011619nccA T o o l k i t f o r C o m m u n i t i e s
B E C O M I N G
B R O A D B A N D R E A D Y
W W W .N E X T C E N T U R Y C I T I E S .O R G
Becoming Broadband Ready:
A Toolkit for Communities
Next Century Cities is a non-profit membership organization of over 190 communities, founded to
support communities and their elected leaders, including mayors and other officials, as they seek
to ensure that all have access to fast, affordable, and reliable internet access. Next Century Cities
celebrates broadband successes in communities, demonstrates their value, and helps other cities
to realize the full power of truly high-speed, affordable, and accessible broadband. For more
information, visit www.nextcenturycities.org.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States
License. A copy of this license is available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/.
Please include the following attribution when citing this toolkit:
Next Century Cities. "Becoming Broadband Ready: A Toolkit for Communities." Washington, DC:
Next Century Cities, January 2019.
https://nextcenturycities.org/becoming-broadband-ready/
Next Century Cities would like to thank Neighborly and the Internet Society for their generous
support of this toolkit.
Neighborly connects communities with the capital they need to fund vital public projects like
schools, libraries and parks, and next-generation resilient infrastructure like solar microgrids and
community broadband networks. Neighborly makes it easier and less expensive for communities
to reach investors; easier for investors to direct their dollars towards the world positive projects
that matter to them; and more seamless for investment institutions to leverage the best
technology to maximize impact portfolios for their clients. With Neighborly, individuals and
businesses can invest directly in their communities and the civic projects they care about.
Investors include Emerson Collective, 8VC and Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures.
Founded by Internet pioneers, the Internet Society (ISOC) is a non-profit organization dedicated
to ensuring the open development, evolution and use of the Internet. Working through a global
community of chapters and members, the Internet Society collaborates with a broad range of
groups to promote the technologies that keep the Internet safe and secure, and advocates for
policies that enable universal access. The Internet Society is also the organizational home of the
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Online Trust Alliance (OTA).
Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1
Establish Leadership .................................................................................................... 1
Build a Community Movement ..................................................................................... 2
Identify Goals .............................................................................................................. 4
Evaluate the Current Circumstance .............................................................................. 5
Asset mapping .................................................................................................................... 5
Measuring demand.............................................................................................................. 5
Establish Policies and Procedures to Support Investment ............................................. 6
Dig Once ............................................................................................................................. 6
One Touch Make Ready (OTMR) or Climb Once ...................................................................... 7
Template lease agreements ................................................................................................. 9
Simplified permitting practices ........................................................................................... 9
Create clear review processes for historic, scenic, or theatre districts .................................. 10
Leverage municipal assets ................................................................................................. 10
Competition in multi-dwelling units ................................................................................... 11
Prioritize Digital Inclusion.......................................................................................... 12
Create a digital inclusion plan ............................................................................................ 12
Provide digital inclusion grants programs and funding opportunities .................................. 12
Use your convening power ................................................................................................ 12
Support housing authority access projects ......................................................................... 13
Investigate and elevate low-cost options ........................................................................... 13
Identify Legislative and Regulatory Barriers ............................................................... 15
Small cells ........................................................................................................................ 15
Pole attachments .............................................................................................................. 15
Municipal broadband ........................................................................................................ 16
How to work around barriers ............................................................................................. 16
Explore Connectivity Options ..................................................................................... 17
Municipal networks........................................................................................................... 18
Open access networks ....................................................................................................... 18
Public-private partnerships ............................................................................................... 18
Institutional networks ...................................................................................................... 19
Electric co-ops .................................................................................................................. 19
Working with incumbent providers .................................................................................... 19
Explore Financing Options ......................................................................................... 19
Financing models .............................................................................................................. 20
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) ....................................................................... 21
Department of Agriculture (USDA) ..................................................................................... 21
Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) .................................................................................. 22
Special investment districts and Opportunity Zones ........................................................... 22
State programs ................................................................................................................. 22
Be a Clear Collaborator .............................................................................................. 23
Consider your community’s priorities ................................................................................ 23
Designate a point person ................................................................................................... 24
Know your resources ......................................................................................................... 24
Measure Success ........................................................................................................ 25
Manage expectations ........................................................................................................ 25
Maintain communication ................................................................................................... 25
Next Century Communities Checklist ......................................................................... 26
1
Introduction
In 2018, the time has long passed
since broadband access was
optional. The internet has grown
out of its luxury status and is now a
bedrock ingredient for resilient
communities. Fast, affordable,
reliable broadband is essential to
the long-term success of a
community and to the health and
happiness of its residents.
Cities, towns, and counties have an extraordinary amount of resources that can be leveraged to
encourage investment in broadband infrastructure and ultimately lead to greater connectivity. While
there is no one connectivity model that works for every community, there are common threads that
run through thee diverse array of successful projects. This toolkit is a compilation of those pra ctices
and a first-stop resource for any community seeking strategies and solutions to connect its residents.
Establish Leadership
A common element that appears in many cities’ success stories is having a dedicated staff member
leading the effort. Having a staff member in a leadership role who is passionate about connectivity in
your community is a prerequisite for any successful broadband project.
This role can take on a variety of titles, from Chief Technology Officer to IT Director to Broadband
Manager. The formal title is less important than the employee’s ability to clearly articulate why the
community wants and needs better broadband. An important duty of this project leader is to help
inform elected officials in your community about a broadband pr oject’s goals, the value it will bring to
the community - such as remote work opportunities, new jobs, economic development, and improved
public safety, healthcare, education, and transportation - and project details, such as the build
timeline and who exactly will be getting service.
Next Century Cities’ guide to hiring a broadband manager identifies traits that many successful
project leaders share, including:
- Interpersonal and communication skills
- Flexibility and problem-solving skills
- Empathy
2
- A big-picture outlook
- A passion for broadband
- Out-of-the-box thinking
In addition to having a dedicated employee spearhead the issue, it is essential that local elected
officials take on a leadership role. As with any municipal project, top-down support can make a big
difference in a broadband project. Local leaders should understand how an investment in broadband
infrastructure will impact the longevity of their communit y, and that connectivity means “more than
just Facebook.” Examples of positive impact can include:
- Youth staying in or returning to the community
- Improved opportunities for local businesses
- Making your community more attractive for new businesses
- Educational opportunities
- Telehealth applications
- Improved real estate values
- Elevated civic engagement
- Resources available for elderly population to age in place
- Public safety applications and other municipal innovations
- Overall improvement in quality of life
Further reading
The Anatomy of a Community Broadband Manager (Next Century Cities)
“More Than Just Facebook” Internet Connectivity Fact Sheet (ILSR)
What Fiber Broadband Can Do For Your Community (Broadband Communities Magazine)
Community Broadband Bits Podcast: Political Will and Local Broadband Initiatives (ILSR)
Establish leadership checklist
❏ Understand how broadband access would impact your community
❏ Talk with your local elected leadership about the importance of investing in broadband access
Build a Community Movement
Community interest in and support of high-speed internet is imperative when attempting to attract
investment and competition, and is critical to the long-term sustainability of local projects. Hosting
events, engaging the community in conversation, and maintaining high transparency can bolster
constituent engagement.
