| To: | Colorado Governor Jared Polis |
| From: | Jon Stavney, Executive Director Northwest Colorado Council of Governments |
| Date: | December 15, 2023 |
| Re: | (Written for a class at University of Colorado Denver School of Public Affairs PUAD 5005 Policy Memo🙂 Colorado Broadband Office to Manage Existing Regional Networks and Develop into a Colorado Middle Mile Broadband Network serving rural Colorado by Governor’s Order |
Summary
Access to robust, affordable, reliable internet service has become as necessary to commerce and everyday life as roads and electricity. Today, locally developed, entrepreneurial policy solutions to poor internet services have prospered, filling gaps in essential utility service. Small markets served only by monopolies of major incumbent internet providers prove little incentive for continued investment in current best in class services. The financial difficulty of extending the best internet service available to remote and dispersed places has proven more achievable with public interest investment backfilling private profit incentives. Rural and resort communities across much of Western Colorado are currently served by three existing Regional Middle Mile Broadband Networks operated by Regional Councils of Governments on behalf municipalities, counties, rural electric co-ops, hospitals, 911 Call Centers and other anchor institutions. These stakeholders value the affordability, robust speed, resiliency of these networks and the fact that they have a voice in how the networks operate (Chuang, 2020).
This is an innovative concept that has been proven through local collaborations across the state. The innovation is ripe for a more systematic approach from the state. This requires leadership to overcome the status quo of private sector actors who sell flashy products on national platforms only to underdeliver at the doorstep of rural Coloradoans who deserve access to the opportunities granted by the best internet access today’s technology has to offer. The state can take a bold step to eliminate the inequity of unequal levels of service that exists today across Colorado.
Governor Polis should build upon his 2012 Executive Order creating the Office of Information Technology to “oversee and coordinate broadband activity across state agencies. Another Executive Order in 2016 formed the Colorado Broadband Office (CBO). Executive Order D 2022 009 “Accelerating Broadband Deployment in Colorado” charged the CBO with creating a statewide strategic plan and to administer federal funds now available at historically high levels. The next logical step is for Governor Polis to issue another Executive Order charging the CBO with creating a statewide middle-mile broadband network from the regional pilot networks now operating and expand the concept across rural Colorado (Polis, J. 2022).
Analysis
Bringing fiber to remote locations is expensive and having a single state network performing that service would provide economies of scale, programmatic uniformity, and stability that has remained elusive.
History: skepticism of the marketplace builds: Prior reliance on incumbent internet service providers (ISP) was not working for stakeholders that banded together to create each of these regional middle-mile networks over the past decade. Private investment alone has failed to provide current technologies in remote, disparate locations separated by mountains and distances. This situation made for an unacceptable lack of quality broadband (internet) services across rural Colorado. As this condition became increasingly acute concurrently with everyday life becoming increasingly reliant on connection to the internet through the first decade of the century, local governments began to realize that they had no policy tools with which to influence private sector broadband providers. It wasn’t yet on their agendas. Market incumbent providers saw this coming. In 2005, they influenced the Colorado Legislature to pass Senate Bill 152, explicitly prohibiting public investment in broadband unless citizens locally approved an “opt out” measure (Chuang, 2023). The concept backfired. While public broadband had neither been on the ‘institutional agenda’ nor on the ‘decisional agenda’ of most local governments through the 2010’s, citizens finally had a way to voice their collective frustration with rural internet services (Birkland 2020, p. 213). Senate Bill 152 ‘opt-out’ votes became common across rural Colorado, passing overwhelmingly in most places. As a next step, local governments started ISPs, built fiber and partnered with willing ISPs to fill in missing infrastructure such as cell towers (CML 2023). Over time, these public networks encountered another weakness. They were often served middle-mile connections by the same incumbent provider on the same vulnerable circuit and charged hefty fees for that access. This led to the innovation of public middle-mile networks to serve those disperse local networks (Maiolo, 2019).
Current Situation: Regional middle mile networks today stand as proof-of-concept for public investments improving this situation. Currently, Project THOR exists across Northwest Colorado providing a dynamic loop with mesh architecture that allows for dynamic re-routing of traffic in the case of an outage (see Map 1 in Appendix). The backbone of Project THOR is 178 miles of CDOT fiber from Denver to Glenwood Springs. It is paralleled by a second path along much of that segment and a northern loop that connects to Denver through the Moffat Tunnel as well as “drains” which are secondary circuits that loop back to Denver from Aspen and from Breckenridge. Incumbent providers rarely operate alternate paths. When fiber cuts occurred, ‘one guy with a backhoe’ could put entire valleys out of service for hours or days. Project THOR resolved that issue, even providing emergency backup to CDOT when Glenwood Canyon closed during a rockslide (Duncan 2021), and emergency alternate route to Estes Park during the Cameron Peak Fire (Chuang 2020). Such ‘redundant architecture’ is critical in regions at high risk of failure. Region 10 operates a second network from the Grand Valley through Delta and Montrose counties. Region 9 in the Southwestern portion of Colorado has secured grant funding and will be constructing a third network. Each is governed by different stakeholders and operated with different business models.
