From Davidson CharlesTo BOCrfc2015Cc Santorelli MichaelSubject Broadband Opportunity Council - Response to Request for Comments by the ACLP at New York Law School -

Docket No 1540414365-5365-01Date Wednesday June 10 2015 20252 PMAttachments ACLP - BOC Comments - June 10 2015pdf

Dear Assistant Secretary Strickling amp Under Secretary Mensah

The Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law Schoolrespectfully submits the following filing in response to the request for comment issued bythe Broadband Opportunity Council Should you have any questions please do not hesitateto contact us

Respectfully submitted

Charles M Davidson DirectorMichael J Santorelli DirectorACLP at New York Law School185 W BroadwayNew York NY 10013

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

TheAdvancedCommunicationsLawampPolicyInstituteNewYorkLawSchool

185WBroadwayNewYorkNY10013

June102015

TheHonorableLawrenceStricklingAssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation AdministratorNationalTelecommunicationsampInformationAdministrationUSDepartmentofCommerce1401ConstitutionAvenueNWRoom4626WashingtonDC20230TheHonorableLisaMensahUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentUSDepartmentofAgriculture1400IndependenceAveSWWashingtonDC20250

Re DocketNo1540414365‐5365‐01ndashResponse toRequest forComment

bytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil

DearAssistantSecretaryStricklingampUnderSecretaryMensahThe Advanced Communications Law amp Policy Institute (ACLP) at New York Law SchoolrespectfullysubmitsthefollowingfilinginresponsetotherequestforcommentissuedbytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilShouldyouhaveanyquestionspleasedonothesitatetocontactusRespectfullysubmittedsCharlesMDavidson sMichaelJSantorelli CHARLESMDAVIDSONDIRECTOR MICHAELJSANTORELLIDIRECTOR

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐1‐

To AssistantSecretaryforCommunicationsampInformation LawrenceStricklingampUnderSecretaryforRuralDevelopmentLisaMensah

From CharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliACLPatNewYorkLawSchoolRe GuidingPrinciplesforUsebytheBroadbandOpportunityCouncilinBolstering

BroadbandConnectivityintheUnitedStatesDate June102015TheBroadbandOpportunityCouncil (BOC)has auniqueopportunity to collaboratewithcounterpartsinstateandlocalgovernmentaswellaswithstakeholdersintheprivateandnonprofit sectors to enhance broadband connectivity across the United States As thePresidentrightlynotedinhismemorandumcreatingtheBOCldquobroadbandiscriticaltoUSeconomicgrowthandcompetivenessrdquo1High‐speedInternetaccessisalsoincreasinglyvitaltobasiccommunicationsocialinclusioncivicengagementandarangeofothereverydayactivitiesConsequentlyitisimperativethateveryAmericanhastheopportunitytoaccessand use broadband in a meaningful way For the vast majority of Americans theseopportunities are already present in the form of readily accessible Internet connectionsbutforanarrayofreasonstheychoosenottogoonlineForamuchsmaller(andsteadilyshrinking) percentage of citizens broadband remains unavailable depriving themof theopportunitytomakeadecisionofwhetherornottoadoptForthesereasonstheBOCmustactinatargetedandcoordinatedmannertoenhancebroadbandfromboththesupply‐sidendashsoeveryindividualandbusinesshasreadyaccesstoaconnectionthatmeetstheirneedsndash and the equally important though often overlooked demand‐side ndash so every userpossessestheskillsneededtoputtheirconnectionstoproductiveandmeaningfulusesHoweverasdiscussedatlengthinthesecommentstheBOC(oranyentityforthatmatter)isnotabletoaddresseveryissuendashrealorperceivedndashfacingtheUSbroadbandsectorOnthe contrary theeffortsof theBOCand itsmemberagencies representonlya small butimportantcomponentofamuchlargermosaicofactivitythatisalreadyoccurringineverystate across the country Indeed a growing number of states and their politicalsubdivisionsareexperimentingwithpoliciesandprogramsaimedatclosingdigitaldividesfurtheringsocialjusticeandharnessingthetransformativepowerofbroadbandtobolstertheir citizenry and their economies As suchwe respectfully suggest that theBOC avoidundermining or discouraging the progress beingmade in the states and should insteadfocusonengaginginactivitiesthatsupportcontinuedforwardprogresstowardimprovingbroadbandconnectivityineverypartofthecountryTotheseendswerespectfullysubmitthefollowingsetoffoundationalprinciplesthatwehopewill informtheBOCrsquoseffortsTheseprinciples focusonthreesetsof issuesgeneral 1SeePresidentialMemorandumExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionbyAddressingRegulatoryBarriers and Encouraging Investment and Training The White House March 23 2015httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150323presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐broadband‐deployment‐and‐adoption‐addr(ldquoExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoptionrdquo)

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐2‐

policyparameterstohelpinshapingthecontoursofwhatevereffortsgrowoutoftheBOCrecommendationsfortargetedsupply‐sideactionsandideasforsupportingandbolsteringthemyriadofeffortsfocusedonaddressingcomplexdemand‐sideissuesMorespecificallytheprinciplesincludeGENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

1 Theprimary focusof theBOC shouldbeonensuring that the federal governmentmaximizes its own resources ndash ie spectrum and access to federal lands ndash whenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment(p3)

2 Respect core notions of constitutional federalism by avoiding activities thatencroach upon the ability of the states to experimentwith programs and policiesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity(p6)

3 With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robust broadbandconnectivity theBOC should use the FCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlan as a startingpoint(p8)

4 Coordinationamongandacross federalagenciesdepartmentsandbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts(p10)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

5 The priority of any broadband deployment program that emerges from the BOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas(p11)

6 TheBOCshouldengageinsupply‐sideactivitiesthatfavorprivateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks(p13)

7 Basedon itsownsuccesses in facilitatingbroadbanddeploymenton federal landsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetworkdeploymentandfosteringarationalregulatoryenvironmentthatisconducivetocontinuedprivateinvestmentinnovationandcompetition(p14)

GUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

8 Demand‐side issues are the most important pressing and overlooked in thebroadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw more attention to theseissuesandfacilitateadditionalprogresstowardaddressingthem(p15)

9 TheBOCshouldencouragethestatestoworkmorecloselywithmunicipalitiesandother local stakeholders tobolsterbroadband connectivity from thedemand‐side(p17)

10 Insteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeployment theBOCshouldengage inactivities that underscore the importance and value of facilitating demand‐sideeffortsbycommunities(p18)

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐3‐

GENERALGUIDINGPRINCIPLES

PRINCIPLE1

The primary focus of theBOC should be on ensuring that the federalgovernmentmaximizes itsownresourcesndash iespectrumandaccesstofederallandsndashwhenattemptingtoenhancebroadbanddeployment