Charlotte, North Carolina began a grassroots campaign called Charlotte Hearts Gigabit when Google
Fiber announced that they were considering expanding to the city. Community members were
3
concerned that there wasn’t enough citizen interest in high-speed internet, so Charlotte Hearts
Gigabit was formed to begin a conversation in the hopes that it would help attract Google.
Charlotte Hearts Gigabit engaged citizens by talking about how gigabit internet would positively
impact individuals and the community. The group discussed specific use cases and hosted in -person
events and hands-on demonstrations of applications and technology powered by high -speed internet.
Not only did Google Fiber decide to invest in Charlotte, but AT&T announced plans to offer fiber
service in the city, and Time Warner Cable increased its speeds. The robust com munity interest in
high-speed internet encouraged investment in the city and eventually led to a more competitive local
market. The initiative has since expanded into a statewide effort - NC Hearts Gigabit - to attract,
support, and champion the universal availability of broadband in North Carolina.
Fort Collins, Colorado’s Broadband Core Team led an investigation into broadband solutions for the
city following a need identified during a Budgeting for Out comes (BFO) outreach effort in 2014. The
Team explored a number of solutions, and developed four options which they brought to citizens for
preference. When the city decided to pursue a municipal broadband network, Fort Collins saw a
citizen-led effort to educate the local electorate. Colin Garfield, the campaign lead for Fort Collins
Citizens’ Broadband Committee, noted that keeping the community consistently informed can make a
big difference for engagement.
Even if a project isn’t yet underway, maintaining transparency through consistent updates helps
maintain interest and trust. For example, Larimer County, Colorado created a newsletter to share
updates about broadband projects. While Fort Collins was considering building a network, the city
launched an interactive map on which residents could drop pins where they wanted fiber built, in
addition to a broadband project website that could be visited for updates and information. The city
also hosted several public outreach sessions to engage citizens.
A grassroots group was also formed in Fort Collins to keep momentum going. The group Broadband &
Beers is a self-described “independent, public outreach group founded… to inform residents and
educate decision makers about bringing municipal gigabit internet service to communities across the
country.” The group hosted frequent events at breweries to talk about the city’s path to municipal
broadband, and also led a social media campaign that organically reached tens of thousands of
voters.
Further reading
Charlotte Hearts Gigabit
Larimer County Broadband Newsletter
Community Broadband Bits Podcast: Organizing for a Community Network, Against Big Cable
(ILSR)
4
Building a community movement checklist
❏ Use the convening power of the city, town, or county to bring together stakeholder groups for
conversation, information sharing, and brainstorming
❏ Consider the anchor institutions, community groups, and local businesses that could help
involve residents in a discussion about broadband
❏ Identify individuals who are trusted members of their community (faith -based leaders,
activists, nonprofit staff, etc). Seek their advice and keep them well informed of the process
and progress.
❏ Brainstorm methods of communication that make sense for your municipality and your
community (for example: an email newsletter, Facebook page, mailings, etc)
❏ Create a communications plan that is consistent, transparent, and inclusive
Identify Goals
Once leadership is established and the community has been engaged in the conversation, community
leaders need to think deliberately about what problem they are hoping to solve with broadband
access. It is best to approach investing in broadband with end goals in mind from the start, so
leadership should define the problem statement by asking, “What are the pain points that might be
mitigated if high speed internet was available?”
Community leaders should strive to meet the principle of “Build With, Not For.” This philosophy puts
community residents first, and strives to meet the actual needs of residents, as opposed to the needs
that leaders assume exist. In order to successfully “build with,” leaders must build trust in the
communities that they aim to serve. The Internet Society offers additional recommendations for
supporting networks that empower communities.
Common community concerns include, but are not limited to:
- Residents can’t sell their homes
- Students can’t complete homework
- Young people are leaving the community and not returning
- Grandparents can’t Skype with grandchildren
- There are limited options to age in place
- Telehealth applications are not available
- There is limited communication available for public safety personnel
- Local businesses are leaving and new ones are not locating in the community
Further reading:
Five Lessons for Tech-Powered Civic Engagement (Next Century Cities)
5
Evaluate the Current Circumstance
After goals have been thoughtfully established, the next step is to organize information about your
municipality’s current circumstance.
Asset mapping
Asset mapping is when a municipality collects data on the public and private infrastructure assets
scattered across the community. Assets can include fiber, conduit, towers, and more. Does the city
have dark or lit fiber? Available conduit? Rooftops? Tower access? Right-of-way across bridges or
railroads? Where is it located and what are the options for sharing, leasing, or using those assets to
support broadband expansion?
When evaluating options for broadband, the city of Missoula, Montana contracted a third party to
compile a map of all privately-owned fiber assets within the city. That map showed that there was a
significant amount of fiber already in the ground in Missoula - much of which wasn’t being used to its
full potential - and the city was able to strategize and build partnerships accordingly.
The city of Boston, Massachusetts created a publicly available map that displays the location of
“shadow conduit” - conduit put in the ground alongside a primary construction project, as per the
city’s Joint Build Ordinance - and city-owned conduit that could be utilized by public or private
projects.
Tools like VETRO FiberMap and ESRI GIS can help communities manage infrastructure mapping and
can support planning, budgeting, design, construction, sales, and more.
Measuring demand
The community needs an accurate reading of the level of demand from residents and businesses for
broadband before they can responsibly take on a new project . Consider:
- Who in your community is online?
- Who wants to be online and is not?
- Who needs better bandwidth?
- Is cost preventing residents from connecting?
- Is sufficient bandwidth available to meet the needs of residents, large and small businesses,
and anchor institutions such as schools, libraries, and healthcare organizations?
Tools like Crowdfiber and COS Service Zones can also help measure and evaluate demand data.
It would be helpful to have information from your community’s current providers: what are their tiers,
where is service offered, and what is the price of service? However, many providers will not share this
6
information. As an alternative, communities can t urn to crowdsourcing this data from projects like
Measurement Lab or SpeedUp USA, an open source nationwide map that pulls individual internet
speed test data from M-Lab and breaks down the results on maps and charts by points, census blocks,
ISP, date range, and speed. Louisville, Kentucky created the original source code for this with
SpeedUpLouisville in order to evaluate the cost and quality of internet service offered in the city.
Evaluating the current circumstance checklist
❏ Map all municipally-owned fiber, conduit, and towers and create a simple system to allow you
to share with relevant parties
❏ Develop policies and a contract template to simplify leasing these assets
❏ Ascertain the level of service offered by current service providers. Is it sufficient to meet the
needs of businesses, anchor institutions, and residents? Are residents able to afford the cost of
the existing service?
