Click here for a replay of the event.

Click here for panelist slides.

The Marconi Society is proud to present the first state case study in our virtual event series, A National Inflection Point: The Intersection of Research & Education Networks and Sustainable Digital Equity Initiatives.

Our team of California experts shared their perspectives on all things about connecting Californians to opportunity through broadband.  Here are just a few highlights from this important discussion:

We must solve geographic, policy and business issues to get broadband to many underserved areas.

From a business perspective, companies often come into an area and cherry-pick the most potentially lucrative parts of the market, leaving lower income and more remote areas without service.  It can make it difficult for state and federally funded providers to create workable business models serving those “in between” locations.  These locations often include challenging geographies with hills, valleys and gullies, as well as difficulties gaining  environmental permits.  Carefully crafted public / private partnerships can be a solution, though no one entity or solution will work for all areas.  

Local advocacy organizations must keep close watch on the policies and funding eligibility for their communities and work with government leaders to surface inequities and fight for adequate funding.

From a policy perspective, California passed Senate Bill 156, allocating $6B to advancing broadband infrastructure across the state and, for the first time ever, giving counties the right to operate and maintain broadband infrastructure.  This has allowed a unique, community-driven approach to creating networks in rural areas.

Accurate broadband maps are a critical and problematic part of getting infrastructure dollars where they are most needed.

The FCC National Broadband Map determines how billions of dollars in infrastructure funding will be allocated to states, territories and Tribes.

Many locations, including Tribal Lands, are misrepresented in these maps, many of which are based on information from internet service provider (ISP) marketing departments.  Many Tribal Lands are designated as “served” areas because they received licenses for 2.5 Ghz spectrum during recent FCC auctions.  While this spectrum provides one tool for serving these areas, it is inadequate and multiple solutions are needed. As long as Tribal Lands are classified as “served” locations on the FCC National Broadband Map, they may be ineligible for other funding opportunities.  

The mapping data in a number of urban areas and multi-dwelling units is also inaccurate.

Independent groups, such as the National Broadband Mapping Coalition, are doing very good work to identify problems with the FCC’s broadband maps, as well as strategies for correcting those maps during the state challenge process.

Know your state agency or partner if you are building out a middle mile network together.

Partnering on a middle mile network buildout kicks off a deep and long term relationship.  It is important to understand your parter’s experience, expectations and priorities in the following areas:

• Experience in networking.  Do they have experience owning and operating a network or is their expertise in administration?
• Staff and leadership, as well as political and policy priorities.  The balance between pragmatism (on time, on budget program execution) and idealism (services, geography and quality) must always be considered. 
• Expectations for long term network operating and maintenance costs.  If the partner does not have network operating experience, education is a critical component.  You will need content to help your partner understand what it takes to run a carrier class network, buy vs. build vs. borrow options, and the like so that they can make fully informed decisions about the middle mile and how to measure and achieve success.

Fundamentals of successful partnering are critical to delivering the opportunities of the network to everyone.

When asked for one lesson they would like to share with other states, panelists consistently focused on the ingredients for successful partnerships.

• “It takes a village to connect a state. We need to focus further ahead, while addressing legacy solutions. Think about what infrastructure and network will bring and how they will impact adoption and more rapid deployment of whatever those future technologies are.”  Sylvie Wong Cosgrove
• “Instead of just worrying about infrastructure itself, we looked at some of the other root causes of why people can’t access the internet. Affordability, adoption, literacy – these were the problems we solved for.  Collaboration was the key to accelerating the process.”  Kevin Harbour
• “Because rural county representatives sit between the state, where money and programs are, and the local governments that comprise our member counties, where the need is, we can only get this done with partnerships.  We need government, private, and organizational partners at all levels to get everyone up on broadband in an inclusive way.”  Barbara Hayes
• “Often money is spent to fix a specific issue at the local level and we miss the need to interconnect back to the larger telecom world. Without that connection, those last mile investments aren’t effective. If there’s any one thing I’ve learned in this process is that a variety of solutions and corporate partnerships is key.  For any state, the solution set is a complex mix.”  Eric Hunsinger
• “Building networks is a team sport.  Everyone brings a different piece of the puzzle and we need to streamline, make the process more efficient, and create easy access.”  Kim Lewis
• “Successful management is based on trust between partners.  Both parties need to  achieve the balance between idealism and pragmatism.”  Tony  Naughtin
• “Everyone comes to the table with different experiences.  Partners need to manage expectations, leave their egos at the door, and make sure that all efforts focus on the end goal, rather than the individual perspectives.  This only works if we’re all solving for the same goal.”  Matt Rantanen
• “Keep your goal in mind and keep reminding people of that goal when they design programs and policies.  Then you can hold them accountable for designing to the goal, rather than building programs in silos.”  Connie Stewart