The BOC should focus first and foremost on leading by example when it comes tofacilitating broadband deployment by prioritizing actions over which it has the mostinfluence In particular it should leverage its broad jurisdictional mandate ndash iecoordinatingeffortsacrossmorethantwodozenfederalagenciesndashtomakemuchneededprogressontwobroadband‐relatedissuesthathavebeenpendingatthefederal level formany years (1) freeing up government‐owned spectrum for use in building out next‐generation mobile broadband networks and (2) streamlining the processes for gainingaccesstoandusingfederallandstosupportprivatebroadbanddeploymentSpectrum The need for additional spectrum that can support mobile broadbanddeployment has been well documented as has the need for rationalizing and makingavailablethelargeamountofunusedandunder‐usedspectrumheldbyvariouspartsofthefederal government2 A dearth of licensed spectrum capable of supporting mobilebroadband services threatens to slow efforts to improve upon Americarsquos world‐leadingwirelessnetworks3Fortunately therehasbeen littlehesitancyby theWhiteHouseFCCandNTIAtoacknowledge thatasignificantportionof theresponsibility for thisproblemrestsonthecollectiveshouldersofthefederalgovernmentwhichhasbeenslowtoactuallymake available these vital resources for private use4 Some progress has been made inrepurposingandauctioningoffswathsof theairwavesthatwerepreviouslyallocated forotherusesndashbyoneestimatetheFCChasfacilitatedanetincreaseinspectrumavailablefor

2SeeegCharlesMDavidsonampMichaelJSantorelliSeizingtheMobileMomentSpectrumAllocationPolicyfor the Wireless Broadband Century 19 CommLaw Conspectus 1 (2010)httpscholarshiplaweducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1516ampcontext=commlaw Connecting America TheNational Broadband Plan at Ch 5 Federal Communications Commission (2010)httpstransitionfccgovnational‐broadband‐plannational‐broadband‐planpdf (ldquoNational BroadbandPlanrdquo)

3Seeeg idSeealsoPreparedRemarksofFCCChairmanTomWheeler2014CTIAShowFCCSept92014httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchDOC‐329271A1pdf

4 SeeegNationalBroadbandPlan (calling foranadditional500MHzof spectrumtobemadeavailable)PresidentialMemorandumUnleashingtheWirelessBroadbandRevolutionTheWhiteHouse June282010httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐officepresidential‐memorandum‐unleashing‐wireless‐broadband‐revolution (same) PresidentialMemorandumExpandingAmericarsquos Leadership inWireless Innovation TheWhite House June 14 2013 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20130614presidential‐memorandum‐expanding‐americas‐leadership‐wireless‐innovatio (establishing a spectrumpolicy team anddirectingittostudyopportunitiesforsharingspectrum)PlanandTimetabletoMakeAvailable500Megahertzof Spectrum for Wireless Broadband US Dept of Commerce (Oct 2010)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationstenyearplan_11152010pdf(ldquoNTIATimetablerdquo)

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐4‐

mobilebroadbandofabout985MHzsince20105Thesenewresources includedseveralblocks of spectrumpreviously held by the federal government6 Though impressive thisamount is over 400MHz short of meeting the Presidentrsquos and the FCCrsquos shared goal offreeingupandallocating500MHzofadditionalspectrumoverthenextfewyearsAmajorsourceof thisadditional spectrumshouldcome fromtheholdingsof the federalgovernment Indeed NTIA has identified well over 300 MHz of spectrum that could becleared and reallocated for these purposes7 However reallocating these portions of theairwaveshasproven tobe extremely timeconsumingandpolitically fraught endeavors8Moreoverintheabsenceoffirmerandclearerpoliciesaroundrepurposingthisspectrumsome entitiesmight delay or simply refuse to clear certain bands In recent yearsmanyfederal agencies like the Department of Defense have acquiesced to calls for usingunderutilized spectrum assets for wireless broadband9 This represents significantprogressprovidedofcourse that theseentitieshastenthemanner inwhich theyvacatespectrumbandsorotherwiseprepare to share themwithserviceproviders10 Given thecross‐agency remit of the BOC the Council should dedicate significant resources toacceleratingtheprocessesbywhichspectrumheldbythefederalgovernmentndashespeciallythoseresourcesthatsitunusedndashisrepurposedforuseindeployingnewmobilebroadbandservicesAccess toFederalLands Similarly the BOC shouldworkwith its constituent agencies tostreamlineaccesstofederallandsbyprivateserviceprovidersforthepurposesofbuildingoutbroadbandnetworksThisparticularissuewasthesubjectofanExecutiveOrderissued

5SeeColemanBazelonampGiuliaMcHenryMobileBroadbandSpectrumAVitalResourcefortheUSEconomyat 8 The Brattle Group (May 2015) httpwwwctiaorgdocsdefault‐sourcedefault‐document‐librarybrattle_spectrum_051115pdf

6 See Promoting Spectrum Sharing in the Wireless Broadband Era Jan 9 205 NTIAhttpwwwntiadocgovblog2015promoting‐spectrum‐sharing‐wireless‐broadband‐era

7NTIATimetable

8SeizingtheMobileMomentatp55‐56SeealsoNationalBroadbandPlanatp79

9 See An Assessment of the Viability of AccommodatingWireless Broadband in the 1755‐1850MHz BandNational Telecommunicationsamp InformationAdministration US Department of Commerce (March 2012)availableathttpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsntia_1755_1850_mhz_report_march2012pdf

10SeeegRealizingtheFullPotentialofGovernment‐HeldSpectrumtoSpurEconomicGrowthReporttothePresident Presidentrsquos Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (July 2012) available athttpwwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostppcast_spectrum_report_final_july_20_2012pdf(ldquoPCASTfindsthatclearingandreallocationofFederalspectrumisnotasustainablebasisforspectrumpolicy due to the high cost lengthy time to implement and disruption to the Federal mission Furtheralthough some have proclaimed that clearing and reallocationwill result in significant net revenue to thegovernmentwedonotanticipatethatwillbethecaseforFederalspectrumrdquoIdatpvi)cfLarryDownesFeds to Mobile Users Drop Dead July 30 2012 CNET available at httpnewscnetcom8301‐1035_3‐57481929‐94feds‐to‐mobile‐users‐drop‐deadtag=rtcolFDposts(arguingthatldquoThefederalgovernmentisslinkingawayfromapromisebyPresidentObamatofreeupbadly‐neededradiospectrumformobileusersandthealreadyover‐taxednetworksthatservethemrdquo)

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐5‐

bythePresidentinJune201211InthatorderthePresidenthighlightedthepressingneedfor a ldquocoordinated and consistent approach in implementing agency proceduresrequirementsandpoliciesrelatedtoaccesstoFederallandsbuildingsandrightsofwayfederallyassistedhighwaysandtribal landstoadvancebroadbanddeploymentrdquo12A fewmonthspriorCongressenactedtheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof201213alawthatincludedseveralprovisionsrelatedtostreamliningfederalldquoagenciesrsquoprocessesfor the deployment of wireless broadband facilities on Federal property includingrequirementsfor[GeneralServicesAdministration]todevelopcommonapplicationformsmastercontractsandfeesforsuchaccessrdquo14Althoughsomeprogresshasbeenmadetowardstheseendsndashegencouragingldquodigoncerdquorequirements for laying conduit in existing federal transportation projects15 ndash realizingCongressrsquos and the Presidentrsquos vision for leveraging federal lands for broadbanddeploymentremainsadistantgoal16Thatmanyofthesesamediscussionshavebeenhadinthepastbuttolittleavailisequallydisconcertingsuggestingthatrealprogressmightbeimpossible17HowevertheBOCafirst‐in‐kindefforttocoordinateacrossagenciesfortheexpress purpose of bolstering broadband connectivity could succeedwhere others havefailedifitdedicatesitselftomovingtheneedleonthisverycomplexsetofissuesGiventhecomplexities ofworking acrossmultiple agencies theBOC should thus focuson creatingnewprocesses for engaging counterparts in relevantparts of the federal governmenton