❏ Evaluate if there are private assets that could be leveraged to su pport better service to
residents
Establish Policies and Procedures to Support Investment
There are several policies that municipalities can adopt that encourage the deployment of
broadband.
Dig Once
A “Dig Once” policy encourages the placement of fiber or conduit in the ground any time the road is
dug up for a public works project.
Because construction costs represent the most expensive line item in a broadband deployment
budget, as opposed to the fiber and conduit itself, a Dig Once policy is a c ommon sense method of
reducing the cost of communications infrastructure deployment. Proactive placement of conduit can
be estimated to save anywhere from $30,000 to $100,000 per mile compared to the costs of revisiting
streets and digging them up again. A report by consulting firm CTC Technology & Energy estimated
that the cost of a provider or locality pulling fiber in existing conduit is 10 percent of the cost of
underground construction without the conduit.
By lowering cost of deployment, Dig Once breaks down barriers of entry for new market entrants,
creating a competitive marketplace that ultimately can result in more options, lower prices, and
higher quality of service for consumers. Dig Once can also greatly reduce strain on a community by
minimizing traffic, noise, and safety concerns of constant construction wo rk.
7
Santa Monica, California adopted a Public Right-of-Way Ordinance 20 years ago that regulates the
time, place, and manner of installations in the right-of-way. The city coordinates fiber and conduit
installation with other internal city capital infrastructure projects. This practice reduces the cost
substantially and bundles funding for projects that otherwise would not have been approved. The city
leases fiber cable to private ISPs, creating competition for consumers, and uses its fiber network to
connect commercial buildings, affordable housing, city buildings, and to provide free Wi -Fi in the
public parks and transit corridors.
Lincoln, Nebraska created a 350 mile conduit network along abandoned water lines, traffic conduit,
electric conduit, and gas lines. The city has leased out the conduit to seven different carriers and has
generated nearly a half a million dollars per year in lease revenue. The city is predicting over $1 million
in annual revenue for 2019.
Mesa, Arizona was an early adopter of Dig Once, and also made a point to take advantage of “non -
traditional” existing infrastructure, eventually building a 150 -mile fiber network throughout the
community. The city actively works with carriers to coordinate new infrastructure deployments. On an
episode of the Community Broadband Bits podcast, Alex Deshuk, the former Manager of Technology
and Innovation for Mesa, explained: “We have regular meetings with incumbent carriers… Sit down
with them and show them our street construction activities, so there’s a chance to co -locate and
reduce their expenses. We show them our assets, as we add assets to the infrastructure undergr ound -
- fiber and conduit and utility pipes.” This practice saves carriers money and encourages increased
investment of infrastructure in Mesa.
Further reading:
Community Broadband Bits Podcast: Mesa's Focus on Dig Once and Fiber Leases Pays Off
(ILSR)
Community Broadband Bits Podcast: Dakota County is Fiber Rich Thanks to Dig Once Approach
(ILSR)
Do the right thing in the public right-of-way (Santa Monica, Calif.)
Gigabit Communities: Technical Strategies for Facilitating Public or Private Broadband
Construction in Your Community (CTC Technology & Energy)
One Touch Make Ready (OTMR) or Climb Once
Read more about pole attachment regulations on page 15.
One Touch Make Ready (OTMR) is similar in concept to Dig Once in that it streamlines the deployment
of new infrastructure, therefore lowering costs and encouraging investment.
Typically, in order for a new provider to attach wires to a pole, each owner of the currently attached
wires must be asked to assess and move their wires if necessary -- a process called “make ready.”
8
Incumbent providers don’t have any incentive to move quickly, and the process is time and capital
intensive for new providers, who must bear the cost of all make ready work. In addition, the ongoing
work creates noise, traffic, and temporary service interruptions for residents.
OTMR replaces this practice with one much more streamlined. OTMR policies allow a single
contractor, or a select group of contractors, that all existing pole owners agree upon to conduct all
new make ready work. Benefits of this practice include faster and safer work, and decreased capital
cost and therefore lower barriers to entry.
Louisville, Kentucky passed an OTMR ordinance in 2016 in order to streamline the pole attachment
process and incentivize new providers to deploy in the area. The legislation states that an applicant
for attachment must first receive approval from existing pole owners, at which point it may contract a
pre-approved construction crew to perform all make ready work at its own expense. Pole owners and
pre-existing providers whose wires were moved may choose to do post -make ready work inspections
and call for remedial work if needed, at the new provider’s expense.
While OTMR is a best practice for many communities, some incumbent providers have pushed back on
local ordinances. Those opposing OTMR policies, including Comcast and AT&T, have argued that each
provider has its own internal process for make ready work, and OTMR does not do enough to take
these processes into account. Furthermore, they state that they have their own trusted contractors
that they train to handle their wires, though in reality, many contractors work for multiple provid ers.
Municipalities adopting OTMR should work to educate stakeholders and bolster public support in
order to prepare for pushback. It also helps to understand your state’s specific pole attachment
regulations. Cities like Louisville have been able to overcome litigation and maintain landmark OTMR
policies.
In July 2018, the Federal Communications Commission adopted a Report and Order to establish a new
OTMR framework for pole attachments, writing that “OTMR should accelerate broadba nd deployment
and reduce costs by allowing the party with the strongest incentive to prepare the pole to efficiently
perform the work itself.”
Most local governments have authority over the public rights-of-way, including the utility poles in the
rights-of-way. Cities can use this power to create policies that would make them the best partners
possible for deployment of fast, affordable, and reliable broadband access in their communities.
Further reading:
Next Century Cities’ Guide to Pole Attachments
“One Touch” Make-Ready Policies: The “Dig Once” of Pole Attachments (Next Century Cities)
One Touch Make Ready (POTs and PANs)
Memorandum on the FCC’s Report and Order on Pole Attachments (Baller Stokes & Lide PC)
9
Template lease agreements
The city of Saint Louis Park, Minnesota created a template lease agreement for leasing out their fiber
assets. The template includes lease rates that were determined through a fiber study conducted by
CTC Technology & Energy. The template agreement provides structure so that the city won’t be
caught “flat footed” when approached by parties hoping to use their assets. At the same time, it
allows for modifications in order to accommodate specific needs. Find the city’s template lease
agreement here.
Additional example lease agreements: Weatherford, Texas and Huntsville, Alabama.
Simplified permitting practices
Complex permitting processes can discourage investment. Confusing bureaucratic application
systems and unpredictable waiting periods for approvals can discourage vendors and slow down
investment in your community. Communities that simplify and streamline this process provide
vendors with this needed predictability and can encourage investment. This preparation is es pecially
important as vendors seek to deploy more and more small cells. Next-generation networks will
require many small cells for every one macro cell tower relied upon by current wireless networks, and
cities across the country are already grappling with an influx of permits.
