Monthly Archives: November 2023

It’s a bird, it’s a plane, it’s a Starlink satellite above the Twin Cities

Posted on by
Reply

CBS News reports…

Minnesotans spotted a strange sight in the sky this week — a string of multiple lights

“We had no idea what it was,” said Heidi Benson from Champlin.

Chloe Fischer saw it in Brooklyn Park and says she did a double take.

“It was kind of scary, because I feel like that’s one of those things we should either hear about or get a heads up about just so people don’t have that panic moment,” Fischer said.

The lights were low earth orbit satellites from the company SpaceX.

They’re part of the Starlink network that provides satellite internet service.

President Biden signs Farm Extension Bill, which support extended broadband funding

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor reports…

President Biden signed an extension to the Farm Bill on Thursday as part of a new appropriations package aimed at averting a government shutdown.

The bill that Biden signed is commonly referred to as stopgap funding because it extends funding for some government programs through January 19 and for others until February 4 of 2024….

What does that mean?

Oveson and Keber confirmed with Telecompetitor that key broadband deployment programs in the current Farm Bill are the Broadband Loan and Grant Program, the Community Connect Program and the Distance Learning and Telemedicine Program.

According to WTA, those programs are slated to get the same level of funding specified in the current Farm Bill, which, on an annual basis, is:

  • $3 million for the Broadband Loan and Grant Program
  • $35 million for Community Connect
  • $70 million for the Distance Learning & Telemedicine Program

The ReConnect Program, also administered by USDA, is not part of the Farm Bill, but is temporarily funded through January 19 at the current level of approximately $379 million on an annual basis, Keber said. That program makes grants, loans and grant/loan combinations to cover some of the costs of rural broadband deployments.

Farm Bill Wish List

Both NTCA and WTA would like to see the ReConnect program moved into the Farm Bill when the bill is updated. Because Farm Bills are normally updated every five years, this would eliminate the need to reauthorize ReConnect funding every year.

“We want to get ReConnect properly authorized so it’s a longer-term program, rather than relying on appropriations each year,” said Keber. He added that WTA wants to make sure that ReConnect rules require funding recipients to deploy service at speeds of at least 100 Mbps symmetrically in keeping with the rules that have been in place for the last two years.

NTCA has noted that it would not like to see ReConnect give preference to certain types of providers.

According to Oveson, stakeholders have until September 2024 to negotiate an updated Farm Bill.

Proposed legislation would have broadband providers contribute to Universal Service Fund (USF)

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor reports…

Several U.S. senators introduced legislation that if passed, would direct the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to assess contributions from broadband and edge providers to the Universal Service Fund (USF).

The USF is allocated to broadband builds in rural and Tribal areas, connections for schools, hospitals and libraries, as well as a low-income affordability program.

Until now, broadband and edge providers haven’t been required to contribute to the USF. Since its launch in 1997, USF funding has been the burden of traditional telecommunications companies, including wireline and wireless companies, as well as cable companies that provide voice services. Amid fears over that revenue base “trending toward $0,” the proposed allocated budget for the USF in the fourth quarter of 2023 was still $6.03 billion.

FCC Map is updated – number of unserved areas drops 13 percent in the US

Posted on by
Reply

Telecompetitor reports…

Version 3 of the FCC broadband map has been released publicly. The map is based on data filed by providers reflecting broadband availability as of June 30.

According to FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel, the number of locations lacking high-speed broadband nationwide dropped to 7.2 million from 8.3 million in version 2, which was based on December 31, 2022 data. That’s a drop of more than 13% over the six-month period.

“Providers are connecting more locations to high-speed internet services thanks to the commission’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund and Connect America Fund, in addition to other federal, state and privately funded program and projects,” said Rosenworcel in a blog post.

The new map also reflects the results of 4.8 million challenges to provider-reported data and over 1.5 million accepted location challenges, Rosenworcel said.

Here’s a look at Minnesota’s access to a wired connection with at least 25 Mbps down and 3 up (25/3) connection. (The darker the blue, the better the coverage.)

Sherburne County will be looking at broadband

Posted on by
Reply

Patriot News reports…

The Palmer Township Board met Monday evening and a presentation from Sherburne County’s Planning and Zoning staff highlighted the lengthy agenda. …

Additional priorities in the upcoming months will include an online permitting system, as well as continued progress on the EDA’s strategic plan to include areas such as business retention and expansion, housing and broadband.

