see if existing disparities among demographic groups in terms of home broadband adoption remained when examining performance or internet quality – measured by average download and upload speed tests from Ookla. The analysis uses over 97% of all census tracts in the continental U.S. and accounts for a wide variety of social and technological factors hypothesized to impact broadband speeds. The results were mostly as anticipated, showing that disparities do exist when looking at internet performance or quality. For example, the share of rural residents has a strong negative impact on realized speed, as does the share of residents under the poverty line. These findings contribute to the digital equity literature and provide timely insights to states and territories going through a digital equity planning process. As additional policies and programs are being designed to address digital inclusion issues, recognition of the disparities that specific demographics face in terms of on-the-ground speed (and not simple availability) is an important part of the conversation. In other words, the assumption that certain covered populations require digital equity interventions may need to be revised when looking at the speeds actually experienced by on-the-ground users.

One surprising result is worth discussing further. The fact that white non-Hispanics were associated with slower average download and upload speeds was not expected. According to the Pew Research Center, as of 2021, 80% of whites subscribed to home internet compared to 71% of blacks and 61% of Hispanics (Pew Research Center, 2021). Similar racial and ethnic discrepancies were found in a recent subscription-focused analysis that incorporated a spatial error model like ours (Zahnd et al., 2022). Yet, the analysis here shows that whites were associated with slower download and upload speeds, controlling for other variables known to affect home internet subscriptions. This finding remains when interacting white non-Hispanic percentage with the percentage of the population that is rural. The estimated impact is not overly dramatic: evaluated at other variable means, the expected download speed would be 171 Mbps for a tract with 10% minorities but 181 Mbps for a tract with 90% minorities. Yet, this is roughly the same impact associated with moving from a tract with 40% of the population over the age of 65 to one with only 10%.

This unexpected finding supports other emerging research. Digital equity surveys in Indiana and Missouri found that whites lag or subscribe at the same rate as racial/ethnic minorities when it comes to paying for home internet for all previous 12 months, after controlling for urban and rural locations (Gallardo, 2023; Spell, 2023). In addition, another study that also used internet speeds across 12 states in the southeastern United States found that the share of whites was associated with slower download and upload speeds, after also controlling for urban and rural locations (Gallardo & Whitacre, 2022). Similarly, a recent study using Ookla data found that majority-Black neighborhoods had higher download speeds during the 2019–2021 period, but slightly slower upload speeds (Rodriguez-Elliott & Vachuska, 2023). Lastly, another study found that while fiber-optic broadband—associated with faster download and upload speeds—increased urban and rural home values in Wisconsin, it also decreased the likelihood of homebuyers being white in urban areas of the state (Wolf & Irwin, 2023). This suggests that minority homeowners place more of a value on faster speed availability—at least in urban Wisconsin. This general hypothesis is supported by our research, but for a much broader geography (i.e. the entire continental U.S.).

It is difficult to explain why slower speeds occur in tracts with more white non-Hispanics. One possible explanation is that this demographic may tend to subscribe to slower speeds when compared to nonwhite consumers, despite potentially having faster connections available. This is not testable with our dataset and remains an area for future research. It may also be the case that some areas that have more internet connectivity issues (e.g., rural) and that conduct more speed tests may also have a higher share of white non-Hispanics. A study conducted in the United Kingdom concluded that rural areas had a higher propensity for speed testing due to network performance issues (Riddlesden & Singleton, 2014). However, the fact that the number of speed tests was associated with higher—not lower—speeds does not support the premise that more speed tests are conducted in areas with unreliable or slower service.

Northeast Service Cooperative breaks ground on more Middle Mile in Northeast MN

Posted on by
Reply

WDIO reports on broadband expansion in Northern Minnesota. Funding comes from CARES Act and local funding…

Broadening broadband called for a golden shovel moment on the Range on Tuesday.

The Northeast Service Cooperative is proud to be adding 136 route miles of fiber to their network.

They’ve been working on this project for years. It will mean expanded fiber to places like Kanabec and Pine County, and upgrades to Hibbing and Virginia.

