I’m starting to work on County Broadband Profiles and in the process, I found a map that highlights percentage of households served by wireline service as defined by at least 100 Mbps down and 20 Mbps up by county. So I pulled out the numbers from each county to see how various counties rank. (I looked at rank for speeds of 25/3 earlier this year.)
Here are the top 10 ranking counties:
- Rock (99.93% covered)
- Ramsey (99.82 % covered)
- Hennepin (98.97% covered)
- Big Stone (98.91% covered)
- Anoka (97.86% covered)
- Lac qui Parle (97.35% covered)
- Stevens (96.747% covered)
- Beltrami (96.30% covered)
- Washington (96.10% covered)
- Cook (94.50% covered)
And the bottom 10 ranking counties:
- Otter Tail (2.36% covered)
- Kandiyohi (10.64% covered)
- Becker (12.95% covered)
- Mahnomen (13.53% covered)
- Blue Earth (14.13% covered)
- Aitkin (17.55% covered)
- Todd (17.58% covered)
- Norman (20.55% covered)
- Mower (23.31% covered)
- Pope (23.67% covered)
Given these lists – all things being equal – where are you going to move, start a business or invest?
Clearly some counties are in good shape and some need a good kick start. But what is interesting is the swing between top and bottom – from 99.93 percent covered to 2.36. I think it’s worth nothing that Rock County – the top county was a recent recipient of a Minnesota broadband grant. And congrats to them for edging out the metro counties.
Many people seem focused on the 2022 speeds goals (25/3) but I think these are the ones to look at if you want to be ready for the future. There’s only one county that is on the lowest ranking list for both speeds of 25/3 and 100/20 (Aitkin). Being prepared for 2022 may give some counties a false sense of security for the future.
I’m going to include a table with the full list – but that rarely transfers well to the website – you can download the Excel file too.
County | Percentage Households Served | Ranking |
Rock | 99.93 | 1 |
Ramsey | 99.82 | 2 |
Hennepin | 98.97 | 3 |
Big Stone | 98.91 | 4 |
Anoka | 97.86 | 5 |
Lac qui Parle | 97.35 | 6 |
Stevens | 96.74 | 7 |
Beltrami | 96.30 | 8 |
Washington | 96.10 | 9 |
Cook | 94.50 | 10 |
Lake | 94.30 | 11 |
Pennington | 90.75 | 12 |
Clearwater | 89.30 | 13 |
Scott | 88.61 | 14 |
Winona | 86.31 | 15 |
Polk | 85.39 | 16 |
Carver | 85.09 | 17 |
Red Lake | 83.17 | 18 |
Clay | 82.52 | 19 |
Wilkin | 82.08 | 20 |
Wright | 80.61 | 21 |
Pipestone | 79.73 | 22 |
Itasca | 79.44 | 23 |
Nobles | 77.18 | 24 |
Waseca | 75.06 | 25 |
Dodge | 74.59 | 26 |
Brown | 73.76 | 27 |
Koochiching | 73.44 | 28 |
Lyon | 72.77 | 29 |
Kittson | 71.38 | 30 |
Le Sueur | 70.65 | 31 |
Chisago | 69.53 | 32 |
Jackson | 68.79 | 33 |
Watonwan | 68.42 | 34 |
Roseau | 67.30 | 35 |
Sherburne | 67.11 | 36 |
Houston | 66.63 | 37 |
Cottonwood | 66.34 | 38 |
Wabasha | 66.17 | 39 |
Dakota | 64.89 | 40 |
Swift | 64.15 | 41 |
Sibley | 62.84 | 42 |
McLeod | 58.57 | 43 |
Carlton | 58.22 | 44 |
Isanti | 56.62 | 45 |
Steele | 56.16 | 46 |
Goodhue | 55.99 | 47 |
Martin | 54.80 | 48 |
Mille Lacs | 54.42 | 49 |
Renville | 51.78 | 50 |
Murray | 50.78 | 51 |
Lake of the Woods | 50.47 | 52 |
Wadena | 49.91 | 53 |
Marshall | 48.20 | 54 |
Hubbard | 46.61 | 55 |
Traverse | 45.62 | 56 |
Meeker | 45.08 | 57 |
Fillmore | 44.19 | 58 |
Morrison | 42.74 | 59 |
Faribault | 42.28 | 60 |
Crow Wing | 41.66 | 61 |
Olmsted | 41.29 | 62 |
St. Louis | 41.20 | 63 |
Stearns | 40.17 | 64 |
Grant | 39.93 | 65 |
Lincoln | 39.21 | 66 |
Kanabec | 38.54 | 67 |
Pine | 38.18 | 68 |
Yellow Medicine | 37.72 | 69 |
Cass | 35.92 | 70 |
Freeborn | 34.18 | 71 |
Redwood | 33.56 | 72 |
Nicollet | 33.29 | 73 |
Rice | 32.63 | 74 |
Benton | 25.83 | 75 |
Douglas | 25.56 | 76 |
Chippewa | 24.80 | 77 |
Pope | 23.67 | 78 |
Mower | 23.31 | 79 |
Norman | 20.55 | 80 |
Todd | 17.58 | 81 |
Aitkin | 17.55 | 82 |
Blue Earth | 14.13 | 83 |
Mahnomen | 13.53 | 84 |
Becker | 12.95 | 85 |
Kandiyohi | 10.64 | 86 |
Otter Tail | 2.36 | 87 |
Garbage in, garbage out. These maps and figures are based upon “provider reported service” which in no way matches ground-truth for broadband service provided throughout greater Minnesota. I applaud Blandin’s efforts to spread rural broadband but the very data you are using as a starting point does not match reality. The problem is much worse than it appears.