Barthel did note that Sherburne is now in the top 10 of Minnesota counties in terms of broadband coverage.

More on MN PUC’s suspension of LTD Broadband’s ETC designation

Posted on by
Reply

I posted notes and video from the MN Public Utilities Commission meeting yesterday; the Minneapolis Star Tribune also reported on it…

State utility regulators on Thursday suspended a crucial certification for LTD Broadband, dealing a blow to the embattled telecom company and its hopes of unblocking $311 million in federal cash to build infrastructure for high-speed internet across rural Minnesota.

The decision came at an important juncture for LTD Broadband. The Federal Communications Commission could soon act on an appeal by the company after revoking a huge grant award in August 2022.

Corey Hauer, CEO of LTD, said the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) “acted improperly” by suspending the company’s certification without an “evidentiary hearing.”

“The company is evaluating its options,” Hauer said.

Hauer also said he believes there is “literally zero chance” the FCC will grant the appeal — and the money. But the company, he said, could challenge any decision in court.

At the time it suspended the grants, the FCC said LTD Broadband was not capable of building the fiber-optic cable networks it had promised. But even if the agency reverses course, the PUC decision would at least temporarily stop the telecom provider from using that grant money in Minnesota while state officials investigate whether to permanently bar LTD.

The unanimous vote by the five-member PUC stems from a request made by two trade associations representing telecom companies and nonprofit rural electric cooperatives. Those groups could benefit from state and federal subsidies in areas LTD planned to serve, but they were not alone in arguing the company wasn’t up to the task.

MN PUC suspends LTD Broadband’s ETC designation and refers the case to Office of Administrative Hearings

Posted on by
Reply

Today the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission met to decide on two questions.

  1. Should the Commission lift the January 18, 2023, stay of this proceeding issued by the ALJ?
  2. Should the Commission grant the MREA and MTA’s (Petitioners’) motion to suspend LTD’s Rural Digital Opportunity Fund ETC designation previously granted by the Commission? (PUC: Fournier, McShane)

They were given a series of potential responses – akin to a multiple-choice exam or survey. They decided to move forward with the following:

  • 2 = Lift the stay imposed pursuant to the Administrative Law Judge’s January 18, 2023, Third Prehearing Order (Petitioners, Department, and OAG).
  • 2a = Refer the matter back to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) with the request that the matter be restarted following the procedure outlined in the Commission’s August 16, 2022, Notice and Order for Hearing (Department).
  • 4 = Grant the Petitioner’s motion to suspend LTD’s RDOF ETC designation previously granted by the Commission (Petitioners, Department, and OAG).

Below are  extensive notes from the meeting. I am leaving them ASIS. The questions are fast-paced and detailed referring to solutions by their multiple choice numbers. I tried to supplement that with some additional descriptions for folks to follow along. Continue reading →

Quick look at impact of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law in Minnesota

Posted on by
Reply

The White House has created fact sheets for each state on how much has been spent through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, including Minnesota. The list all of the awards, but I’m only listing broadband info…

Internet: High-speed internet is necessary for Americans to do their jobs, participate in school, access health care, and stay connected. Yet, over 135,984 homes and small businesses in Minnesota do not have access to high-speed internet infrastructure. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invests $65 billion to provide affordable, high-speed internet to everyone in America. The Biden-Harris Administration worked with internet providers to offer high-speed internet plans that are fully covered by the Affordable Connectivity Program — meaning most eligible households can now get high-speed internet without paying a dime. Now, the Biden-Harris Administration is calling on Congress to extend this program through 2024. Without action from Congress, millions of Americans will lose their internet connection and the economic opportunities that come with it. See ACP enrollment for every state and Congressional District here.

Announced funding: To date, Minnesota has received $651.8 million through the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program (BEAD) to provide access to high-speed internet to everyone in Minnesota. In addition, about 234,000 households in Minnesota are enrolled in the Affordable Connectivity Program, with more signing up every day. Households can check their eligibility, sign up, and find fully covered internet plans at GetInternet.gov.

They highlight a ReConnect Project:

ReConnect Project Spotlight Meeker Cooperative Light & Power Association The Department of Agriculture has awarded approximately $19 million to the Meeker Cooperative Light & Power Association to deploy a fiber-to-the premises network to provide high-speed internet. This network will benefit 458 people, 16 businesses, 124 farms and one educational facility in Kandiyohi, Meeker and Stearns counties in Minnesota. This unique investment ensures that rural communities have access to the internet connectivity needed to allow rural America to remain a place of opportunity to both live and work.