Proposal for A Future Condition: State management of a single, unitary middle-mile network would establish clear point of contact for communities and for providers, strengthening the long-term viability of these networks still in a start-up, early proving stage of development. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) already operates fiber along Interstate highways and has plans to expand fiber circuits along all state highways for their traffic cameras and ITS reader boards. Regional public networks such as Project THOR leverage this public asset by leasing fibers from CDOT, passing favorable pricing on to communities today. Because fiber and broadband is not a core focus for CDOT there has been frustration in some regions based on basing substantial local investments on such tenuous strategic basis. The Colorado Broadband Office has not been authorized (yet) to step into this void. In fact, top leadership at the state while taking a number of positive steps forward has not yet seen the many parts as an opportunity for a greater whole. Though it depends on a vision beyond the status quo, this idea is not such a quantum leap. Colorado could still be a leader and early adopter. It would not have to break new ice.
Treating access to broadband as a public interest utility is an idea embraced by other states at the forefront of confronting the digital divide. Regional middle mile networks then contract with local internet service providers at Carrier Neutral Locations (CNL) precluding the need for smaller ISPs to each make a major investment. By bringing broadband to remote areas through regional networks that serve as a de-facto state network, competition and better service has come to many smaller markets. Local governments and regional middle mile public networks have re-defined broadband as ‘a public good’ rather than a commodity (Birkland 2020, p. 220). This takes political courage, vision and some imagination, especially since the need is strongest among the rural populations and traditionally underserved. Internet in rural places is no longer a luxury. It is a necessity.
Middle mile partnerships are less necessary in dense, urbanized parts of the state where private investment alone is cost efficient (though it should be noted that some larger cities in Colorado decided to provide last mile (ISP) broadband services to more urbanized places to increase competition and fill equity gaps (City of Fort Collins 2023)).
A glance at the rest of the state with 20% of the population and 80% of the landmass is instructive. While a town such as Kremmling, 60 miles in 5 directions from nearby towns had no access to anything close to Gig services (1st Generation) in 2019 before Project THOR connected it and now has that potential, operators in Denver area were deploying 5G (Fifth Generation) infrastructure (Denver, 2019). From a business development, equity and many other perspectives, these inequities are no longer acceptable.
Being out of synch with current technology significantly impacts the interrelated infrastructures for broadband, cellular, and public safety networks. Operating for 5 years now, these regional networks such as Project THOR provide ‘proof of concept’ for public investment in open access middle mile broadband to enable less-profit rich, smaller markets to thrive.
Though some may see this as unusual, these networks developed through iterative process among local leaders across the state (Kim 2023). Senator Bennet has observed that what rural Colorado is exploring in the public broadband sector today is parallel to the rural electrification effort led by the federal government in the 1930s. The Colorado Department of Transportation has deployed fiber across most of the I-25 and I-70 corridors for transportation management (cameras and reader boards, ITS) excess capacity from which regional networks like Project THOR have leveraged to enhance broadband across nearly a quarter of the geography of the State in Northwest Colorado.
The innovation has already occurred and been proven. Early-adaptor risks have been taken by communities across rural Colorado working together. Right now, the framework for a state middle-mile network has been tested and working, if in a makeshift manner, with geographical quirks through regional middle mile networks. While this is operational, the business model remains new and could benefit from consolidation. A more systematic approach utilizing the economies of scale through a state-backed initiative is ripe for political action. The policy window for this opportunity is wide- open. The breeze is blowing through weather leadership feels it or not.
Three Regional Councils of Governments leveraging $75 million in Department of Local Affairs grants over the past decade matched by local matching investments of $29 million (NWCCOG, 2023. P. 43) cooperate with local governments and other key stakeholders in providing “policy entrepreneurship” addressing poor broadband services (Weible 2023 p.39). Drawing upon the “problem stream” of poor internet service provided by incumbent providers acting within the constraints of a weak market with infrastructure costs exceeding the profitability in serving smaller disperse markets, a majority of local governments across Western Colorado have found support from the popularity of Senate Bill 152 ‘opt-out’ votes. SB152 passed in 2005 allowing the public sector to seek voter approval to use public funds to “improve broadband services” by “opting out” of a restriction long ago passed on such activities by private sector players (CML 2023). The public response to allowing public sector actors into the broadband marketplace has been overwhelming. Local governments now provide carrier-grade internet services through partnerships in towns as disperse as Steamboat Springs (Community Broadband Network), Craig (Yampa Valley Electric), Meeker (Rio Blanco County), Glenwood Springs (city), Granby and Kremmling (Middle Park Health), Breckenridge (Fiber 9600/ALLO), Pitkin County (Roaring Fork Broadband) Aspen (Aspen Community Broadband), Eagle (town), Vail (town), Summit County, and Clear Creek County which are served by Project THOR, one of the three regional middle mile broadband networks now operating (NWCCOG 2023).