Creating a set of pre-approved small cell designs can greatly simplify this process. The city of
Huntington Beach, California worked with providers to create four pre-approved designs for small
cells. The city’s Sustainability Manager, Antonia Graham, describes the benefit:
“These designs are now integrated into our permitting process, so if carriers’ deployments fit
one of the four standards, they are free to follow a streamlined, over -the-counter application
process to receive permits from the city. As we developed these des ign standards we had a
few carriers push back with their own ideas, and we actually ended up incorporating their
designs into our permitting process. Collaborating with carriers to develop these designs was
integral to ensuring that the permitting process would work for not only the city, but the
providers as well.”
Other cities, including Denver, Colorado, have included equipment shrouds in their small cell design
guidelines in order to simplify and standardize deployments throughout the city.
Creating an organized process to make information about permit applications accessible and easy to
understand helps investors take action. In addition, putting work into this process shows that your
municipality is a conscientious and effective partner. Centennial, Colorado’s comprehensive small cell
permitting parameters create clear definitions, use standards, and more that help ensure the
10
deployment process will be smooth for both providers and the city (see Sections 12 -2-305 and 12-2-
425 for the siting of Wireless Communications Facilities).
The city of Riverside, California created a “One Stop Permitting Shop” in order to address complaints
about its disorganized and confusing permit application process. The shop, located on one floor of
city hall, brings together representatives from all seven departments that are involved in city
permitting, and a triage process ensures th at applicants know exactly what steps they must take in
order to apply for their permit. The shop also uses customer data to ensure the process is as smooth
and pain-free as possible.
Lincoln, Nebraska simplified the permitting process by breaking “department” molds and grouping all
city staff together that work on locating utilities in the city rights of way. This method made
communication easier among staff and cut a clearer path forward for wireless providers seeking
permits.
Further reading:
Huntington Beach Achieves Small Cell Deployment Through Collaboration (Next Century
Cities)
Create clear review processes for historic, scenic, or theatre districts
Creating specific, predetermined requirements for infrastructure deployments within special distr icts
- such as historic, scenic, oceanfront, or theatre - can help a municipality maintain control over areas
of significance. The earlier these specifications are in place, the better.
The city of Boston, Massachusetts wrote specific exceptions for hist oric districts into its small cell
agreements with providers. Boston’s agreement with American Tower includes: “ATC further
acknowledges that it cannot use any historically or architecturally significant light poles located on
the public rights-of-way or other street furniture, except as may be otherwise expressly authorized in a
specific permit issued by the PIC.”
Leverage municipal assets
Municipalities should take into account their public assets that are of value to industry collaborators.
For example, fiber, conduit, and physical siting locations all present opportunities for wireless firms
and/or the intermediary companies that work wit h wireless firms in deploying technology.
Municipalities can leverage these assets to create mutually beneficial agreements and to negotiate
specific terms.
For example, Boston does not own the poles in the city, however, it does own property like street
lights that are interesting to wireless companies. Boston worked with licensees to collaboratively
11
develop designs for replacement lights. These design standards focus heavily on aesthetics,
concealment, and historic character.
In Lincoln, Nebraska, the city leveraged its extensive conduit system to negotiate several public
benefits in return for offering deployers a quick process to deploy on public street lights.
Further reading:
Boston’s agreement with Verizon
Lincoln’s agreement with Verizon
Competition in multi-dwelling units
Apartment buildings and condominiums, known as multi-dwelling units or “MDUs,” present a unique
challenge in the effort to ensure everyone has high quality internet access. MDU owners and managers
often strike exclusivity deals with incumbent cable and telephone companies. Despite efforts to
unwind this practice in the past, many MDUs still lack basic internet choice. But local policies can
provide these buildings with more competitive options.
San Francisco adopted a local statute in 2016 to ensure that MDU residents are able to choose from
multiple providers. The statute renders landlords unable to block ISP access to a physical building,
and also allows landlords “just and reasonable competition” to defray any costs from ISPs ins talling
their equipment. This compensation is a key incentive for landlords, as many buildings, especially
older ones, do not have wiring ready to accommodate multiple ISPs.
Boston recently integrated the Broadband Ready Buildings Questionnaire into a form within the
Boston Planning and Development Agency’s Article 80 design review process for large real estate
development projects. Created through a collaboration with WiredScore, the questionnaire asks for
information about the technical readiness of the prospective development to serve the current and
future connectivity needs of residents and businesses. The city hopes that gathering information early
in the development process will encourage behavior that will support choice and competition as a
part of overall building readiness.
Fixed wireless providers present a unique soluti on to the MDU dilemma, because they can deliver
high-capacity networks to MDUs without running fiber in the street. They do still need good wiring
within the building, but providers like Monkeybrains in San Francisco and netBlazr in Boston are
growing rapidly in metro regions.
Further reading:
The New Payola: Deals Landlords Cut With Internet Providers (Wired)
Boston’s Broadband Ready Buildings Questionnaire (Next Century Cities)
12
Establish policies and procedures checklist
❏ Consider your municipality’s priorities when it comes to small cell design
❏ Consider municipal districts in which you might want specified designs, such as historic,
oceanfront, or theater districts
❏ Evaluate your municipality’s structural assets
❏ Identify or create a system for mapping those assets throughout the community (see asset
mapping)
Prioritize Digital Inclusion
According to Pew, 11 percent of adults are not online. It is clear who is and who is not connected:
Seniors, the disabled, those with limited incomes, those who have not obtained a high school
diploma, rural residents, and indigenous and tribal communities are the least likely to be online at
home. When asked, those not online at home identified cost as the number one factor. Other factors
include the cost of device ownership and digital skills training.
How can cities improve their statistics for online access? There are several be st practices that can
support a move toward digital equity.
Create a digital inclusion plan
Several cities have developed very specific digital inclusion plans that help to guide decision -making
and measure progress. Examples include plans from Austin, Texas, Kansas City, Missouri, Charlotte,
North Carolina, and Louisville, Kentucky.
Provide digital inclusion grants programs and funding opportunities
More and more cities are finding ways to incentivize local organizations to provide digital inclusion
programming and to support the expansion of existing programs. One of the first in the country to do
so was Seattle. Others include Austin, Boston, and Charlotte.
An emerging model involves the city using pole attachment fees to support digital inclusion efforts.
San Jose has been at the forefront of this effort and has an interesting plan in place where the pole
attachment fees are dedicated to a Digital Inclusion Program Fund.
Use your convening power
Municipalities have the unique opportunity to bring together city staff, residents, community
organizations, nonprofits, schools and universities, libraries, f aith-based communities, and others.
Such convenings can provide an opportunity to hear directly from those who are impacted by lack of
13
access and can lead to collaborative problem solving, shared ownership of the solution, and a plan to
intervene.
For example, in Boston and Chattanooga, the cities participated in finding a solution that would
include a wide swath of city and community support. In response to their convenings, they have each
implemented a project called Tech Goes Home. These projects provide a device, training, and support
to find low-cost home access. Training takes place in community anchor institutions across the city,
with a wide range of trainers and learners participating.