New FCC rules protect against discrimination and redlining

Posted on by
Reply

St Paul Pioneer Press reports…

The Federal Communications Commission has enacted new rules intended to eliminate discrimination in access to internet services, a move which regulators are calling the first major U.S. digital civil rights policy.

The rules package, which the commission ratified on Wednesday, would empower the agency to review and investigate instances of discrimination by broadband providers to different communities based on income, race, ethnicity and other protected classes.

The order also provides a framework for the FCC to crack down a range of digital inequities including the disparities in the investment of services for different neighborhoods, as well as the “digital divide,” a term experts use to describe the complete lack of internet access many communities experience due to regional or socioeconomic inequality.

Editorial in Mankato Free Press on Bipartisan Infrastructure Law

Posted on by
Reply

The Free Press Mankato reports in an editorial…

A Free Press in-depth report last week showed the millions of dollars in local investments coming from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law passed in November of 2021, one of the most important achievements in the presidency of Joe Biden.

Broadband was part of the equation…

Then comes broadband internet, another way to connect small towns and keep their businesses competitive. The bipartisan law will send some $600 million to Minnesota to build out broadband internet. That is six times the current annual $100 million state investment. And even that won’t be enough, say broadband contractors.

Some rural areas have only 60% broadband coverage, leaving a gap for business and schools. Minnesota has always supported small town economic development and expanding broadband will allow people to do business with the world, but live in the quiet and safe small towns.

NTIA’s Tom Karst on how Minnesotans can impact BEAD planning in MN

Posted on by
Reply

A big thanks to Tom Karst from the NITA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration, US Department of Commerce) for talking with me today about how communities, providers and people can engage with the newly released BEAD Draft Proposals from the MN Office of Broadband. These documents will (eventually) become the blueprint for how the $652 million of federal funding will be spent to deploy broadband in Minnesota. From now until December 12, the public is invited to comment on these drafts. That means now is the time to have an impact on where and how that money is spent.

The documents are not as long as I expected. OBD does a nice job being concise and straightforward. The report is good is part because OBD has been doing this for years. But more eyes, ear and ideas can only make it better. To make it easier and encourage participation, I’m going to reframe our conversation here as a checklist of things your community can do to engage with the process:

Mapping Challenges
There is no longer an opportunity to use maps to get more BEAD money into Minnesota. Now the maps will be used to define eligibility within the state. You want to make sure that the map is correct and see how broadband is defined. Volume 1 outlines the challenge process. If the challenge process is onerous or confusing to you, now is the time to speak up.

Federal Requirements (such as letter of credit)
Volume 2 outlines the requirements for subgrantees (future potential grant awardees). Because Minnesota has a process in place this is an area where accommodations are made (or not made) from the existing process to adhere to federal requirements. One example is the required letter of credit. (Tom does a nice job describing the letter of credit requirement and alternatives.) If you are a provider or you have experience working on projects with federal requirements, this is a section you may want to delve into to offer advice or concerns.

Scoring Rubric
Volume 2 includes a proposed scoring rubric, which will (eventually) determine the requirements and priorities of future grant awards. Again, now is the time to speak up with your needs and concerns. Do you see things you appreciate or are concerning?

The proposal recognizes that $652 million will not get broadband to everyone in Minnesota. There’s no wiggle room to waste if we want to optimize coverage and maximize speeds. As a state, Minnesota is broadband smart. We’ve gone through the state grant process longer than most. This is the opportunity for us to use that experience and knowledge to create a program that best meet our needs. One idea for local communities is to meet with local broadband stakeholders, including potential provider partners, to discuss these documents both with a goal of submitting comments but also brainstorming local solutions and setting the stage to be prepared for the first round of BEAD funding.

Tom knows the BEAD process well. His job is to help Minnesota make the most of it and while busy, he’s generous with his time. If you have any questions or ideas, please contact him.

Mobile: (240) 328-5178
Email: TKarst@NTIA.gov
InternetForAll.gov

Here are some of Tom’s recommendations:

A Scan through Minnesota’s BEAD Initial Proposals – crib notes edition

Posted on by
Reply

On Monday, the Office of Broadband Development posted their draft copies of the Initial Proposals to BEAD (Broadband Equity Access and Development Program) to outline how they would dole out money for broadband deployment and why they are qualified to do so. The public has 30 days to submit comments to the drafts.