Now is a perfect ‘agenda window of opportunity” (Birkland 2020, p. 233) when the idea has been tested and there exist historic federal dollars incentivizing last-mile broadband through BEAD funding (CBO, 2023). The agenda has moved from a general idea to a ‘decision agenda’ (Birkland 2020, p. 212). For last mile funds to be of use, there must exist robust, accessible, and affordable internet access from a middle mile source. Most incumbent providers monopolize a local market and in rural areas fail to continue to upgrade and re-invest in current technologies or continue to extend services beyond municipal core areas. Though most communities served by local government-supported broadband infrastructure that is connected to the internet through regional middle-mile networks opted out of Senate Bill 152 before the COVID19 Pandemic when businesses and schools were forced to suddenly support work from home, that ‘focusing event’ (Birkland 2020, p. 223) coupled with the rise in remote work shined a bright light on the deficiencies of market-based broadband services. The ‘agenda window’ is wide open as it can be with recent awareness of the deficiencies brought to light by the pandemic, more people than ever working from home, and outages from aging infrastructure becoming increasingly common across rural Colorado such that businesses, schools and people working from home are more reliant on the internet than ever before (Weible 2023, p. 37).
Senate bill 152 activated many local communities to engage in improving internet services becoming internet service providers themselves in places such as Glenwood Springs (gscbn.com. 2023), Fort Collins (fcconnexion.com), Longmont (mynextlight.com). Other communities partnered with stakeholders and smaller internet service providers seeking grant funds and various intergovernmental partners to bridge infrastructure and funding gaps together such as Red Cliff and Kremmling (NWCCOG 2022. p. 28, p. 8). So much public/private innovation has occurred in recent years, yet by the Colorado Broadband Offices own data, only 90% of locations are served with the lowest possible broadband services at 100Mbps (down) and 20 Mbps (up) while nearly 200,000 self-reporting locations lack even that (broadbandhub.colorado.gov). These numbers only reflect a fraction of individuals and communities with insufficient, expensive, and vulnerable broadband today.
In taking this action, Colorado would not be acting alone. There is an ‘information shortcut’ when it comes to state middle mile networks (Weible 2023, p. 242). Public actions in this industry at first glance may appear as classic ‘redistributive policy’ taking potential profits from industry. But to bring quality internet services to the underserved, in practice, government investment in middle mile broadband is analogous to investment in transportation systems such as interstate highways over which commerce can then travel freely. This is economic development (Birkland 2020, p. 264). State operation of broadband networks or support of statewide open access broadband infrastructure that internet service providers can connect to provide last mile services to remote areas is no longer an innovation. Colorado could simply ‘policy transfer’ lifting part-and-parcel programs from states such as California (ca.gov) where the state is investing $3.2 billion to build 10,000 miles of necessary middle mile infrastructure (Weible 2023, p. 234). Kansas is also hoping to leverage the Infrastructure, Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) to build 550 miles of middle mile (Kansas legislature 2023). Arizona is on the same track (azcommerce.com. 2023). Utah (connectingutah.com). If empowered by a new Executive Order, the Colorado Broadband Office could utilize ‘policy mobilities’ and ‘assemble, disassemble and reassemble’ from various examples in other states (Weible 2023, p. 236-237). Doing so would achieve triple bottom line benefits in social, environmental, and economic sectors providing equity to underserved peoples and communities, reducing emissions by replacing fossil fuel intensive travel with internet activity, and leveling the playing field for rural businesses to compete in tomorrow’s connected economy.
Discussion and Recommendation
There will always be resistance from multi-national companies involved in the internet service provider (ISP) business to public-sector investment in and operation of broadband networks which they may lobby against on the grounds that it is unfair competition. There will always be public officials not wanting to smack the bees-nest of those industry lobbyists, or who prefer to wait until ‘the market” comes around to solve these challenges. Public support of broadband is one example of public action joining with market motivations to solve key issues when the expectations are made clear that neither alone holds all the pieces of the puzzle. Among public and local leaders, a shift in thinking has occurred regarding broadband that it is a basic utility as necessary as treated water, wastewater treatment, roads and electricity for the functioning of an economy and democratic society.