Support housing authority access projects
Several communities are finding solutions to connectivity issues within their housing authority
properties.
● Wilson, North Carolina’s municipal network, called Greenlight, provides 50 mbps symmetrical
for $10 per month for residents in housing authority facilities.
● In San Francisco, California, private company Monkeybrains has partnered with the San
Francisco Housing Development Corporation to provide gigabit service for free initially, with
costs limited to $20 per month after two years.
● In Boston, Massachusetts, a pilot program in partnership with Starry will bring free high speed
broadband to common areas in a housing community for elderly and disabled residents.
● Santa Monica, California is providing training to residents and gigabit servi ce to Community
Rooms used for afterschool education and job training programs in affordable housing
buildings. Residents can request a fiber drop and gigabit access in their housing unit for an
installation cost of $48, and monthly service cost of $48.
● Finally, Google Fiber has supported free access in the housing associations in markets where
they provide service.
Note a new rule passed by HUD in 2016 requires the agency to include the installation of broadband
infrastructure in any new construction or substantial rehabilitation of multifamily rental housing that
is funded or supported by HUD.
Investigate and elevate low-cost options
Not every city has a local or regional provider that is able or willing to provide low -cost options for
service. However, there are plans that can help to provide home access.
Some examples include:
● Mobile Beacon and Mobile Citizen provide mobile hotspots for educational entities, for
nonprofits, and for social welfare agencies.
● PCs for People provides the opportunity for individuals or organizations to obtain refurbished
computers and/or a mobile hotspot and low -cost service. PCs for people has partnered with
14
Mobile Beacon and Mobile Citizen to allow individuals to purchase a mobile hotspot and low -
cost monthly service.
● Some of the larger providers have plans to support low income consumers. For example,
Comcast Internet Essentials offers 15 Mbps download speeds for $9.95 per month, available to
families whose children receive free or reduced lunch in school, for those receiving HUD
housing assistance, for low-income veterans, and low-income seniors in 12 pilot locations who
receive state or federal assistance. Note that there are some caveats, so it is important to
check the specifics on the site. EveryoneOn has a portal that lists low-cost options and
programs that make refurbished devices available.
● Many local libraries provide mobile hotspots for internet access. For example, in Santa Clara,
California, there are both Chromebooks and hotspots available for loan. Some libraries in Los
Angeles, California also have mobile hotspots for loan through their Tech2Go prog ram. The
New York Public Library allows households with school age children and no home internet
access to borrow hotspots for the entirety of the school year for free.
Further reading:
Webinar: Connecting Residents in Low Income Housing (Next Century Cities)
Austin, Texas’ Digital Inclusion Strategy
Kansas City, Missouri’s Digital Equity Strategic Plan
National Digital Inclusion Alliance Resources
The Digital Inclusion Coalition Guidebook (NDIA)
Five Digital Inclusion Trends in the United States (NTIA)
Low-Cost Internet Service & Affordable Devices (EveryoneOn)
Gauging Household Digital Readiness (Purdue University)
Prioritize digital inclusion checklist
❏ Consider who in your community is unconnected and why
❏ Make a list of organizations and anchor institutions that work with unconnected populations.
How might they be able to help?
❏ Convene a group of leaders - community members, business, faith based, school, library,
nonprofit, housing authority, and other interested parties - to brainstorm collaborative
solutions
❏ Create a digital inclusion master plan that includes action steps and goals
❏ Learn about the options for low-cost access in your community
❏ Work with trusted anchor institutions, advocacy groups, and nonprofits to alert low -income
residents about options for low -cost access
15
Identify Legislative and Regulatory Barriers
Small cells
At the time of writing, 21 states have passed or are currently considering legislation that limit
municipalities’ control over small cell deployment. For example, a Florida law passed in 2017 caps all
annual collocation rates at $150 per utility pole.
In September 2018, the Federal Communications Commission passed an Order that significantly limits
the ability of local governments to negotiate in the public interest around small cell agreements.
Notably, the Order creates a “safe harbor” for application and use fees of the public rights -of-way, and
puts the burden on municipalities to demonstrate cost if t hey wish to charge higher fees.
Laws and policies such as these limit municipalities’ ability to negotiate in order to create agreements
with providers that are mutually beneficial. In June 2018, San Jose, California created agreements
with AT&T, Mobilitie, and Verizon to deploy more than 4,000+ small cells throughout the city where
lease rates are reduced as carriers commit to larger deployments across the city, incenting
comprehensive, large-scale investment. The agreement with AT&T and Verizon involves roughly $10
million to be paid over the span of a 15-year lease agreement, as well as an additional $1 million
contribution each to the city’s Digital Inclusion Program Fund. A key eleme nt of the project was the
negotiation that AT&T and Verizon would deploy the small cells ubiquitously throughout all of San
Jose, regardless of the differing income levels of each neighborhood. Over ten years, an estimated
$20-24 million will be generated for the Digital Inclusion Program Fund from the leasing of city -owned
streetlights.
This is an example of the type of partnership that can be achieved when cities have the ability to
negotiate attachment fees and other elements of an agreement - including funding the people,
processes and technology required to meet industry permitting needs - while achieving digital
inclusion goals. The agreement would not have been possible had California Governor Jerry Brown
not vetoed a state bill just months prior.
Further reading:
Municipal Action Guide: Small Cell Wireless Technology in Cities (NLC)
Guide to state restrictions on small cell deployments (SmartWorks Partners)
Pole attachments
Read more about One Touch Make Ready policies on page 7.
16
There is no one universal rule governing pole attachments. The Federal Communications Commission
controls attachments and regulations in 29 states, but the other 21 states and the District of Columbia
have each implemented their own regulations.
States are subject to the regulations issued by the FCC under the authority granted by Section 224 of
the Telecommunications Act, which attempts to streamline the pole attachment process in order to
more quickly deploy broadband infrastructure while ensur ing that pole owners are fairly
compensated for their property.
However, any state that certifies to the FCC that it has written and executed effective rules and
regulations regarding the rates, terms, and conditions of pole attachment agreements may exer cise
the authority to regulate those agreements within the state. Importantly, the FCC recently wrote that
any state which has opted out of the FCC’s authority has the ability to allow One Touch Make Ready
policies.
Municipal broadband
At the time of writing, 19 states have barriers in place that prevent or limit municipalities’ ability to
build and own their own broadband infrastructure. For example, Chattanooga is prohibited by state
law from serving people just outside of its electric territory who have no broadband service. This i s
because Tennessee limits municipal fiber networks tightly to areas where a city -owned electric board
offers electricity.
In 2015, the FCC released an order preempting North Carolina and Tennessee’s prohibitions of
municipal provision of broadband service. While this order was later overturned, the document offers
an in-depth analysis of barriers to municipal networks and how those barriers harm communities.
How to work around barriers
Many state laws create barriers to investment, but that doesn’t mean there aren’t steps your
community can take to encourage improved access. Motivated communities should seek innovative
ways to invest, even when state laws pose a challenge.