Here are the drafts:

Between meetings I have been trying to digest this. I thought I’d share my abstract of the reports. I’d be delighted to hear from others. We will all have a different view and take on the reports. Mine is pretty academic. A community leader will read through for opportunities and barriers for them – the broadband provider will do the same. I think the collective hive mind has the power to share their views to make sure we can optimize the $652 million coming into the state. I encourage everyone to read and submit comments to the OBD.

Distillation of Draft Initial Proposal Volume 1

“Minnesota will receive a total of $651,839,368. The individual state amounts were calculated from the number of unserved locations (locations without reliable broadband service of at least 25Mbps download and 3Mbps upload) within each state based on new maps that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) developed as well as the number of such locations in areas deemed to be high cost.”

Minnesota is asked to list all Community Anchor Institutions (CALs). They use the Minnesota Interactive Map to compile the list. If you are a CAI, you should make sure you are on the list. However doing so might not help get funding since they also report, “Since Minnesota has had a process to map CAIs for several years, and because the BEAD allocation for Minnesota is inadequate to address priority #3 (gigabit symmetrical speeds to CAIs), the Office of Broadband Development with its limited resources and very short timeline for preparing the Initial Proposal did not stand up a new process to identify CAIs… (1.3 p4)

Minnesota will not include fixed wireless, DSL nor licensed fixed wireless connections as “served” locations. They will allow speed tests that demonstrate slower speeds (than 100/20) to define addresses (as unserved) even if they show up on the National Broadband Map as served.

Distillation of Draft Initial Proposal Volume 2

Much of the proposal outlines the activities of the OBD since it was established. That history makes parts of the proposal easier to process, such as the logistics of assessing eligible entities, contractual issues, soliciting applications and getting subgrantees to coordinate work.

For many folks, the plot gets good on page 6, when the report gets into working with subgrantees; in short they will build upon the existing process:

The plan is three rounds of grants and a priority for unserved areas. The expectation is that funding will not be adequate to reach all unserved and underserved locations. They will negotiate with providers to get to as many unserved locations as possible. “If negotiations and/or funding options to address all unserved locations prove unsuccessful after Round 3, OBD will seek NTIA approval in its Final Proposal to classify any remaining unserved locations as locations to default to existing fixed wireless service and/or low-earth orbiting satellite service and addressed in any future state grant funding rounds, ReConnect 6, RDOF II, Community Connect, etc.”

The Line Extension program may be a model to reach high cost areas if necessity require and budget allows but that would happen in the third round and be modified based on lessons learned in the first two rounds.

 

New documents for MN PUC meeting (Nov 16) on LTD Broadband ETC designation

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission will be discussing the matter of LTD Broadband’s ETC designation on Thursday. I recently shared their staff briefing papers, which include detailed background of the issue and outline the possible decision options. A few days ago LTD Broadband ask the PUC to remove them from the agenda.

The Minnesota Attorney General has responded, essentially opposing LTD Broadband’s request and asking the PUC to suspect the expanded ETC designation until the matter is permanently resolved…

Dear Mr. Seuffert:
The Minnesota Department of Commerce opposes LTD Broadband’s recommendation to delay the above-referenced proceeding yet again. The Commission referred this matter to the Office of Administrative Hearings for a contested case more than fourteen months ago. As the Department detailed in its initial comments, ongoing concerns over LTD’s fitness to serve as an eligible telecommunications carrier (ETC) has created regulatory uncertainty that interferes with the ability of rural Minnesota communities and service providers to access other federal subsidies for broadband deployment.
There is no guarantee that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will issue a timely final decision regarding LTD’s administrative appeal. A final order arising from a similar appeal by StarLink, for example, has been pending with the FCC for at least two months. Moreover, if the FCC reverses its original denial of LTD’s long-form application, Minnesota will not have enough time to adequately evaluate LTD’s fitness to serve as an ETC in the areas of the state where it was a provisional Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (RDOF) winning bidder. Even an expedited contested case would, realistically, last at least several months during which federal subsidies could begin to flow to LTD while rural Minnesota communities and other service providers would be choked off from other sources of financial support.
To protect the public interest, the Department requests suspension of LTD’s expanded ETC designation until this matter is permanently resolved. The Department and other intervenors, through the submission of affidavits from engineering experts, have met their threshold obligation for the purposes of suspension – demonstrating that it is more likely than not LTD cannot meet its expanded ETC obligations. To be clear, suspension does nothing to change the underlying burden of proof on whether to permanently revoke LTD’s expanded ETC designation. Suspension is simply necessary to prevent harm to the public interest until this case is permanently resolved.

