Connecting America
Broadband Policy Issues and Options for State Legislatures
Pre-Conference Invitational Seminar
NCSL Annual Meeting
Boston, Massachusetts
August 4-5, 2007
Session Date: August 4, 2007
Session Summary: State Approaches to Broadband
By Michelle Larson-Krieg, Intern, Legislative Information Services, NCSL
This summary is provided for information purposes only. NCSL does not endorse any views it contains.
Summary: Representative Warrent Kitzmiller discussed how the governor and legislature are working together and with private providers to make ubiquitous broadband a reality in the rural state of Vermont. Representative Daniel Bosley described the Berkshire Connect model--a model that aggregates demand--and highlighted the many successes this approach has had in rural Massachusetts. Lisa Wallmeyer provided details of several policy initiatives underway in Virginia.
Kitzmiller: Working on broadband policy has been a learning process. Every segment of Vermont’s society wanted broadband. Vermont is small and extremely rural, and the state is also very hospitable to the entrepreneurial spirit. The majority of businesses are mom and pop businesses. The current lack of broadband access may be the single greatest deterrent to economic growth. Vermont heard the pleas of its citizens. The governor made broadband the theme of his administration, and built a consensus on what needed to be done. Senator Vince Illuzzi also wrote Vermont’s broadband bill.
In Vermont, broadband is available in 65 percent of rural areas. This percentage is greater in urban areas. In Burlington, fiber is available to every home.
Vermont is committed to making broadband available to 100 percent of Vermonters. If you compare Rhode Island, which has made the same commitment, 100 percent is not quite the same challenge. Vermont’s mountainous terrain makes deployment more difficult.
The Vermont Telecommunications Authority is governed by a Board of Directors. Some directors are ex-officio, others are appointed, and none are legislators or members of the current administration. We wanted to include experts in all of the necessary areas. The Authority is tasked with providing broadband service to all Vermont residents by no later than the end of 2010. This is a tight timeline that requires focus on unserved areas.
The Authority is directed to develop an inventory of what is currently available; identify the types of infrastructure needed; coordinate broadband deployment efforts; establish and coordinate public-private partnerships; support local initiatives; and provide resources in the form of loans, grants, and other incentives. The Authority can own infrastructure, it can also partner with private providers, or it can offer incentives. The Authority’s job is as the coordinator and facilitator of the service. The focus is on building infrastructure, not on operating services.
Vermont appropriated $200,000 to develop wi-fi hotspots. These hotspots are important for tourism. The money is distributed in small amounts. We’ve also provided $40 million in revenue bonds, also referred to as moral obligation bonds. $40 million is not enough to do the job, but it is enough to leverage many times that amount.
The legislation was the controversial piece because local control is very important in Vermont. We saw the need to create a series of interconnected towers to bend signal around mountains, reach valleys, and provide a signal that could cross boundaries. We didn’t want to give a local community veto power in the permitting process. This was the only controversial piece. Vermont established a minimum technical service goal of 3 mb in both directions. That goal will change along with the Department of Public Service definition. We don’t want to just catch up with old-fashioned DSL and have our broadband service be outdated from the start.
The legislation also requires periodic reports from the Authority. One sticking point is that the governor, speaker of the house, and speaker pro tem all have to agree on who will chair the Authority. The chair has not yet been selected, but we will have to get to work quickly because the initial report is due at the end of this year.
Representative Daniel Bosley: Massachusetts is doing a lot of the things that Vermont has done. Vermont has been extremely innovative.
From the Berkshires, there is very little broadband. In Massachusetts, a third of the state is 100 percent served, a third of the state is underserved, and a third of the communities have no broadband at all. (Map of broadband availability in Massachusetts.) Mountainous territory in the western part of the state makes it more difficult.
In 1989, a rate case was brought to force telephone companies to reconstruct service. There was no call forwarding, no call waiting. Customers took the PUC to court to get better telephone service. They finally got it in 1992.
Berkshire has old telephone lines that haven’t been upgraded. The Berkshires are a big area, but contain less than 10 percent of the state’s population. The broadband market has been slow to develop and there are no market incentives.