11SeeExecutiveOrder13616AcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentTheWhiteHouseJune142012 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20120614executive‐order‐accelerating‐broadband‐infrastructure‐deployment

12Id

13MiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012PubLNo112‐96HR3630126Stat156(enactedFeb222012)

14SeeImplementingExecutiveOrder13616ProgressonAcceleratingBroadbandInfrastructureDeploymentat5 Progress Report to the Steering Committee on Federal Infrastructure Permitting and Review ProcessImprovement by the Broadband Deployment on Federal Property Working Group (Aug 2013)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesmicrositesostpbroadband_eo_implementationpdf (citingtosection6409oftheMiddleClassTaxReliefandJobCreationActof2012)

15See In theMatterof InquiryConcerning theDeploymentofAdvancedTelecommunicationsCapability toAllAmericansinaReasonableandTimelyFashionandPossibleStepstoAccelerateSuchDeploymentPursuanttoSection706oftheTelecommunicationsActof1996asAmendedbytheBroadbandDataImprovementAct2015BroadbandProgressReport andNotice of Inquiry on ImmediateAction toAccelerateDeployment at para18FCCGNDocketNo14‐126(Feb42015)httpsappsfccgovedocs_publicattachmatchFCC‐15‐10A1pdf(ldquo2015BroadbandProgressReportrdquo)

16SeeegPressReleaseAdelsteinMoreProgressNeededtoSiteWirelessFacilitiesonFederalPropertyOct16 2014 PCIA httpwwwpciacompcia‐press‐releases675‐adelstein‐more‐progress‐needed‐to‐site‐wireless‐facilities‐on‐federal‐property

17 See eg NTIA Federal Rights‐of‐Way For Telecommunications ProjectshttpwwwntiadocgovlegacyFROWsiteindexhtml(detailingsimilareffortslaunchedbyPresidentBushin 2002 and 2004) Improving Rights‐of‐Way Management Across Federal Lands A Roadmap to GreaterBroadband Deployment Report by the Federal Rights‐of‐Way Working Group (April 2004)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfrowreport_4‐23‐2004pdf

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐6‐

thesekindsofissuesinordertocreateaframeworkforresolvingissuesthatcanbeappliedinthiscontextandothersrelatedtobroadbanddeployment

PRINCIPLE2

Respectcorenotionsofconstitutional federalismbyavoidingactivitiesthat encroach upon the ability of the states to experiment withprogramsandpoliciesaimedatimprovingbroadbandconnectivity

A core goal of the BOC as detailed in its founding documents ndash ie the PresidentialMemorandumestablishing itand therequest forcomment issuedby theCouncil inApril2015ndashistoldquounderstandthewaysthe[federal]governmentcanbettersupporttheneedsofcommunities seeking to expand broadband access and adoptionrdquo18 This focus oncommunity broadband ndash aka municipal broadband and government‐owned broadband(GONs) ndash can be traced back to the Presidentrsquos embrace of this deployment strategy inJanuary2015whenhe announcedhis support for federal preemption of state laws thatldquolimit the range of options available to communities to spur expanded local broadbandinfrastructure including ownership of networks19 At that time the administration alsoreleased a report touting the benefits of GONs20 and launched a federal initiative ndashBroadbandUSA ndash to support communities interested in exploring municipal broadbandsolutions21ShortlythereaftertheFederalCommunicationsCommissionactedtopreempttwostatelawsndashoneinNorthCarolinaoneinTennesseendashthatitfeltwereimpedimentstobroadbandinvestmentandcompetition22Suchafocusondirectfederal‐communitycoordinationinbolsteringbroadbandconnectivitywhich appears to be central to the BOCrsquosmandate threatens to alienate a critical set ofpartners from these efforts the states Indeed by circumventing the states via formalaction (eg FCC preemption) and informal action (eg BroadbandUSA) the federalgovernmenthasarticulatedaboldnewunderstandingofandapproachtofederalisminthecontext of broadband deployment This new approach hinges on an interpretation of 18SeeBroadbandOpportunityCouncilNoticeandRequestforComment80FedReg23785(April292015)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsfr_boc_notice_and_rfc_4‐29‐15pdf(ldquoBOCRequestrdquo)

19 See Fact Sheet Broadband That Works Promoting Competition amp Local Choice In Next‐GenerationConnectivity The White House Jan 13 2015 httpswwwwhitehousegovthe‐press‐office20150113fact‐sheet‐broadband‐works‐promoting‐competition‐local‐choice‐next‐gener

20 See Community‐Based Broadband Solutions The Benefits of Competition and Choice for CommunityDevelopment and High Speed Internet Access The Executive Office of the President (Jan 2015)httpswwwwhitehousegovsitesdefaultfilesdocscommunity‐based_broadband_report_by_executive_office_of_the_presidentpdf

21SeeNTIABroadbandUSAhttpwww2ntiadocgovnew_BroadbandUSA

22SeeIntheMatterofCityofWilsonNorthCarolinaPetitionforPreemptionofNorthCarolinaGeneralStatuteSections160A‐340etseqMemorandumOpinionandOrderWCDocketNo14‐115(March122015)ThisorderhasbeenchallengedincourtbyNorthCarolinaandTennesseeSeeegSeanBuckleyNorthCarolinaSues FCC Over Ability to Limit Municipal Broadband Growth May 20 2015 Fierce Telecomhttpwwwfiercetelecomcomstorynorth‐carolina‐sues‐fcc‐over‐ability‐limit‐municipal‐broadband‐growth2015‐05‐20

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐7‐

federalism that is at odds with substantial legal precedent regarding the relationshipbetween states and their subdivisions23 as well as with the realities of a paradigm offederal‐stateandstate‐localcoordination thathasproven tobeenormouslysuccessful inimprovingbroadbandconnectivity24This is a sensitive set of issues for states because at a very practical level municipalbroadbandnetworksareexpensiveandriskyundertakings25Indeedthereisalonghistoryof failedGONsintheUnitedStates26Noteverysystemfailsbut fewsurviveandprosperoverthelongtermInmanyinstanceslocalgovernmentshaveactedtobailoutfailedandfailingnetworksndashegbyredirectingtaxdollarstopropupadyingsystemorbyassumingeven more debt ndash often to no avail27 When these networks fail the damage is rarelycontainedndashforexamplemanytownswithfailedorfailingsystemsseetheircreditratingsdowngraded28Andevenwhenthesenetworkssurvivetheenormouscostsofbuildingthesystemrarelyoutweighthebenefitsarisingfromit29Theseareworryingdynamicsforstategovernmentswhichbearultimateresponsibilityfortheactivitiesoftheirpoliticalsubdivisions30IndeedtherelationshipbetweenastateanditsmunicipalitiesisanessentialaspectoftheorderingofgovernmentintheUnitedStatesIn otherwords it is a sacred relationship that has longbeenpreservedby the courts incases stretchingbackwell over a century31 It is thus rare for the federal government toattempttoinsertitselfbetweenastateanditssubdivisionsitsauthoritytodosomustbe 23 See Charles M Davidson amp Michael J Santorelli Understanding the Debate Over Government‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksContextLessonsLearnedandaWayForwardforPolicyMakersACLPatNewYorkLawSchool (June 2014) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Government‐Owned‐Broadband‐Networks‐FINAL‐June‐2014pdf(ldquoACLPGONsReportrdquo)