Minnesota Telecom Alliance and Minnesota Rural Electric Association have also responded, opposing LTD Broadband’s request…

This letter is submitted by the Minnesota Telecom Alliance (“MTA”) and Minnesota Rural Electric Association (“MREA”) in opposition to the November 13, 2023 request of LTD Broadband, LLC (“LTD”) for further delay based on the circulation of a Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) draft order concerning LTD’s Application for Review.
Completely contrary to LTD’s position, the circulation of that draft order makes it all the more essential that the Commission act immediately on the Motion to Suspend because failing to do so would:
1. Potentially moot any later Commission order regarding whether LTD can meet its Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (“ETC”) obligations to 102,000 locations in Minnesota; and
2. Leave entirely up to the FCC the critical public interest question of whether Minnesotans in these locations will be able to actually obtain high speed Broadband service (which has been LTD’s goal from the start of this proceeding). These totally unacceptable results would occur because:
1. The Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (“BEAD”) program prohibits BEAD funding for any locations for which the FCC has issued a Public Notice that Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (“RDOF”) support is ready-to-authorize or is authorized. 1 (Minnesota’s Border to Border (“BTB”) Program has adopted this same restriction that prohibits BTB funding to areas that have an enforceable commitment.);2 and
2. Such a Public Notice could be issued very shortly after an FCC Order, sooner than time estimates for actual funding, and long before the Commission could react.
These facts make it clear that, if the Commission waited for the issuance of the FCC Order, it would be impossible for the Commission to issue an order before the announcement of the Public Notice that would preclude BEAD funding for the 102,000 locations that would, in effect, prevent the Commission order from protecting the public interest.
Further, all of the evidence before the Commission fully justifies suspension, including:
1. Engineering analysis provided by Petitioners showing that LTD could not install fiber needed to provide Broadband service to these 102,000 Minnesota locations even if LTD had all of the $311 million RDOF support for those locations; and
2. Engineering analysis provided by the Department that also shows that LTD cannot provide Broadband service to those locations.
These facts show there would be no benefit to the public from enabling LTD to obtain RDOF support, only an illusion of a benefit. This would come at the cost of preventing qualified providers, that could otherwise obtain and use BEAD funding and State BTB Broadband funding, from providing high-speed Broadband service in LTD’s ETC area.
It is the Commission’s responsibility, not the FCC’s, to protect the public interest in Minnesota, and the Commission has more than an ample record to suspend LTD’s ETC expanded designation. Therefore, there is no merit to LTD’s argument that the Commission should wait for a decision by the FCC. To the contrary, federal law contemplates State commissions acting through ETC designations before the FCC acts to determine a provider’s eligibility for RDOF funding.
Under Minnesota law, public interest considerations take priority over private interests. Here, the severe risk to residents in the 102,000 locations within LTD’s ETC area, combined with the factual information now available to the Commission, fully justify suspending LTD’s expanded ETC designation unless and until LTD can provide evidence showing it can be reasonably expected to perform its ETC obligations.

LTD Broadband responds countering the responses above…

LTD Broadband, LLC (“LTD”), by counsel, hereby replies to the letters filed earlier today on behalf of the Minnesota Department of Commerce (“DOC”) and the Minnesota Telecom Alliance (“MTA”) and Minnesota Rural Electric Association (“MREA”), each opposing LTD’s request that Decision Item 1 be deleted from the Public Utilities Commission’s November 16, 2023 Agenda Meeting. As detailed herein, the DOC and MTA/MREA once again
have failed to articulate any public interest basis for the Commission to pursue a contested proceeding in this matter at this time.
Both the DOC and MTA/MREA pile speculation upon conjecture to reach a wholly unsupported conclusion that immediate action is required. Broken down to its essence, the argument is that if the FCC grants LTD’s Application for Review at any point, then the Commission might have limited time to conduct its own proceedings before the FCC’s staff might possibly announce that LTD may, upon submission of additional showings, become eligible for Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (“RDOF”) support.