Berkshire Connect stepped in to aggregate resources to market the area to the phone company. They received $2 million in state funding, and now have their own system, which is a mixture of microwave wireless and landlines. The concept has spread to other counties. Pioneer County now has Pioneer Connect.
The one-to-one wireless laptop initiative is a program to provide all public students in junior high with a laptop computer.
From a legislative perspective, the economic stimulus bill overrode the governor’s veto to open up access to poles and to create the Director of Broadband Services position to coordinate and provide direction.
The Massachusetts Technology Collaborative is a quasi-public agency responsible for a bond issue to fund broadband deployments. All providers will be invited to participate. The required funding is expected to grow to $45 million because unserved communities are surrounded by underserved areas. High tech federal money is being used to supplement the bond money.
For example, Worthington is a remote town that would like to access broadband by using a microwave signal from Peru. There are a lot of different solutions that are available for different towns. Massachusetts has seen lots of capital investment by private providers, but the government is backfilling where private alone isn’t working.
Lisa Wallmeyer: Exciting broadband initiatives are happening in Virginia. Our goal is to ensure universal broadband access for all businesses by 2010.
The FCC data makes it look like everyone has broadband access, but this is not true in Virginia. Our state has a unique and diverse landscape. There are many urban areas, but there are also many rural and mountainous areas that are underserved. We have discovered that one size does not fit all, and that community-by-community solutions are the best way to meet our goals.
In 2006, Governor Kaine signed an Executive Order establishing the Office of Telework Promotion and Broadband Assistance (OTPBA). This office is to be of limited duration. One of the main responsibilities of the OTPBA is to promote and encourage the use of telework alternatives for public and private employees. The Office is also tasked with advocating for, and facilitating the development and deployment of broadband applications, programs and services to encourage demand. Telework, telemedicine, and e-learning are examples of applications designed to bolster broadband usage.
A second initiative was the creation of the Broadband Roundtable. Former governor Mark Warner is heading that initiative. Both of the chairs have personally faced broadband challenges – one in a rural area, one just outside D.C. The Broadband Roundtable is charged with assisting communities to plan for and deploy broadband with a focus on the delivery of low-cost, last-mile service.
There is a symbiotic relationship between the OTPBA and the Roundtable. We don’t want to recreate the wheel.
Virginia’s emphasis on public-private partnership has provided us with unique opportunities. Importantly, it allows industry to come to government with proposals. We specifically want to know what value-added the government side can bring to the table and we are looking at how to remove policy roadblocks and provide incentives for providers. Our public-private partnerships involve both large and small scale providers.
We have also focused on marketing to bolster broadband demand. We recognize that some areas are not economically viable for providers and we may need authority to look at bond issues, or other solutions.
Both the legislative and executive branches are tuned in to broadband. Last year, two important pieces of legislation were passed. The first amended our statute on public-private partnerships to specifically include the wireless deployment of broadband. The second amended the Virginia funding authority statute to allow for wireless broadband deployment financing.
The Commonwealth has tried to address broadband deployment from an economic development perspective. For example, in non-traditional businesses such as medical transcription, broadband access is more important than bricks and mortar. To help develop our rural communities, we also want people to be able to live in rural Virginia while telecommuting to higher paying jobs.
Senator Smidt: South Dakota has made great strides in broadband deployment. All of our K-12 schools are now wired. This was done with private sector help and prison support to do the work. This assistance was critical because the state’s declining student population means less funding.
We also bought computers for the schools. When we found out that teachers didn’t know how to use the computers, we made a huge effort to train teachers to use computers more effectively in the classroom.
The EROS Data System in Sioux Falls, South Dakota uses a worldwide satellite system to compile and analyze geographical data. However, the data couldn’t be transmitted to the state university. The Board of Regents and others looked at the issue. We are now building infrastructure to link schools to a new underground data delivery system.
Telecommunications companies do a great job in South Dakota, but we want to work more with private-public partnerships to deploy broadband to rural areas.
 Seminar Home
|