24 Idat109‐138 (highlightingeffective roles forpolicymakersandother stakeholdersat the federal stateand local levels vis‐agrave‐vis enhancing broadband connectivity) Specific ideas for state and local activities infurtheranceofbroadbandconnectivityarediscussedinfra

25Seegenerallyid

26ForexamplesseeidParsingtheDebateOverGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (April 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ALCP‐GONs‐Overview‐April‐2013FINAL_pdf Charles M Davidson ampMichaelJSantorelliEvaluatingtheRationalesforGovernment‐OwnedBroadbandNetworksACLPatNewYorkLaw School (March 2013) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Evaluating‐the‐Rationales‐for‐GONs‐March‐2013pdfMichael JSantorelliRationalizingtheDebateOverMunicipalBroadband3ISJournal43(2007)httpmoritzlawosuedustudentsgroupsisfiles201202Santorelli‐formattedpdf

27SeeegACLPGONsReportat47‐91(providingexamples)

28Id

29Id

30 See eg Grant Gross States Threaten Lawsuit Over ObamarsquosMunicipal Broadband Plan Jan 26 2015Computer World httpwwwcomputerworldcomarticle2875613states‐threaten‐lawsuit‐over‐obamas‐municipal‐broadband‐planhtml

31ACLPGONsReportat105‐106

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐8‐

clearlyexpressedbyCongressandeventhenthereisusuallysomehesitancybythecourtstoupsetthedelicatebalanceofUSfederalism32ForthesereasonsneithertheBOCnorthefederalgovernmentgenerallyshouldcoordinatedirectlywithcommunitiesonbroadbandmatters without robust consultation and coordination with the states Otherwise thefederalgovernmentriskscreatinganacrimoniousrelationshipwith50criticalpartnersallofwhom are increasingly interested and active in addressing discrete broadband issuesarisingwithintheirborders

PRINCIPLE3

With regard to identifying and addressing barriers to more robustbroadband connectivity the BOC should use the FCCrsquos NationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpoint

When seeking to ldquoidentify regulatory barriers unduly impeding broadband deploymentadoptionorcompetitionrdquoandthinkingabouthowtoldquotakeallnecessaryactionstoremovethesebarriersrdquo33theBOCshouldusetheFCCrsquosNationalBroadbandPlanasastartingpointIndeed rather than start from scratch in an attempt to amass a new list of barriers anddevelopstrategies forovercoming them theBOCwouldbewell servedby looking to theFCCrsquos Plan which succeeded in identifying dozens of barriers impeding more robustbroadband connectivity and making over 200 recommendations for addressing them34Equally as important for the purposes of removing these barriers many of therecommendations articulated in the Plan ldquowere directed to the FCC to Congress to theExecutive Branch (both to individual agencies and to Administration as a whole)rdquo35providing the BOC with numerous opportunities for making immediate progress infurtheranceofitsmandateA key feature of the Plan was its focus on highlighting the importance of high‐speedInternetconnectivitytoachievingcertainldquonationalpurposesrdquoincludingusingbroadband‐enabled services to transform key sectors of the economy like education energy andhealthcare36Therationaleunderlyingthisfocuswassimpleenhancingbroadbanduseinthese sectors would not only help to improve service offerings bolster innovation andstreamlinecertainprocessesndashitwouldalsoassistinincreasingtherelevanceofbroadbandto consumers especially those in under‐adopting communities However the Plan alsoobserved thatmerelyenhancingbroadbanduse in thesesectorswouldnotbeenough toachieve these goals On the contrary a broad range of additional legal regulatory and

32SeeegLawrenceJSpiwakTheFCCrsquosNewMunicipalBroadbandPreemptionOrder isTooCleverbyHalfBloombergBNA Telecommunications Law Resource Center April 10 2015 httpwwwphoenix‐centerorgopedBloombergBNATennesseePreemptionOrder10April2015pdf

33BOCRequestat23785

34 See eg Lennard G Kruger The National Broadband Plan GoalsWhere DoWe Stand CongressionalResearchServiceReporttoCongressR43016(March2013)httpswwwfasorgsgpcrsmiscR43016pdf

35Id

36NationalBroadbandPlanat193

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐9‐

publicpolicy adjustmentswerenecessary tounlockand facilitatenewusesAccordinglythePlanalongwithotherreportsissuedinconjunctionwithit37identifieddozensofareaswhere non‐FCC and non‐Congressional actionwas required It is in these areas that theBOCshouldfocusitsattentionA cursory reviewof thePlanrsquos recommendations relateddocuments examiningbarriersand informationregarding theprogressmade in implementing theseproposals revealsarangeofareasripeforBOCactionForexampleinthehealthcarespaceprogresshasbeenmadeonnumerous fronts inunlocking the fullpotentialofbroadband inUShealthcareelectronichealthcarerecordsaremorewidelyusednowthantheywerepriortoreleaseofthe Plan38 health insurers increasingly reimburse for telemedicine services39 andnumerous discussions about the need for rationalizing key licensure and credentialingprocesses have been had at the federal and state levels40However reviewof the Planrsquosrecommendationsandsupportinganalyseshighlightareaswhereadditionalfederalactionby agencies other than the FCCwould help in removing remaining barriers41 A similardynamicisevidentintheeducationandenergysectorswhereimportantforwardprogresshasbeenmade42butnumerousbarriersremainunaddressedatthefederallevel43

37SeeegBarrierstoBroadbandAdoptionAReporttotheFCCACLPatNewYorkLawSchool(Oct2009)httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308ACLP‐Report‐to‐the‐FCC‐Barriers‐to‐BB‐Adoptionpdf

38SeeegPressReleaseMorePhysiciansandHospitalsAreUsingEHRsThanBeforeAug72014USDeptofHealthampHumanServiceshttpwwwhhsgovnewspress2014pres0820140807ahtml

39SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisCoverageandReimbursementAmerican Telemedicine Association (May 2015) httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐‐coverage‐and‐reimbursementpdfsfvrsn=10

40SeeegLatoyaThomasampGaryCapistrantStateTelemedicineGapsAnalysisPhysicianPracticeStandardsand Licensure American Telemedicine Association (May 2015)httpwwwamericantelemedorgdocsdefault‐sourcepolicy50‐state‐telemedicine‐gaps‐analysis‐‐physician‐practice‐standards‐licensurepdfsfvrsn=14

41NationalBroadbandPlanat199‐217

42 In theenergyspace forexample the federalgovernmenthasworkedcloselywith thestatesto facilitatedeploymentof ldquosmartgridrdquo technologiesandservices includingsmartmetersandotheraspectsofamoreintelligentandresponsiveenergysystemSeeeg2014SmartGridSystemReportReport toCongressUSDept of Energy (Aug 2014) httpenergygovsitesprodfiles201408f18SmartGrid‐SystemReport2014pdfIntheeducationspacetheUSDepartmentofEducationlaunchedseveralinitiativesinthewakeoftheNationalBroadbandPlaninanefforttobolsteravailabilityanduseofadvancededucationaltechnology tools See egNationalEducationTechnologyPlanUS Department of Education (Nov 2010)httpswwwedgovsitesdefaultfilesnetp2010pdf However the focus in recent years has been almostentirelyonenhancingbroadbandspeedsinschoolsanundertakingthathasbeenledprimarilybytheFCCviaanarrayofreformstothefederalE‐RateprogramForanoverviewofrecentFCC‐ledeffortsonthisissueseeFCCModernizingE‐Ratehttpswwwfccgove‐rate‐updateOtherpressingissueslikeequippingteacherswiththeskillsneededtoharnessbroadbandforeducationalpurposeshavebeenacknowledgedviaprogramslikeConnectEDwhichwas launchedby theWhiteHouse in 2013SeeUSDept of Education ConnectEDhttpwwwedgovconnected