That is a multitude of future conditional events that would be required before the asserted harm that is alleged could occur, i.e., an award of RDOF funding that conceivably blocks other funding for the locations for which LTD was a provisional winner of support.
In the absence of even one of these many dominoes being tipped, there is no credible basis to engage in further administrative proceedings, which would not only impose significant time, financial and other resource burdens upon all parties and the Commission but would also be prejudicial to LTD. Indeed, the lead arguments raised by DOC and MTA/MREA are contradictory. In its letter, DOC expresses concern that there’s “no guarantee that the [FCC] will issue a timely decision regarding LTD’s administrative appeal.” But for so long as that remains the case, the status quo is maintained, no RDOF support can be authorized to LTD, all locations remain eligible for other broadband support programs (including BEAD) to the extent they are
not now otherwise served, and LTD’s ETC designation covering Minnesota RDOF locations remains effectively dormant.
Taking the opposite view, MTA/MREA assert that “the circulation of that draft order makes it all the more essential that the Commission act immediately” based on the specious contention that FCC action could “[p]otentially moot any later Commission order” governing LTD’s ETC status in Minnesota. MTA/MREA make no legal showing why any FCC action could preempt Commission action in this case, let alone a factual showing that “it would be
impossible” for the Commission to act before LTD received RDOF funds.
In short, both the DOC’s and MTA/MREA’s arguments are based not only on hypothesized events (FCC action or lack thereof), but also on a series of other potential followon events to which both simply presume the Commission would be unable to respond in timely fashion should the first of their speculative occurrences come to fruition. There is no evidence to support such presumptions. Moreover, neither the DOC nor MTA/MREA has made any fact based showing that current circumstances have any negative impact on the public interest. Accordingly, it makes far more sense to defer any Commission engagement on this matter pending further FCC action, which now seems likely to occur and may by itself preclude any need for further proceedings before the Commission.

Le Sueur County responded explaining how the issue has had an impact on them…

I was made aware the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) will be discussing on November 16, the revocation of expanded Eligible Telecommunications Carrier (ETC) designation of LTD Broadband (LTD) and denying LTDs funding certification for 2023.

I want to thank you for your time and attention to this very important matter. As you know, the issue of the ETC designation for LTD is a complex one, that is intertwined with funding ramifications that directly link to future fiber access to citizens in our county and throughout Minnesota.

I am not a subject matter expert on whether LTD qualifies and should carry ETC designation, but I can share with you the impact LTD and its RDOF winning bid has had on our county and its citizens, which I hope you take into consideration as you decide what direction to take on ETC designation and funding certification.

As a rural county with limited fiber infrastructure, many of our citizens have had to rely on wireless internet service providers for our internet, with LTD being a key provider of those services. While we were, and are grateful, for LTD providing wireless services to our area while we wait for fiber infrastructure, unfortunately over the past several years we have heard many complaints about speed and reliability of the wireless service and the quality of customer service.

Furthermore, our county experienced a Border-to-Border grant being denied in 2021 from the State of Minnesota based on RDOF census tracts, a decision that has had a chilling effect on providers looking to work in these areas. Further, we continue to be concerned about how winning RDOF census tracts are counted in BEAD allocations, thus shorting our county of much needed federal resources to install fiber networks.

On a separate, but related front, we recently met with LTD representatives to discuss with them their FCC speed reporting, which showed many locations eligible for 250/250 service. During that meeting, we were happy to hear about claimed improvements in their wireless service technology, and some preliminary work on fiber projects. However, unfortunately, we did not hear about any significant plans to broadly install fiber networks in the county within RDOF census tracts.

As a follow-up to that meeting with LTD, the county reached out to several citizens and current LTD customers and encouraged them to contact LTD to enhance their speeds if they wished to improve their service. Based on the responses back from those citizens, none were able to improve their speeds, and in fact were told improved service was not available. Based on this knowledge, the county worked and continues to work on challenging speed reporting to the FCC.

When considering LTDs ETC designation, I would recommend you question and closely examine LTDs
capabilities and plans to install fiber networks to homes and businesses, especially within RDOF census tracts.

For your reference, we believe LTD has been awarded 415 census tracts in our County. The entire RDOF award for LTD amounts to around $1 million in our County, an average of $2,410 per census tract. Based on our past work, $1 million is far short of the public subsidy needed to install fiber networks in these census tracts.

Thanks again for your time and attention to this issue and examining if LTD has the capability of installing fiber networks and should carry ETC designation.