There is a growing awareness that, especially for the underserved communities where market incumbents do not see extension of the newest and best technologies as profitable that this has led to an inequitable patchwork of various levels of service from insufficient, unreliable and inadequate to non-existent across vast portions of Colorado. This is especially so across rural Colorado where geography dominates population. This is exactly why people are drawn here, because of the inspiration and challenge of an alternative. Today, citizens expect internet for daily activities and commerce just as they expect roads to connect their home to the businesses, schools and places they want to explore. Internet is public infrastructure. States that are recognizing this are raising the quality of service evenly across their varied geographies and gaining strategic economic and social benefits from those investments. Colorado still has time to become a leader in this area with a commitment from the Governor’s office that reinforces previous Executive Orders.
Next Step: Governor Polis should direct the Colorado Broadband Office to gather together public sector middle mile network operators and develop a plan to weave these into a single state-wide middle mile network while identifying gaps and developing plans to extend services to corners of the state still underserved in the broadband sector, and could direct five years of Energy/Mineral Impact Assistance Fund Grants (EIAF) to be entirely directed to this initiative (DOLA. 2023).
Appendix 1: Geographic Map of Project THOR
Appendix 2: Detail of Project THOR Circuits
Reference List
Chuang, T. (April 16, 2020) Internet service in western Colorado was so terrible that towns and counties built their own telecom. (The Colorado Sun) https://coloradosun.com/2020/04/16/internet-service-western-colorado-rural-broadband-nwccog-sb152/
Polis, J. (2022) Executive Order D 2022 009 Accelerating Broadband Deployment in Colorado. Broadband.colorado.gov https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_QAGugKL-nOUxZnhUqYmP7E0jfXV7C6a/view
Chuang, T. (May 24, 2023) Colorado repealed law limiting municipal internet, making it easier for towns to build their own. (Colorado Sun). https://coloradosun.com/2023/05/24/municipal-internet-sb-152-repealed-colorado/
Birkland, T. (2020) An introduction to the policy process: theories, concepts, and models of public policy making. Fifth Edition. Routledge. Taylor & Francis Group. New York and London.
Colorado Municipal League (2022) Broadband In Colorado. cml.org https://www.cml.org/home/topics-key-issues/broadband-in-colorado
Maiolo, D. (October 8, 2019) Broadband project se to protect Routt County from outages, improve bandwidth by the end of 2019. The Steamboat Pilot. https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/broadband-project-set-to-protect-routt-county-from-outages-improve-bandwidth-by-end-of-2019/
Duncan, K. (August 16, 2021) Project THOR a hidden hero in reopening glenwood canyon. (Vail Daily). https://www.vaildaily.com/news/project-thor-a-hidden-hero-in-reopening-of-glenwood-canyon/
Chuang, T. (November 9, 2020) Spurred by the threat of wildfires, an Estes Park broadband project moved at the speed of light. (The Colorado Sun). https://coloradosun.com/2020/11/09/fires-estes-park-broadband-emergency-communication/
City of Fort Collins (2023). Fcconnexion.com. Fort Collins Connexion. https://fcconnexion.com
Denver Public Works (August 2019) Small cell infrastructure in Denver. https://www.denvergov.org/content/dam/denvergov/Portals/730/documents/ROWServices/small-cell-infrastructure-2019.pdf
Kim, C. (August 23, 2023) Some areas of Colorado still don’t have high-speed internet, but new funding could change that. (Colorado Public Radio News). https://www.cpr.org/2023/08/23/some-areas-of-colorado-still-dont-have-high-speed-internet-but-new-funding-could-change-that/
Weible, C. (2023) Theories of the policy process. Fifth Edition. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. New York and London.
Northwest Colorado Council of Governments. (2022) Broadband 10-year report. https://www.nwccog.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/22029-Broadband-Report_WEB-002.pdf
Colorado Broadband Office. (2023) broadband.colorado.gov. Advance Colorado Broadband Grant Program. https://broadband.colorado.gov/advance-colorado-broadband
City of Glenwood Springs (2023). Gscbn.com. Community Broadband Network. https://broadband.colorado.gov/advance-colorado-broadband
City of Longmont (2023). Mynextlight.com. Longmont’s fastest internet just got faster. https://mynextlight.com
Colorado.gov. (2023) Colorado Broadband Office Mapping Hub. https://broadbandhub.colorado.gov
State of California. (2023) CA.GOV. California for all: middle-mile broadband initiative. https://middle-mile-broadband-initiative.cdt.ca.gov
Kansas Department of Commerce (2023). http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2023_24/committees/ctte_h_trnsprt_1/documents/testimony/20230123_02.pdf
Arizona Commerce Authority. (2023) Arizona broadband statewide middle-mile strategic plan. https://www.azcommerce.com/media/vvslgr2e/aca-broadband-strategic-plan-final-2-2-22.pdf
State of Utah. (2023) Connecting Utah All Utah All Online. https://www.connectingutah.com
Colorado Department of Local Affairs. (2023) Energy/Mineral Impact Assistance Fund Grant (EIAF) https://dlg.colorado.gov/energy-mineral-impact-assistance-fund-grant-eiaf