43NationalBroadbandPlanat223‐234amp245‐262(detailingrecommendationsforovercomingbarriersintheeducationandenergysectorsrespectively)

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐10‐

Inordertomakefurtherprogressontheseandothersissuesinasefficientandeffectiveamanner as possible the BOC should first review the National Broadband Plan and inpartnership with the FCC develop a comprehensive inventory of whether and to whatextent specific barriers and recommendations havebeen addressed Thereafter theBOCshouldworktoupdatethosebarriersandrecommendationsthatrequiresomemeasureofactionbyfederalagencieswithinthepurviewoftheCouncilAtthatpointtheBOCshouldbegindevelopingaprocessforfacilitatingcollaborationacrossrelevantagencies inordertobeginaddressingthesenewandlingeringimpediments

PRINCIPLE4

Coordination among and across federal agencies departments andbranchesmustbeapriorityinordertoassureimpactfuloutcomesandavoidinefficientduplicationofefforts

Coordination of efforts and resourceswill be essential to the success of any initiative orprogram that evolves out of the BOC With over two dozen federal agencies involvedcoupled with new and emerging policy efforts at the FCC in Congress and elsewhereacross the federal government there is a significant risk that in the absence of carefulplanning a particular action by the BOCmight be redundant with an existing programinefficientundulycostlyorotherwiseintensionwithotherfederalactivitiesAssuchitisincumbentupontheco‐chairsoftheBOCndashtheDepartmentsofAgricultureandCommercendash to adhere to a basic framework when launching a new program or forging a newpartnership to address a particular broadband issue first do no harm (to existingprograms) and second do not bewasteful (in terms of unnecessarily replicating effortsthathavealreadysucceededorfailed)Theprimarycause forconcern in thiscontext is thepotential forBOCactivities thatmightmimicorsomehowunderminetheimpactofprogramsalreadyunderwayattheFCCSuchanoutcomewould result in thewaste of taxpayer resources and could slow or derailmuch‐needed reforms being spearheaded by the Commission The BOC mandate requires theCounciltoldquoconsulthellipwiththe[FCC]asappropriaterdquo44buttheBOChasnoauthoritytoforceindependentagenciesliketheFCCtocomplywithoraccedetonewpolicyimperativesorprograms that might grow out of its activities45 For these reasons close coordinationbetween the BOC and the Commission will be essential to preventing unnecessarilyredundantorcostlyinitiativesEquallyasimportantclosecoordinationwillbevitaltoaccuratelycalibratingandtargetingthe BOCrsquos efforts The FCC already oversees the collection and allocation of billions ofdollars a year in support of broadband deployment in schools and libraries via E‐Ratebroadband deployment in high‐costs parts of the country via its ConnectAmerica Fund

44ExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

45BOCRequestat23786

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐11‐

andtelemedicineuseanddeploymentinruralareasviaitsHealthcareConnectFund46ItisalsocurrentlyattemptingtorestructureLifelinesothatitcanhelptosubsidizebroadbandconnections for non‐adopters47 Several other federal agencies includingNTIA and RUSalso already administer broadband‐related programs As such after studying andunderstanding thearrayof resources and reachof these existingprograms the scopeofpotentialBOCactivitymightbemuchnarrowerthaninitiallyenvisionedGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHESUPPLY‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE5

ThepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbefacilitatingbuildouttounservedareas

Despite enormous and sustained progress in deploying next‐generation broadbandnetworksacross theUnitedStatessomeareasof thecountryremainwithouthigh‐speedaccesstotheInternetThereasonsfortheseunfortunateoutcomesaremanyandreflectanarray of challenges facing policymakers and service providers ndash some areas aregeographicallyremoteothersfacesignificanttopographicalchallengesmanyaresparselypopulatedAsaresult theseareasareusuallyconsideredldquouneconomicrdquo toservewithoutsomemeasureofgovernmentassistance48Theprimaryresponsetotheseproblemstodatehas involved the transition of the federal universal service fund (USF) to supportdeploymentofconnectionsofatleast10Mbpsaninitiativethatwilllikelytakemanyyearsto fullyunfold49As such some remote areas are likely to remainwithout access for theforeseeablefutureForthesereasonsthepriorityofanybroadbanddeploymentprogramthatemergesfromtheBOCshouldbehelpingtofacilitatebuildouttounservedareasIncluded in the details of whatever broadband deployment strategies best practicesandorprograms thatevolveout theBOCprocessshouldbeanembraceofanall‐of‐the‐above approach to plugging gaps in availability Unfortunately for those living in trulyunservedpartsof the country theFCChas rejected suchaplatform‐neutralperspectivebyadoptinga speedbenchmark forbroadband (25Mbps) thatexcludesallbuta fewdeliverytechnologies from qualifying50 This change further compounds what has become a

46 For an overview of recent expenditures see 2014 Annual Report Universal Service AdministrativeCompanyhttpwwwusacorg_resdocumentsaboutpdfannual‐reportsusac‐annual‐report‐2014pdf

47 See eg FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler A Lifeline for Low‐Income Americans May 28 2015 FCC Bloghttpswwwfccgovbloglifeline‐low‐income‐americans

48 See eg In the Matter of Connect America Fund Report and Order and Further Notice of ProposedRulemaking26FCCRcd1766317961(Nov182011)

49IntheMatterofConnectAmericaFundReportandOrderatpara4WCDocketNo10‐90FCC14‐190(relDec182014)StimulusfundingallocatedviatheBTOPandBIPprogramsalsoaddressedtheseissuesbutonlyobliquely ndash most funded projects focused on bolstering middle‐mile networks not building out last‐mileconnections See egBroadbandTechnologyOpportunitiesProgramEvaluation StudyASR Analytics (Sept2014)httpwwwntiadocgovfilesntiapublicationsasr_final_reportpdf(ldquoBTOPEvaluationStudyrdquo)