I would also like to call to your attention the following correspondence that we sent to the Governor’s
Office in September that further outlines the issues that providers who overreport service create for
communities and local providers.

The Attorney General’s Office also responded…

The Office of the Minnesota Attorney General—Residential Utilities Division (“OAG”) respectfully submits this letter in opposition to LTD Broadband LLC’s (“LTD”) request that the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (“Commission”) delay consideration of Petitioners’ Motion to Suspend (“Motion”) because the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) placed LTD’s Application for Review on its Items on Circulation. For many months, LTD’s defense to the Motion has leaned heavily on the fact that the FCC had not taken further action on LTD’s Application for Review. LTD’s initial comments observed “[t]here has been no change in the circumstances of LTD’s Application for Review.”1 LTD argued the Motion was premature and based upon “a skewed and inconsistent account of the status of proceedings before the FCC concerning LTD’s long-form application.”2 The thrust of LTD’s comments was that there would be plenty of time to engage the Commission’s attention if and when FCC returned its attention to LTD.

In response to these arguments from LTD, the Minnesota Telecom Alliance (“MTA”), the Minnesota Rural Electric Association (“MREA”), the Department of Commerce, OAG, and several additional commentors have continued to raise concerns that (1) the FCC could move on LTD, and if FCC acted (2) Minnesotans will be harmed in the absence of Commission action, because LTD cannot deliver the services it pledges to provide.3 Rather than engage the substance
of these concerns, LTD doubled-down in its Reply Comments on the argument that the Motion was premature. LTD complained that there was “no evidence that we have seen from the Commission that [FCC] action will take place anytime soon.”4

It was, then, perplexing to see LTD file a letter yesterday citing an FCC action—the absence of which was foundational LTD’s ripeness argument opposing the Motion—as a basis to once again scuttle consideration of MTA and MREA’s Motion.

The fact of the matter is that LTD’s appearance on FCC’s Items on Circulation list moves LTD a step closer to receiving funding it is ill prepared to deploy. FCC’s action moves Minnesotans a step closer to having once-in-a-generation rural broadband funding go to a carrier
that is unequal to the task of building out the vital infrastructure that the people of greater Minnesota need. It moves rural communities a step further away from alternate sources of funding (e.g., federal Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (“BEAD”) program and the State Border to Border (“BTB”) funding), which could otherwise meet some of the regional need for broadband
infrastructure funding.

There is urgent need for Commission action to ensure that scarce Universal Service Fund dollars are not squandered. The events cited by LTD provide no reasonable basis to delay consideration of this matter. If anything, they hasten the need for the Commission’s attention. The OAG respectfully requests the Commission deny LTD’s request to pull this matter from the November 16, 2023 agenda meeting.

Iron Range meets to workshop some broadband solutions: start of a get better broadband checklist

Posted on by
Reply

I was in Mountain Iron today for a meeting with RAMS (Range Association of Municipalities and Schools), North East Service Cooperative, IRRR and anyone interested in talking about how to get better broadband to their community. At the end of the meeting, we learned that one goal was to get one community to move forward to get better broadband. I think it was a successful meeting.

Fewer than a dozen of us sat at a table. No agenda. And just started talking about what we knew. Much of the conversation was very specific to the area so I won’t go into those details. But a few things happened that I thought would be interested in any Minnesota region. First – it was time well spent. There were four-ish communities represented and I think all of them have a deeper drive and idea of what to do next; one is definitely ready to move forward. Second – the question on everyone’s mind is whether there is an opportunity to use the BEAD challenge process to get more money into Minnesota. There are discrepancies between the FCC maps, the Minnesota maps and local surveys with speed tests. It’s frustrating to folks. Finally, there was a provider in the room who was very generous about asking practical questions to the communities that taught us a lot about how a provider qualifies a potential community partner. I thought I’d try to relay the questions I caught with some explanation when is makes sense.

