Over the weekend, I had a chance to read through the Five Year Broadband Action Plan created by the MN Office of Broadband Development as part of the BEAD process. (It’s a precursor of sorts to the Initial Proposal due in December 2023.) At the highest level, it seems to say that Minnesota, through the Office of Broadband Development, is well poised to administer the BEAD money because they have been doing it for a long time. If this were a resume, I’m pretty sure we’d get the job.
They outline the current situation:
The FCC data identified 134,850 unserved locations (lack broadband service of at least 25Mbps download/3Mbps upload by a wired or licensed fixed wireless service). That total includes 7,067 locations determined to be high cost for deploying broadband.
Minnesota’s most recent data (as of 12/31/2022) identified 152,000 unserved locations without a wired broadband service delivering speeds of at least 25Mbps download/3Mbps upload (shown in pink on above map) and 229,000 underserved locations without a wired broadband service delivering speeds of at least 100Mbps download/20Mbps upload (total of pink and purple on above map). Minnesota statutes identify locations without a wired service of at least 100/20 as eligible for broadband grant funding, thus for purposes of determining grant eligibility, OBD focuses on those areas lacking a wired broadband service.
The highlight points of synchronicity…
Minnesota’s statutory goals directly align with those of the BEAD program, prioritizing the deployment of broadband infrastructure to locations that are unserved, then deploying infrastructure to locations that are underserved.
And there’s a plan to update the estimated costs to securing universal access in MN at speeds of 100/20
The cost estimate to achieve universal broadband service in Minnesota is under development. In the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband’s Annual Report for 2022, the estimate necessary for achieving full coverage was $2,764,500,000, using a cost per passing of $9,500 and the number of homes without broadband service of at least 100Mbps download and 20Mbps upload as 291,000. The cost share attributable to provider/community match was then factored in at both 50 percent and 75 percent. The result was the need for public funding of $1,382,250,000 with a 50 percent match and $2,073,375,000 with a 75 percent match. Amounts calculated to be received from ARPA CPF, ReConnect 3, RDOF, NTIA Tribal awards, BEAD, and Federal Direct Appropriations were then factored in.
Prior to the submission of the Initial Proposal, OBD will do additional work to calculate a more accurate cost per passing by reviewing the results of our two most recent grant rounds (including the first round of our Lower Population Density Program), reviewing any data available from CostQuest, examining factors that would increase costs in various geographies of Minnesota, using NTIA’s toolkit, and discussing with providers serving in the various regions of the state.
They also highlight the barriers to getting broadband to everyone. Funding is the big one:
Funding—despite the eight broadband infrastructure grant rounds funded and administered in Minnesota, awarding over $280M, and two additional state funded grant rounds totaling $100M anticipated in the next year, even with the BEAD allocation, Minnesota expects to be short funds to improve broadband speeds and reliability to all currently unserved and underserved locations. The most recent grant round saw funding requests at three times funding availability.
The weather, uncertainty, supply chain are other issues. There is also Minnesota communities’ preference for fiber:
Community based support and communities generally want fiber—in Minnesota, high speed broadband generally means fiber when speaking with communities. If the once-in-a-lifetime infusion of funding for broadband deployment is going to serve as the permanent solution for a community’s broadband needs, then most every community wants that solution to be fiber. In most grant applications OBD has seen since 2014, fiber projects predominate.
There will always be a place for wireless broadband, but I think the focus on fiber is as result of Minnesota’s communities’ experience learning about broadband since 2010 (even before!). This is an area where it’s nice to see Minnesota offer its experience to expect/ask the most from the federal funding.
Another barrier is the mapping situation:
CostQuest license barriers–OBD and its mapping partner are working through the licensing requirements of the CostQuest license to continue the Minnesota map which is familiar to our residents, businesses and providers. Hopefully the data can be as transparent as prior maps, but that remains to be determined.
Minnesota is slated to get about $650 million for broadband through BEAD. That isn’t going to change and as stated above, it might not be enough, subsequently accurate maps are going to be key to equitable investment. Minnesota has been mapping broadband for many years. The maps have been created with data provided by providers but residents have always had the opportunity to run a speed text and report any discrepancies to OBD. I have heard that mapping challenges are not as straightforward for the FCC maps, especially for aggregate challenge options. Maybe this is another area where Minnesota’s expertise can shine.