Money for the $4.25 million dollar project is coming from the CARES Act and matching local money.

Lake States Construction is the contractor. Work could take two years, but weather permitting much of it can be done this year.

OPPORTUNITY: Unleash the Good(R) Grant: A Web Design Initiative by ArcStone – deadline May 31

Posted on by
Reply

A little bit off topic but, ArcStone is a Minnesota company, and I know many readers have a connection to a nonprofit organization, and I’m just one day off Earth Day – so here’s info on a grant for website development. Good luck!

ArcStone partners with nonprofit organizations and thoughtful brands to drive missions forward. As a demonstration of our commitment to growing the impact of organizations that care, we are proud to launch the Unleash the Good Grant program.

Through this grant, we aim to support nonprofit organizations to enhance their online presence and achieve their mission through strategic web development services.

Our current grant cycle is open to 501(c)3 tax-exempt organizations dedicated to protecting, preserving, and improving the Earth’s natural environment.

Stay tuned for our Fall grant cycle, exclusively dedicated to social impact organizations making a meaningful and sustainable difference in people’s lives and society.

This in-kind grant provides services valued at $15,000 to selected organizations to empower them to create a compelling and impactful online platform.

 

Eligible Organizations

To be eligible for the Unleash the Good Grant, organizations must meet the following criteria:

  • 501(c)3 Status: The organization holds a valid 501(c)3 tax-exempt status under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code.
  • Environmental Impact: The organization actively works to protect, preserve, and improve the Earth’s natural environment.
  • Web Design Needs: The organization has a clear vision of how web design services will enhance its online presence and further its mission.
  • Agreement to Grant Terms: The organization agrees to comply with the terms and conditions outlined in the grant application.

Services Included

The grant project includes the following web development services:

  • Website Discovery and Sitemap
  • Accessible and Inclusive Design
  • WordPress Development
  • SEO Basics for Key Pages
  • Limited Content Entry
  • Project Management, Quality Assurance, Training, and Launch
  • One year of free hosting

Application Process & Timeline

Application Submission: Eligible organizations are invited to submit their applications through our online application form below.

Review and Evaluation: Applications will be thoroughly reviewed, and organizations will be evaluated based on alignment with our mission, potential impact, and demonstrated need for web design services.

Selection: One organization will receive the $15,000 Unleash the Good Grant. Additionally, two organizations will be selected to receive $5,000 off the $15,000 web design package outlined above.

Timeline: The application period is currently open, and the deadline to apply is May 31, 2024 at 11:59 PM CST. All applicants will receive a decision via email by June 18th. Work on the project will begin in July. Grant recipients must submit a final report by August 31, 2025.

Please contact Dan Olson at dolson@arcstone.com with any additional questions.

Please fill out the form to be notified of future grant opportunities.

EVENT Notes: OBD Training for broadband providers: working with MN Indian Affairs Council, MN Historical Society, and the Office of the State Archaeologist

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s session on BEAD funding regulations by the Office of Broadband Development focused on…

Session provides an overview of Minnesota’s two primary statutes governing archaeological resources: the Private Cemeteries Act (Minnesota Statute 307.08) and the Field Archaeology Act (Minnesota Statute 138.31-42); a discussion on licensing, including qualifications needed to work in Minnesota; and a consultation with MIAC regarding American Indian cemetery sites, the licensing process, and work standards.

You can check out the session:

Links shared:

Link for the Office of the State Archaeologist (OSA) Portal: https://osaportal.gisdata.mn.gov/

For more information on SOI-quals: https://www.nps.gov/articles/sec-standards-prof-quals.htm

Applying for an Archaeology License: https://mn.gov/admin/archaeologist/professional-archaeologists/manuals-licenses/

OSA’s Manual for Archaeological Projects in Minnesota: https://mn.gov/admin/assets/OSAmanual_tcm36-186982.pdf

Curation of Archaeological Collections: https://www.mnhs.org/library/learn/collections/archaeology/curation

Or the PPT slides: Continue reading →