  • How many locations do you want to include? And are any seasonal residents?
    Seasonal residents are often not compelling, although remote monitoring and other year round use of broadband can change that.
  • Do you need to serve the whole community?
    It may make sense to h relationship serving only a portion of your community with a project that may be easier or more profitable. You may need to skip the onesie-twosie neighborhoods a mile down the road because that math doesn’t work well – for the first project. Once you have a relationship, it’s easier to make a case for the more difficult neighborhoods.
  • Can you serve locations outside of your jurisdiction? Got an area near you that might draw a provider, like a manufactured home park?
    Consider including customers who aren’t in your township or county if it means more potential customers to provider. The provider doesn’t think in political boundaries and it might make the different in making the project attractive.
  • Is there any existing infrastructure? Think of anchor tenants too. Maybe the courthouse has access or the school.
    The owners of the existing technology may make good partners or they may be the most likely provider moving forward.
  • How many miles of streets do you have? Are they all paved? Is there a ditch that might hold conduit?
  • Do you railroad tracks, bogs, lakes, granite ground, historically significant lands?
    Each of these can be a trigger for an increase in expense because of permitting or simply being ground that’s hard to dig.
  • Is there any scheduled construction in the foreseeable future? Or any new housing development or industrial parks?
  • How much can your community (township, city and/or county) invest in the project?
    A number of 2 percent was mentioned as a target.
  • Have you surveyed folks on their need and interest in better broadband.

I may try to develop this list more and update with a new post.

A few bonus nuggets maybe related to policy suggestions:

Providers who accepted RDOF money need only reach 95 percent of the locations in the area. This means 5 percent will likely not be served and those locations will be the highest cost, hardest to reach. Not including those locations in the original bid, made the bid more attractive but it will leave some locations unserved.

Low population density grants in Minnesota offer 75 percent of funding but that is not enough to make a project palatable in some areas where the population or population density are too low or potential costs to deploy and maintain are too high. There are trigger issues (permits, crowded rights of way, difficult terrain) that might cause an unexpected high increase in price. It is difficult to plan for such triggers. Maybe we need an option for greater funding or an option for trigger funding.

Black Broadband Summit Nov 2023: Notes on building a black-led broadband cooperative

Posted on by
Reply

The Second Annual Black Broadband Summit was an opportunity for folks to talk about their broadband needs and experience and to learn about cooperatives. There were 2-3 dozen people attending. There is a push to create a black-led broadband cooperative to meet the needs of the local community and develop community wealth. There was more conversation about the reason and the whys than the technology but I think giving a reason for people to want to do something is a great start.

Here are notes from the sessions:

Ini Augustine – Project Nandi

During COVID Ini realized people needed computers. After the murder of George Floyd, Ini realized that having the computer wasn’t enough. People needed training, support, broadband. Redlining for technology seems to mirror the redlining for homeownership laws.

We need a black led cooperatively owned broadband provider. They released a report on broadband in the community and submitted it to the Office of Broadband Development with the hope that it might impact the federal money coming into the state for broadband.

Steering Committee Status Report

  • We have the power to take control of our own technology. We can be good at technology. It’s all about opportunity.
  • Internet is a modern day tool people without access to that tool are being marginalized.
  • We need to take back our money and our power away from the monopolies.
  • In technology, you don’t take notes for yourself, you take notes for the people who will follow you.

Can you tell us about a time that you needed internet and didn’t have it?

  • Had to take days off of work rather than work from home
  • Only one option means putting up with crappy service
  • Dropped cell phone coverage means loss of Google Maps
  • Internet is more power than lights
  • In Hennepin County if you get MFIP, you can submit forms by iphone – but not with an Android and you need a decent data plan.
  • I need access to compose music – I rely on internet to do that. It’s greater to food to me.
  • I will pay broadband before I pay electricity. I have five kids and when internet goes out, I pack up my kids to pay it immediately.

Black Coop Training by Nkuli Shongwe

  • Ownership is a goal of the cooperatives.
  • How do we relate to community wealth meeting? Buy in the community.
  • What does it mean build your own membership when the history for some members may lead an inherent or historical imbalance.
  • Black Panther started food stamps and buses that would bring families to visit loved ones in prisons. The point being cooperatives understand and strive to meet the needs.
  • Cooperatives meet many needs.

Nandi surveyed Minnesotans about technology – the Myth of Urban Broadband

Here are some of the finding/notes/stories from the audience:

  • 113 people surveyed
  • According to OBD, 90 percent of MN have broadband but that means 300,000 people in the TC without broadband
  • 3 percent of people surveyed had no device at home
  • less than 30 percent of people who qualify for ACP take advantage of it – Nandi tris to help with that because they found that the time required to get ACP was a barrier
  • Access to broadband by ethnicity/race varied dramatically
  • The speeds and quality of service also varied greatly. They found that people in parts of Minneapolis were paying as much for slower speeds than folks in the suburbs.
  • Many providers are beholden to shareholders, not customers.