The Institute for Local Self Reliance has a new report (Native Nations and Federal Telecom Policy Failures) that tracks the history of how poor or nonexistent technology policies have hindered relationships between broadband providers and tribes and tribal nations…

As Tribes work in record numbers to close the significant digital divide across Indian Country, they need good policy that facilitates self-determined and sustainable solutions. To the contrary, RDOF became, for many, yet another lesson in the dangers of investing significant sums of federal money into new Internet networks on Tribal lands without regard to local knowledge or priorities, leaving Tribal governments to spend their own time and resources to fix broken processes.

While some recent federal broadband programs do require ISPs to secure Tribal consent prior to receiving funds, the FCC still has not adopted this approach. The problems outlined in this report reinforce the need for such a requirement. This report examines RDOF’s program design in the context of the FCC’s policies on Tribal nations, highlights the practical and fundamental concerns raised by some Tribes about the program, and considers the long-term reverberations it continues to have on broadband funding for Tribes. It concludes that the FCC should have stronger, more clear requirements for ISPs operating on Tribal Reservations.

It seems consent is key…

It doesn’t seem far-fetched to tie the release of the FCC’s November 2023 memo to the provider letter in the Pacific Northwest. With state BEAD challenges underway or on the horizon, RDOF recipients bumped up against the threat of competition and felt a renewed sense of urgency to secure consent. Companies could use undue pressure or selective information in an attempt to do so. If Tribes do not fully understand the leverage they hold, they may feel pressured to provide that consent or be unnecessarily warned off of competing for BEAD funds. The legacy of disingenuous outsiders taking advantage of Tribes does not seem to be consigned to history.

There remain a lot of moving parts in the broadband funding landscape – a lot of different state and federal funding programs with different rules and guidelines. For many years, the FCC has doled out the largest share of money, especially to rural areas, but the Commission’s policies on Tribal consultation have often resulted in broken promises, frustration, and bureaucratic hurdles for already time-strapped Tribes looking to close the digital divide on their lands. It is a heap of trouble that some Tribes are still actively trying to unwind. NTIA’s decision not to recognize enforceable commitments without Tribal consent can be a helpful corrective for Tribes who might otherwise be eligible for BEAD funding, though it looks like it may take another big effort to make it a reality.

For years strong public-private partnerships have been touted as essential to deploying broadband in rural areas. Trust and consent are essential to any relationship. Even parenting, I know a begrudged “I’ll clean my room,” will not yield the same result as a happy “I’ll clean my room for $10 or your birthday or to have friends over.” There’s begrudged consent and partnership and many shades in between.