502015BroadbandProgressReportatpara3

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐12‐

perplexing approach by the FCC to measuring broadband availability For exampleaccordingtotheFCCrsquosnewstandardforbroadbandbetween15percent51and17percent52ofthepopulationdoesnothaveaccesstoawirelinebroadbandconnectionthatmeetsthenewbenchmarkbut93percentofthepopulationdoeshaveaccesstowirelineconnectionsof at least 10Mbps53 These numbers are evenmore lopsidedwhen it comes tomobilebroadband86percentofthepopulationlacksaccesstomobileconnectionsthatmeettheFCCrsquosnewdefinitionofbroadbandwhile98percenthasreadyaccesstomultiplewirelessconnectionsofatleast10Mbps54MoreoverwhiletheFCCdoesnotincludewireless(fixedormobile) or satellite broadband in its official tabulations of broadband availability55 itdoes subsidize deployment ofwireless broadband at speedswell below 10Mbps via itsnewlycreatedMobilityFund56Inshort there isanopportunity for theBOCtoarticulateapreferenceforbringingsomelevelofbroadbandconnectivitytotrulyunservedareasasameaningfulfirststepandasamoreexpedientalternativetotheFCCrsquoslong‐terminitiativeDoingsowouldconveyseveraladvantagesover theFCCrsquos speed‐focusedapproachFirst and foremost itwillhasten theprocessofconnectingtheseareastobroadbandWhetherapersongetsonlineforthefirsttimeviaacable satelliteWISPormobileconnectionshouldnotmatterndashconnectionbyanymeansshouldbe theprioritySecondandrelatedanapproach thatyieldsadditionalnewconnectionsinthenear‐termwillhelptogenerateusefuldataaboutactualconsumerdemandforandusageofbroadbandinthesehard‐to‐serveareasSuchreal‐worlddatawillbe essential to signaling tootherprivate firms that there is sufficientdemand in agivenarea and to calibrating any additional government responses (eg FCC subsidies) thatmightbewarrantedFinally this approachwill help toprevent inefficientoverbuild inareas thataredeemedldquounder‐servedrdquo by the FCCrsquos subjective speed benchmark By focusing only on unservedareaswhichshouldbeidentifiedincloseconsultationwithrelevantstateauthorities(iethosetaskedwithcollectingandanalyzingbroadbandconnectivitydata)theBOCcanavoidhaving to navigate the FCCrsquos byzantine approach to measuring broadband and insteadensure that resources are allocated in as efficient and impactful a manner as possibleHowevertheBOCwouldhavetocoordinatecloselywiththeFCCandthestatestoensurethat whatever emerges from the Council for the purposes of bringing broadband tounservedareasdoesnotduplicateorundermineotherprogramsorresourcesdedicatedtothe same task In short funding andother resourcesprovidedby government shouldbeoptimizedandpreciselytargetedforthesepurposes

51 See National Broadband Map Analyze ndash Summarize ndash Nationwidehttpwwwbroadbandmapgovsummarizenationwide(ldquoNationalBroadbandMapndashNationalDatardquo)

522015BroadbandProgressReportatpara4

53NationalBroadbandMapndashNationalData

54Id

552015BroadbandProgressReportatpara9

56SeeegUSACMobilityFundhttpwwwusacorghccafmobilitydefaultaspx

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐13‐

PRINCIPLE6

The BOC should engage in supply‐side activities that favor privateinvestmentinanddeploymentofbroadbandnetworks

In keeping with Principle 2 above the BOC ndash and the federal government generally ndashshould not seek to disenfranchise the states vis‐agrave‐vis evaluating the appropriateness ofmunicipal broadband deployment and other public investments in broadband networksOnthecontrarydecisionsaboutpermittingprohibitingormediatingtheextenttowhichmunicipalities are allowed to build their own networks are best left to the individualstates57 Instead the BOC should focus its supply‐side efforts exclusively on supportingprivateinvestmentinandfacilitatingprivatedeploymentofbroadbandinfrastructureIn addition to undermining core notions of federalism and otherwise promoting riskyfinancialbehaviorbyentitiesthatareultimatelyresponsibletotheirstatehavingtheBOCposition municipal broadband as both a viable and a preferred approach to improvingbroadband connectivity would negatively impact states consumers and the privatebroadbandmarket in several ways First prioritizing GONs as a ldquosolutionrdquo to perceivedbroadbandneedsrisksconveyinglegitimacyandcredibilitytoadeploymentstrategythathasnotproventobesustainableoverthelongterm58SecondmanyGONsespeciallythosedeployedviamunicipally‐ownedutilitieshavebuiltinadvantagesoverprivatenetworksadynamicthatcouldunintentionallytilttheplayingfieldagainstprivateproviders59Thirdcommunitiesthatarefocusedonmakingtheirownnetworksworkcoulddeprioritizeotherreformsand initiatives (eg changes torights‐of‐waymanagement local franchisingandsitingrules)aimedatencouragingadditionalprivateinvestmentPromoting GONs also exposes broadband to the poor track record of infrastructuremaintenancebythepublicsectorateverylevelConsiderabledatabyorganizationsliketheAmerican Society of Civil Engineersmake clear that government has done a terrible jobinvesting in and engaging in basic upkeep of core infrastructure like roads bridges anddams60Subjectingadynamicservice to thevagariesofpublicadministrationwould thusundermine that which has made broadband thrive in the United States ndash ie thecompetitive pressures exerted on it by a marketplace composed of private providersMoreover at a timewhenpublic resources remain scarce andvolatile at every level theBOC should not prioritize facilitate or otherwise endorse a broadband deploymentstrategy that would result in the diversion of such resources away frommore pressingneedsunlessastateexplicitlyendorsessuchanapproach61

57ACLPGONsReport

58Seeegidatsection2(providingahistoryofGONsintheUSincludingmanyexamplesoffailedmunicipalefforts)andsection4(evaluating10majorsGONsthathavebeendeployedinrecentyears)

59Idat94‐96

60SeegenerallyASCE InfrastructureReportCard2013httpwwwinfrastructurereportcardorgSeealsoACLPGONsReportat40‐45(foradditionaldataandanalysis)

61SeeegACLPGONsReportat34‐40

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐14‐

InsumtheBOCshouldfocusonlyonactionsthatsupportprivateinvestmentandprivatebroadband deployment These activities could range from the development anddissemination of best practices related to key processes like rights‐of‐waymanagementandsitingapprovalsaswellasthepromotionofcriticalpolicyreformsatthefederalandstate levels (seenext section)Forexample theBOCcouldhighlight theneed for certainadjustmentstotaxpoliciesinordertofreeupmoreprivateinvestmentforbroadband

PRINCIPLE7

Based on its own successes in facilitating broadband deployment onfederallandsandinothercontextsunderthepurviewoftheCounciltheBOCshoulddevelopanddisseminatemodelpoliciesaimedatfurtheringnetwork deployment and fostering a rational regulatory environmentthat is conducive to continued private investment innovation andcompetition

AstheBOCmakesadvancesinbroadbanddeploymentviaactivitiesdescribedinseveralofthe previous Principles it should seek to distill best practices from these efforts anddisseminatethemtocounterparts instategovernmentinorderto facilitate furthergainsWhiletheBOCisnotinapositiontoimposethesebestpracticesonthestatesorengageinfederalpreemptionofinconsistentstate‐levelpoliciestheCouncilshouldpositionitselfasan additional resource for state policymakers especially those in agencies and divisionsthatmirrorthoseoftheBOCrsquosmemberswhomightbeinterestedinlearningmoreabouthowtheycanparticipateintheirstatersquosbroadbandplans62ForexampleasdiscussedinPrinciple1acorefocusoftheBOCshouldbeonmaximizingfederal resources to bolster broadband deployment Several of the areas that areparticularly ripe for reform at every level of government fall nicely into the Councilrsquospurview updating how government administers access to rights‐of‐way approves sitingrequestfortowersandotherstructuresandconsiderspossibleenvironmentalimpactsofnew broadband builds Discussions about these kinds of issues have been had formanyyearsspanningthelastfewpresidenciesandyieldingarangeofproposalsthatappeartohavebroadsupportndashpromotingldquodigoncerdquopoliciesestablishingmoreuniformratesandapplication procedures to streamline review and approval processes rationalizing andreformingenvironmentalimpactcriteria63Todatethefederalgovernmenthasmadesomeprogress on these fronts (as discussed in Principle 1) Similarly a small but growingnumberofstateshaveembracedsomeaspectsoftheseproposals64Howevermuchworkremainstobedone

