Lawmakers need to re-think how they’re going to bring broadband to rural WA state | Opinion

Having spent many years representing South Central Washington in Olympia, there are a few truths in the Legislature; multiple issues have bi-partisan consensus; the best policy solutions are often the most straightforward; and well-intentioned actions can have unintended consequences.

Rural broadband access for all is a game changer for economic development. We are at a critical moment to close the digital divide by bringing broadband access to our least populated areas of the state. Through the federal Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment grant program (BEAD), Washington State is in line to receive over $1.1 billion to extend broadband access to our unserved and all-too-often neglected communities.

Unfortunately, some lawmakers in the State House of Representatives in Olympia are creating an unnecessary roadblock to this once in a generation opportunity. As often happens, many important policy decisions are never voted on directly, instead committee members slide language into large budget bills.

Lawmakers on the House Capital Budget Committee are attempting to force what’s known as an “open-access” mandate for those seeking BEAD grant funding. This mandate will effectively lock out private companies from accessing one-time grant dollars to extend internet service to those who need it the most — preventing public/private partnerships with some of our region’s largest internet providers.

You might ask, why do we even need the BEAD grants? It is because extending broadband to all sometimes means $10,000 to $15,000 of infrastructure per customer in rural areas.

Requiring “open-access” would mean that a provider, that is also the builder of a network, would be required to open its lines to any other provider that wants to offer services — even if the investment costs that provider millions of dollars to install and maintain its lines.

In reality, “open-access” is rarely truly “open access”. Private companies that want to provide service but don’t own the network infrastructure have little incentive in making long-term commitments to the communities they say they will serve. Likewise, there is no incentive for a private sector company to invest in upgrades, innovation, and cybersecurity practices, end to end, unless there is clarity which company is ultimately accountable to maintain the underlying network.

Worse case, a network gets built and is owned by a government entity using one-time federal dollars, but then lacks ongoing financial resources to maintain and upgrade the network in following years. This scenario has played out time and again, in our state and across the country where a government owned network fails and is sold to a private provider for pennies on the dollar to be upgraded and replaced. In these cases, the result is a waste of taxpayer funds, time, and effort that leaves the most deserving communities behind, still waiting for critical broadband services.

“Open-access” could be a consideration in Washington State’s broadband policy, but we would be the only state to require it as the exclusive criteria to qualify for broadband grant dollars. $1.1 billion is a lot of money but still will not be enough to close the digital divide in the rural areas of our county and counties throughout the state. There is simply not enough public dollars in the system to pay for what is needed — that’s why lawmakers MUST make room to partner with private companies.

This story was originally published April 17, 2023 at 5:00 AM.