For example, Nebraska has a state law that prohibits municipalities from leasing out fiber. The city of
Lincoln, Nebraska instead built an impressive conduit network to lease out to providers.
Municipalities can speak up for local control by crafting a written response to FCC proposals.
Submitting comments to the FCC is a powerful way to add your municipality’s voice to the debate.
The perspective of local communities and governments is often underrepresented at the federal level,
so speaking up can go a long way. Next Century Cities’ step-by-step guide to submitting comments
(with screenshots) makes this process simple and accessible.
17
Staying apprised of actions, proposals, and legislation at the federal and state level is the first step in
defending local rights. Join your state’s municipal league to stay informed about federal and state
policies and to gain access to resources. Municipal leagues can provide information about navigating
barriers - such as the “opt-out kit" provided by Colorado Counties, Inc. and the Colorado Municipal
League.
Municipalities can join Next Century Cities - a municipal membership organization that is dedicated to
helping communities get fast, affordable, reliable broadband - for free. Among other things, Next
Century Cities closely monitors federal actions and policies that affect local choice and connectivity
opportunities. Each week, the organization sends an email newsletter to update members about
relevant actions at the FCC and i n Congress.
Further reading:
How-To: Submit Comments to the Federal Communications Commission (Next Century Cities)
The Future of 5G: The Bitter Battle for Local Control (GovTech)
Advocating for local control checklist
❏ Join Next Century Cities
❏ Join the Coalition for Local Internet Choice
❏ Connect with your state’s municipal league
❏ Research existing or pending laws and policies that could limit your local control:
❏ SmartWorks Partners’ guide to state restrictions on small cell deployments
❏ Baller Stokes & Lide, PC’s guide to state restrictions on community broadband
services
❏ Community Broadband Networks’ map of state restrictions on community broadband
networks
❏ Next Century Cities’ state-by-state guide to pole attachments
Explore Connectivity Options
There is no single “correct” way to connect a community. Many models have successfully brought
broadband access to cities, towns, and counties. These models are each unique in their distribution of
responsibilities and risks among participating parties. Performing a thorough and thoughtful
inventory of your community’s assets, needs, and priorities is a good place to start when thinking
about your own best model.
18
Municipal networks
Municipal networks are built as a municipal effort and are owned by local governments. These
networks take many forms, from modest networks serving a few businesses to networks that are
available at every address across a community. Some are run by the city and others are managed by
an ISP under contract. More than 500 communities have invested in municipal networks using a
variety of models to achieve a variety of public policy goals, from creating a better business climate to
digital inclusion to lowering prices for residents. Examples include Chattanooga, Tennessee; Wilson,
North Carolina; and Sandy, Oregon.
Further reading:
The Deep History of Chattanooga’s Fiber Network (ILSR)
Wilson Gives the Greenlight to Fast Internet (ILSR)
SandyNet Goes Gig: A Model for Anytown USA (ILSR)
Community Broadband Networks
Community-Owned Fiber Networks: Value Leaders in America (Harvard)
Open access networks
Open access networks allow multiple ISPs to offer service over the same fiber infrastructure. The
network owner (which could be the city, the utility, or a private entity) builds and owns the actual fiber
infrastructure. For example, the city of Ammo n, Idaho built the infrastructure and multiple providers
offer services to residents using this infrastructure. Open access networks allow for subscribers to
have multiple options, which can drive down cost and drive up the quality of service while
encouraging innovation in services available.
Further reading:
Ammon case study: Enabling Competition and Innovation on a City Fiber Network (Harvard’s
Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society)
Ammon Model video (ILSR & Next Century Cities)
Why I Believe Open Access is The Right Choice for Communities (Next Century Cities)
Open Access Resources (ILSR)
Public-private partnerships
Municipalities and private companies can collaborate to share the risks and rewards of a network
investment. Public-private partnerships can take many forms and can divide responsibility and roles
between municipalities and vendors in a variety of ways. Public-private partnerships offer an
alternative to an entirely government-owned and operated municipal network. The city of
Westminster, Maryland has a very successful public-private partnership with private provider Ting.
Further reading:
19
Westminster and Ting: The How and the Why (ILSR)
Successful Strategies for Broadband Public-Private Partnerships (ILSR)
Navigating Public-Private Partnerships (Next Century Cities)
Library on Broadband Public-Private-Partnerships (CLIC)
Institutional networks
An institutional network is a network that connects municipal buildings such as the town hall, city
office buildings, schools, public safety, and libraries. They do not serve homes or private businesses.
However, institutional networks can serve as the valuable fiber backbone to support a wider build -out
in the community. Montgomery County, Maryland has an institutional network that has brought
tremendous cost savings and higher-quality telecommunications to public facilities.
Further reading:
Institutional Networks Resources (ILSR)
Electric co-ops
Rural electric cooperatives brought electricity to communities and created a template later modified
to ensure universal telephone service. Now, many of these organizations are expanding to deliver
higher-quality internet access to their rural regions than is available in major metro regions.
Further Reading:
Cooperatives Connect America (ILSR)
Co-op case studies library (NRECA)
Working with incumbent providers
Many communities have successfully partnered with incumbent providers, whether large national
companies or smaller, local ISPs. Smaller incumbents, especially telephone cooperatives, tend to be
especially receptive to partnerships with local communities.
Explore connectivity options checklist
❏ Consider your community’s priorities when it comes to ownership and risk. What aspects of a
network do you prefer to keep in-house, and what aspects do you prefer to outsource?
Explore Financing Options
There is no single best way to finance your broadband network, and each community should work out
what model will be the best fit for their unique needs. That said, it is very important to think about
20
financing early in the process so that you can accurately design the project and have informed
conversations with decision makers, such as city finance managers or Chief Financial Officers (CFOs).
A major mistake many communities make is not considering financing options and not engaging the
city Finance Director or CFO early on in the process. Finance Directors are often the most risk -averse
people within a city government, and for the most part, that’s a good thing!
There are more than 500 publicly owned networks successfully serving local communities and the
vast majority of municipal networks have not used taxpayer dollars.
Financing models
There are many financing options to consider:
● Public municipal bond offering: A local government or utility issues revenue bonds that are
secured by the revenue source from the broadband buildout. Note that these bonds do not
need to be sold in traditional $5000 denominations. These bonds are sold to investors,
including local residents. Examples include Fort Collins and Longmont, Colorado.
● Private municipal bond offering: A local government or utility issues revenue bonds, or
other debt instruments, that are sold privately, often to high net worth in dividuals or
institutions, and would not be available for purchase by local investors. Ammon, Idaho is an
example.
● Direct loan/private loan (debt financing): A good example of this is when a bank provides a
short-term loan to get the network off the ground. A loan like this could cover initial
construction costs and then the community could find another financing solut ion if needed to
continue. Examples include Downeast Economist Development, Maine and Reedsburg,
Wisconsin.