62ThiswouldbeinkeepingwithoneofthecorepurposesoftheBOCasperthePresidentialMemorandumestablishingitExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption

63SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanatch6

64SeeegWilliamPetroskiandBriannePfannenstielIowaLawmakersOKBroadbandExpansionPlanJune42015 Des Moines Register httpwwwdesmoinesregistercomstorynewspolitics20150604iowa‐broadband‐expansion‐bill28506153(reportingonbroadbandlegislationthatamongotherthingsincludeslanguagetoldquocreateauniformprocessforlocatingnewcellphonetowersmodificationsofexistingcelltowers

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐15‐

TotheextenttheBOCmakesprogressinactingontheseandotherproposalsforimprovingaccesstofederallandsviareformstorights‐of‐wayandsitingprocessestheCouncilshouldinform state counterparts of what worked and what did not in this context Suchconsultation either directly with individual states or via national organizationsrepresentingthestatesrsquointerestscouldhelptobuildmomentuminfavorofmuch‐neededregulatoryadjustment at the state level Indeed federalbest practices regardingoptimalrights‐of‐way management siting environmental review application procedures andrelated aspects of network deployment could nudge state legislatures and agencies toengage in similar reforms From the perspective of encouraging additional privateinvestment in broadband coordination along these lines could yield some measure ofuniformityvis‐agrave‐visaccesstocritical inputsto infrastructureconstructionConsistency inthestructureandimplementationofsuchrulesandregulationswouldcertainlybeaboontoprivatecompanieslookingtodeploybroadbandnetworksGUIDINGPRINCIPLESFORIMPROVINGBROADBANDONTHEDEMAND‐SIDE

PRINCIPLE8

Demand‐sideissuesarethemostimportantpressingandoverlookedinthe broadband policy arena The BOC should work to draw moreattention to these issues and facilitate additional progress towardaddressingthem

A focus ondemand‐side issues appears to be among the core functions of theBOC65 AssuchtheCounciliswellpositionedtodrawadditionalattentiontoasetofissuesthathasbeenoverlookedfortoolongbypolicymakersIndeedmuchofthedebateoverbroadbandintheUnitedStateshasrevolvedaroundthesupplyofhigh‐speedInternetaccessEvenasbroadband and intermodal competition diffused across nearly every part of the UnitedStates over the last decade the policy focus has remained almost exclusively on supplynotwithstandingthemoresystemicissueofdisparitiesinadoptionratesacrossarangeofusercommunitiesImplicitinmanysupply‐sideargumentsisanassumptionthatdemand‐side issues will resolve themselves once there is ample supply of cheap and ultra‐fastbroadband Though appealing this reductive cause‐and‐effect has been questioned bysocial scientists researchers practitioners and otherswho haveworked to identify andbetterunderstandthecomplexmechanicsassociatedwithbroadbandadoptionacrosskeydemographicsandinkeysectors66

and co‐location of cell towers and the rights and responsibilities of local governmentsauthorities whenapprovingtheseapplicationsrdquo)

65SeeegExpandingBroadbandDeploymentandAdoption(notingthatamandatefortheBOCistoldquopromotetheadoptionandmeaningfuluseofbroadbandtechnology)

66TheliteratureonbroadbandadoptionisvastandcontinuestogrowForacomprehensivediscussionoftheimportanceofdemand‐sideissuesaswellasthemanyfactorsinfluencingadoptiondecisionsbynon‐userssee eg Barriers to Broadband Adoption ACLP GONs Report at 28‐34 Charles M Davidson Michael JSantorelliampThomasKamberBroadbandAdoptionWhy itMattersampHow itWorks 19MediaLampPolrsquoy14(2009) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson_Santorelli_Kamber‐BB‐Adoption‐Article‐MLP‐191pdf

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐16‐

Understanding the complexities of broadband adoption and the factors influencing theextenttowhichusersputconnectionstomeaningfulusesshouldbehighonthelistofBOCpriorities Even though the vast majority of these factors and influences arise almostexclusively at the hyper‐local level67 ndash in discrete user communities and neighborhoodsthatarescatteredacross townsandcities ineverystatendash there isroomforsubstantiallymore federal leadership tomore precisely define the contours of and trends associatedwith broadband adoption To this end the BOC could serve as a forum for facilitatingadditionalresearchintothesekindsofconnectivityissuesTheBOCitselfcouldsponsororco‐sponsorresearchprojectsaimedatdelvingintothedynamicsofdemand‐sideissuesofparticularunder‐adoptingcommunitiesSimilarlyindividualBOCmemberscouldsponsorresearch into specific aspects of broadband adoption and use arising within theirjurisdictionForexample TheDepartmentofHealthandHumanServicesinpartnershipwithrelevant

counterpartsatthestatelevelcouldsupportresearchintotheeffectivenessof tying telemedicine training to increasing broadband adoption amongseniorsorpeoplewithdisabilities

TheDepartmentofHousingandUrbanDevelopmentcouldpartnerwiththeSmall Business Administration and state housing authorities to investigatethe extent to which workforce development efforts that include digitalliteracytrainingimpactadoptiondecisionsamonglow‐incomehouseholds

The Department of Education could partner with state officials and localadministrators to develop best practices for enhancing professionaldevelopmentandotherwiseequippingteacherswiththeknowledgeneededtoimpartimportantdigitalliteracyskillstostudentsofallages

In short the range of research opportunities facilitated by the BOC is potentially verybroad The Council should pursue these with an eye toward supporting furtherdevelopmentofarobustbodyofliteraturearoundbroadbandadoptionDoingsowillhelptodemonstratetopolicymakersandotherstakeholdersateverylevelofgovernmentthattheseissuesdeservemoreattentionifbroadbandconnectivityistoincreaseacrosseverydemographicgroup Charles M Davidson Michael J Santorelli amp Thomas Kamber Toward an InclusiveMeasure of BroadbandAdoption 6 Intrsquol J of Comm 2555‐2575 (2012) httpwwwnylseduadvanced‐communications‐law‐and‐policy‐institutewp‐contentuploadssites169201308Davidson‐Santorelli‐Kamber‐Toward‐an‐Inclusive‐Measure‐of‐Broadband‐Adoption‐IJOC‐2012pdf(ldquoTowardanInclusiveMeasurerdquo)

67ForadditionaldiscussionseeegTowardanInclusiveMeasure

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐17‐

PRINCIPLE9

The BOC should encourage the states to work more closely withmunicipalities and other local stakeholders to bolster broadbandconnectivityfromthedemand‐side