● Internal loans: A department within the local government loans another department the
necessary capital for building the network. Many states regulate the minimum interest rate
and requirements for such a loan. Chattanooga, Tennessee is an example.
● Private equity financing: A third party investor provides the startup capital and then owns
the network for an agreed-upon period of time before giving the community a buy-back
option. Examples include Monmouth, Independence and Dallas, Oregon.
● Avoided costs: A local government redirects existing funds used to lease connections from an
existing provider to build and operate its own network, often resulting in faster connections at
lower prices. If payback is longer than one year, bonds may be issued and repaid with the
budget that had been used to lease lines. This approach is most common with smaller
networks built incrementally, not citywide projects. Examples include Santa Monica,
California and Ammon's LID 1.
21
Neighborly is a mission-driven startup connecting communities with the capital they need for
impactful public projects. They have helped communities finance a wide range of public
infrastructure. Learn more about how they support broadband projects on their site.
Note that these financing options can be mixed-and-matched, and combined with state and federal
grants, too. Many federal programs support the deployment of broadband through grants, loans, or
both. The majority of these programs are housed within the Fede ral Communications Commission
and the Department of Agriculture.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
The FCC houses the federal Universal Service Fund (USF). USF supports four programs, all
administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC):
● Lifeline. This program provides monthly discounts for voice and broadband services to low -
income consumers. USAC is in the process of rolling out a National Eligibility Verifier, an online
centralized system that determines subscriber eligibility.
● High-Cost. This program, also known as the Connect America Fund (CAF), allows eligible
carriers who provide service in rural, insular, and high -cost areas to recover some costs.
● E-Rate. This program provides discounts to schools and libraries for telecommunications and
information services, internal connections, managed internal broadband services and basic
maintenance of connections. Discounts for services range from 20 to 90 percent based on the
local poverty rate.
● Rural Health Care. This program supports three initiatives: the Healthcare Connect Fund, the
Rural Health Care Telecommunications Program, and the Rural Health Care Pilot Program. All
three provide discounts for eligible health care providers to access telecommunications and
information services. This program and E-Rate are both notable in part because connections
to anchor institutions can often provide a backbone for building out to the rest of a
community.
Department of Agriculture (USDA)
USDA and its Rural Utilities Service (RUS) coordinate several grant and loan programs that work to
help build out broadband in rural America. Most USDA progra ms are available to state and local
governments, tribal communities, non-profits, for-profit businesses, cooperatives, and consortia:
● Community Connect Grants. This program helps fund broadband deployment in rural
communities where it’s not economically feasible for private providers to build out. State a nd
local governments, tribal communities, non-profits, and for-profit corporations in
communities that lack 10/1 Mbps service are all eligible.
● Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grants. This program awards grants to entities that
provide education or health care through telecommunications, including state and local
governments, tribal communities, non-profits, for-profit businesses, and consortia.
22
● Rural Broadband Access Loan and Guarantee. This program provides loans and loan
guarantees to help pay for the construction, improvement, or acquisition of facilities and
equipment needed to provide broadband in areas that are underserved.
● Telecommunications Infrastructure Loans and Guarantees. This program provides
financing through loans for the construction, maintenance, improvement, and expansion of
phone and broadband services in communities with a population of 5,000 or less.
● E-Connectivity Pilot Program . USDA is currently developing the e-Connectivity Pilot
Program, which will, upon implementation, support rural broadband deployment.
USDA has a tool to identify the field representative that covers your area. The representatives can help
you navigate the agency’s offerings, determine your eligibility for participation, and more. It can be
helpful to ask about reporting requirements and then to ensure that your team has the internal
capacity to manage potential grants.
Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)
The CRA requires banks to invest in low - and moderate-income neighborhoods in the surrounding
community. Several communities have leveraged the CRA to support broadband expansion as a form
of community development. Examples include cooperative RS Fiber in rural Minnesota; Palmer
Wireless in Foley, Minnesota; GreatWave Communications in Ashtabula County, Ohio; and Uniti Fiber
in Monroe County, Alabama.
Special investment districts and Opportunity Zones
Communities may consider providing incentives such as tax cuts in specif ic districts in order to
incentivize investment in targeted neighborhoods. The city of Ammon, Idaho created an innovative
Local Improvement District as a method of financing their fiber infrastructure. The city council created
a district from five subdivisions where residents could opt in or out of participation in the new fiber -to-
the-home network. Improvement bonds are sold to those who choose to opt in, funding the
construction of the network. The bonds are then paid for by an assessment on each of the properties
that benefit from the network - the households that chose to opt in.
Recently developed federal Opportunity Zones can also encourage investment in low income
communities through preferential tax treatment. For example, the city of Erie, Pennsylvania is
planning to first offer their upcoming public Wi-Fi program within federal Opportunity Zones because
of the high demand and tax incentives.
State programs
In addition to federal programs, many states have their own set of programs to promote broadband
access and adoption.
23
Further Reading
How public finance can make universal internet access a reality (Neighborly)
How Municipal Networks are Financed (ILSR)
Universal Service Support Mechanisms (FCC)
Broadband programs (USDA)
USDA’s Rural Broadband Boost -- With More to Come (Benton)
How CRA Can Close the Digital Divide: Banking the Unbanked (EVERFI)
Closing the Digital Divide: A Framework for Meeting CRA Obligations (Federal Reserve Bank of
Dallas)
Expanding Internet Access: Bank Financing for Rural Broadband Initiatives (Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency)
Ammon’s Local Improvement District Gets City Council Blessing (ILSR)
Opportunity Zones Frequently Asked Questions (IRS)
Explore financing options checklist
❏ Bring your community’s Finance Director or CFO into a project as early as possible
❏ Explore available financing mechanisms early in a project’s life
❏ Gauge your community members’ appetite for public investment
❏ Determine if anchor institutions in your community are already receiving grant s or loans from
federal broadband programs
❏ Determine your community’s and anchor institutions’ eligibility for existing federal and state
programs
Be a Clear Collaborator
In order to promote investment in your community, it’s necessary to be a deliberate, open
collaborator with the private sector and other stakeholders. Partnerships in any form require
compromise and communication, and are often most beneficial to involved parties when the time is
taken to discuss goals, opportunities, and priorities.
Consider your community’s priorities
Thinking through your municipality’s priorities prior to meeting with a potential partner can help
ensure you end up with an agreement that reflects community needs and desires. It’s important to
have a good handle on what aspects of a project you want firmly in your wheelhouse, and which
you’re comfortable with or enthusiastic to outsource. Various partnership models entail different
levels of risk and reward for a community, and local governments should be prepared to assess their
own risk tolerance before creating a partnership.
24
For example, the city of Westminster, Maryland knew that while they needed improved internet access
for residents, they weren’t up for taking on the role of a municipal broadband provider. On the other
hand, they did want to make sure that any infrastructure that was investe d in would be publicly
owned. The city ended up finding its perfect partner in private company Ting, and developed a plan
together that suited both parties’ strengths and priorities.