WhiletheBOCiswellpositionedtoserveasachampionforbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracytheCouncilitselfshouldnotattempttoengageinactualdemand‐sidestimulationactivitiesInsteadtheBOCshoulddirectanysupportforsuchdemand‐sideactivitiestothestates and encourage them to collaborate with municipalities when developing andimplementingadoption‐relatedstrategiesThe federalgovernmenthasaspottyrecordwhen itcomestoengaging insuccessfulandsustainable demand‐side activities Over the last few years several federal agencies andprograms have attempted to address these issues the BTOP program allocated asubstantial amount of money in support of sustainable adoption programs across thecountry while the FCC launched a pilot program to study the impact of using Lifelinesubsidies for broadband Each initiative proved moderately successful in boostingbroadbandadoption68HoweverarecentreportbytheGAOconcludedthattherehasbeenlittle effort by the agencies to develop and implement a cohesive long‐term strategy foraddressing barriers to broadband adoption in under‐adopting communities69 Thiscriticismechoesotherconcernsabouttheabilityoftheseagenciestoeffectivelystructureimplementandevaluatedemand‐sideprogramsinamannerthatyieldslastingimpactfuloutcomes70ProposedreformstotheLifelineprogramcouldcertainlyhelpaddressaffordabilityissuesforsomenon‐usersbut thearrayofotherbarriers that influenceadoptiondecisionswillremainunaddressedTheBOCcouldwork to supplement theFCCrsquosnarrowdemand‐sideefforts by highlighting the importance of close coordination between state and localstakeholdersAsageneralmatterstateandlocalgovernmentsarewell‐positionedtohelpspurbroadbandconnectivityinanumberofways(someofthesearediscussedinthenextsection) These efforts tend to be the most impactful because they are tailored to the

68 See BTOP Evaluation Study Low‐Income Broadband Pilot Program Staff ReportWireline CompetitionBureau FCC (May 2015) httptransitionfccgovDaily_ReleasesDaily_Business2015db0522DA‐15‐624A1pdf

69See IntendedOutcomesandEffectivenessofEfforts toAddressAdoptionBarriersareUnclearGAO‐15‐473(June2015)httpwwwgaogovassets680670588pdf

70SeeegFCCShouldEvaluate theEfficiencyandEffectivenessof theLifelineProgramGAO‐15‐335(March2015)httpwwwgaogovassets670669209pdf(criticizingtheFCCforfailingtoevaluatetheefficacyofitsLifelineprogram) JamesPriegeramp JaniceAHaugeEvaluatingthe ImpactoftheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestment Actrsquos BTOP Program on Broadband Adoption Pepperdine University School of Public PolicyWorking Papers ndashPaper 55 (April 2015)httpdigitalcommonspepperdineeducgiviewcontentcgiarticle=1054ampcontext=sppworkingpapers(concludingthatldquotheimpactofthestimulusspendingonbroadbandadoptionishighlyuncertainrdquoandnotingthat there is a lack of ldquoclear evidence supporting the position that BTOP led to beneficial outcomes ofincreasedadoptionrdquo)

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐18‐

specific needs of communities Since one size rarely fits all in the broadband adoptioncontexttheBOCshoulddemonstrateawillingnesstosupportcommunity‐specificeffortsineverystateacrossthecountry

PRINCIPLE10

InsteadofpromotingmunicipalbroadbanddeploymenttheBOCshouldengage in activities that underscore the importance and value offacilitatingdemand‐sideeffortsbycommunities

In an effort to maximize the impact of the BOC on broadband connectivity the Councilshouldeschewitsfocusonpromotingmunicipalbroadband(asdiscussedinPrinciple1andPrinciple6) and insteaddedicate resources tomakingapersuasive case as towhymunicipalitiesshouldchannelresourcesintoaddressingcriticaldemand‐sideissuesThereis growing evidence that amore robust focus by communities on increasing broadbandadoptiondeliveringtrainingservicesandimprovingdigitalliteracyskillsyieldsignificantand lasting economic and social gains71 Because broadband adoption issues are bestaddressedatthehyper‐locallevelmunicipalitiesareinthebestpositiontoworkwithlocalstakeholders on these issues ndash a simple but powerful fact that the BOC should endorseratherthanworktounderminesuchactivitiesbyencouragingcommunitiesto focusonlyonbuildingtheirownnetworksInresponsetothesechallengesavarietyofpublic‐privatepartnershipshasbeendeployedat the state and local levels to spur broadband adoption and assure productive uses ofthesetoolsWhileprogramsvarygreatlytwogeneralframeworksndashaldquoTop‐DownrdquoModelandaldquoCollaborativerdquoModelndashcapturethebroadstructuralcomponentsofeachapproach72The Top‐Down Model which is illustrated in the figure below positions governmentparticularlypolicymakersatthelocalandstatelevelsastheprimarydriversofbroadbandconnectivityonthedemandsideThisapproachassumespublicsectorentitiespossesstheexpertise needed to successfully address demand side challenges hindering broadbandadoptionandutilizationInpracticehoweverthiskindofapproachtendstofailbecauseitmarginalizeskeypartnersespeciallythoseinlocalsocialinfrastructuresApreferenceforpurelypublicactioninthiscontexttendstoforecloseabroaderarrayofPPPsAssuchtheTop‐DownModelshouldbeseenasacautionarytalefortheBOC

71SeeegNationalBroadbandPlanACLPGONsReportBarrierstoBroadbandAdoption

72Forfurtherdiscussionandspecificexamplesofsuccessfuldemand‐sideprojectsbeingpursuedatthestateandlocallevelsseeACLPGONsReportatsection6

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐19‐

Top‐DownModel

$$orin‐kindresources Genericgrantwithlittle

guidanceaboutprogramstructure

ThealternativeapproachtheCollaborativeModelisdepictedbelowItisanapproachthatisreflectedinmanyeffectivedemandsidePPPscurrentlyinoperationacrossthecountryThismodel reveals that local and state governments have important supporting roles toplay in boosting broadband adoption and enhancing digital literacy This is the kind ofmodelthattheBOCshouldsupportCollaborativeModelforAddressingDemand‐SideIssues

LocalStateGovernment

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Expertnonprofits Broadbandserviceproviders Otherfirmswithcommunityties Anchorinstitutions(eglibraries) Communityampseniorcenters

TailoredandTargetedDemandSideProgram

StakeholdersinthepublicprivateandnonprofitsectorscollaboratethroughoutthedevelopmentanddeploymentofdemandsideactivitiesPublicresourcesareusedtorealizewelldefinedgoalsforbroadbandincommunities

Recognizingthateachusergroupfacesadistinctsetofbarrierstomorerobustbroadbandadoptionexpertorganizationsusepublicresourcestotailoreducationandoutreachinitiativesindiscreteunder‐adoptingcommunities

Government

PublicSectorIntermediary

GenericDemandSideProgram

LocalSocialInfrastructure

Organizationsseektocoordinateeffortswithgovernmentagenciesandorseekfunding

OrganizationsworkindependentlyincommunitiestobolsteradoptionanddigitalliteracyLackofcoordinationandfundinglimitstheirreachandimpact

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities

‐20‐

As these models make clear the most effective approaches to addressing lingeringdemand‐side challenges tend to be structured as public‐private partnerships (PPPs)between statelocal government and entities in the local social infrastructure Thisprevailingstructureisbasedonarecognitionbypublicsectorentitiesofthewiderangeofresources and expertise already available in the private and nonprofit sectors PPPsdevelopedtoaddressbroadbandadoptionanddigitalliteracyissuesalsotendtothriveinareaswhere a strong social infrastructure is already in place In the broadband contextthereiswideagreementthattheinstitutionsandorganizationsattheheartofthesesocialinfrastructuresndashegcommunitycenters libraries schools seniorcenters churchesandcompanies like ISPs with roots in the municipality ndash are ideal conduits for channelingeducationoutreach and trainingprogramsbecause theyhave succeeded inengenderinghighlevelsoftrustwithresidentsandhavedemonstratedanabilitytodelivercommunity‐specific services Accordingly the BOC should encourage municipalities to explore andharness these resources collaborate with state counterparts and otherwise work todevelop the right approach to addressing complex demand‐side issues in theircommunities