Designate a point person
It is often helpful to appoint one municipal employee to act specifically as a point person between the
community and its partners. This can streamline information sharing and help eliminate crossed wires
between various contacts and the siloing of departments. Implementing this practice early on, duri ng
the RFP stage, shows investors that your municipality is easy to work with and would be an effective
partner.
In Kansas City, Missouri, Assistant City Manager Rick Usher served as the main point of contact for
Google Fiber. He wrote about the importan ce of communication and collaboration between the city
and its partner in a piece for Government Technology:
“The most important service we are providing Google Fiber is the bi -weekly technical team
meetings where city staff and Google Fiber’s design and construction teams review upcoming
design challenges in the project, resolve construction issues in the field, identify opportunities
for sharing resources and team up on projects to expedite installation of conduit for the
current and future use of both parties.”
It can be helpful to prioritize bringing on a point person throughout the negotiation process of a new
partnership. In a recent agreement between Saratoga Springs, N.Y. and SiFi Networks, SiFi agreed to
contribute $45,000 to the city annually in order for a Department of Public Works employee to serve as
the contact person between the city and the company.
Know your resources
Research who at the state level - and what other departments within your municipality - might be
working on similar issues. Being aware of synergies and complementary efforts before a project gets
started can enhance work and minimize redundancy.
Further reading:
Hiring Guide: The Anatomy of a Community Broadband Manager (Next Century Cities)
Westminster and Ting Go Together Like Milk and Cookies (Next Century Cities)
Lessons from the Kansas City Google Fiber Deployment (GovTech)
For Wireless Broadband, Raleigh Finds Common Ground Through Relationships (NLC)
25
Be a clear collaborator checklist
❏ Establish your community’s priorities in a partnership. On what are you willing to
compromise? What is non-negotiable?
❏ Create a system for smooth communication; selecting a one person contact within city hall
can make the process simpler for the partner an d therefore less likely to create confusion
❏ Research similar or complementary initiatives within other municipal departments or at the
state level
Measure Success
As with any project, it’s important to define measurements of success. While “success” will vary
depending on the community and the type of project, there are a few places to start:
● Take rates. How many households and businesses have gotten online?
● Diversity of institutions on the network. Are the benefits of connectivity reaching all corners
of your community?
● Financial stability. Is the network’s business model sustainable based on take rates and
returns on investment? This calculation will take different variables into consideration based
on the type of project. For example, a municipal network breaking even can be considered a
net positive, because the public investment will have brought additional tangible and
intangible benefits to the community.
● New businesses. Have new companies chosen to set up shop in your community? Are existing
businesses taking advantage of new opportunities?
● Mutually beneficial partnerships. Have partnerships been formed with stakeholders that
maximize benefits and mitigate risk for all parties?
● Engaged community. Is the community involved in and supportive of the project? Does the
project work to serve true community needs?
Manage expectations
Acknowledge from the onset that the project itself will likely change significantly throughout its
course, and be sure to adjust expectations accordingly.
Maintain communication
Maintaining open communication with stakeholders and the public throughout the course of the
project is key to its success.
Measure success checklist
26
❏ Hold a community listening session to receive feedback about the project and explore ways in
which it could improve
❏ Maintain a communications strategy that keeps the public informed through all stages of the
project
Next Century Communities Checklist
Establish leadership
❏ Understand how broadband access would impact your community
❏ Talk with your local elected leadership about the importance of investing in broadband access
Build a community movement
❏ Use the convening power of the city, town, or county to bring together stakeholder groups for
conversation, information sharing, and brainstorming
❏ Consider the anchor institutions, community groups, and local businesses that could help
involve residents in a discussion about broadband
❏ Identify individuals who are trusted members of their community (faith -based leaders,
activists, nonprofit staff, etc). Seek their advice and keep them well informed of the process
and progress.
❏ Brainstorm methods of communication that make sense for your municipality and your
community (for example: an email newsletter, Facebook page, mailings, etc)
❏ Create a communications plan that is consistent, transparent, and inclusive
Evaluate the current circumstance
❏ Map all municipally-owned fiber, conduit, and towers and create a simple system to allow you
to share with relevant parties
❏ Develop policies and a contract template to simplify leasing these assets
❏ Ascertain the level of service offered by current service providers. Is it sufficient to meet the
needs of businesses, anchor institutions, and residents? Are residents able to afford the cost of
the existing service?
❏ Evaluate if there are private assets that could be leveraged to support better service to
residents
Establish policies and procedures to support investment
❏ Consider your municipality’s priorities when it comes to small cell design
❏ Consider municipal districts in which you might want specified designs, such as historic,
oceanfront, or theater districts
❏ Evaluate your municipality’s structural assets
❏ Identify or create a system for mapping those assets throughout the community (see asset
mapping)
Prioritize digital inclusion
❏ Consider who in your community is unconnected and why
27
❏ Make a list of organizations and anchor institutions that work with unconnected populations.
How might they be able to help?
❏ Convene a group of leaders - community members, business, faith based, school, library,
nonprofit, housing authority, and other interested parties - to brainstorm collaborative
solutions
❏ Create a digital inclusion master plan that includes action steps and goals
❏ Learn about the options for low-cost access in your community
❏ Work with trusted anchor institutions, advocacy groups, and nonprofits to alert low -income
residents about options for low -cost access
Advocate for local control
❏ Join Next Century Cities
❏ Join the Coalition for Local Internet Choice
❏ Connect with your state’s municipal league
❏ Research existing or pending laws and policies that could limit your local control:
❏ State restrictions on small cell deployments (SmartWorks Partners)
❏ State restrictions on community broadband services (Baller Stokes & Lide PC)
❏ Community Broadband Networks’ map of state restrictions on community broadband
networks
❏ State-by-state guide to pole attachments (Next Century Cities)
Explore connectivity options
❏ Consider your community’s priorities when it comes to ownership and risk. What aspects of a
network do you prefer to keep in-house, and what aspects do you prefer to outsource?
Explore financing options
❏ Bring your community’s Finance Director or CFO into a project as early as possible
❏ Explore available financing mechanisms early in a project’s life
❏ Gauge your community members’ appetite for public investment
❏ Determine if anchor institutions in your community are already receiving grants or loans from
federal broadband programs
❏ Determine your community’s and anchor institutions’ eligibility for existing federal and state
programs
Be a clear collaborator
❏ Establish your community’s priorities in a partnership. On what are you willing to
compromise? What is non-negotiable?
❏ Create a system for smooth communication; selecting a one person contact within city hall
can make the process simpler for the partner and therefore less likely to create confusion
❏ Research similar or complementary initiatives within other municipal departments or at the
state level
Measure success
28
❏ Hold a community listening session to receive feedback about the project and explore ways in
which it could improve
❏ Maintain a communications strategy that keeps the public informed through all stages of the
project