9. Governors Broadband taskforce 2017 annual report
Annual
Report
January 3, 2018
2017
This document contains the Task Force’s
2017 Annual Report with recommendations
for policy makers and stakeholders to
consider in the 2018 legislative session.
Governor’s Task
Force on Broadband
Table of Contents
Letter from the Chair of the Task Force 1
Members of the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband 2
Executive Summary 3
Introduction 4
Overview of Governor’s Task Force on Broadband 6
Overview of Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program 6
Overview of Office of Broadband Development 19
Conclusion 21
Appendix A: Office of Broadband Development Statutory Charges 23
Appendix B: Letter from Coalition Representing Many Rural Interests 25
Appendix C: 2017 Meeting Details, Presentations and Other Correspondence 28
1
Dear Governor Dayton,
Thanks to your leadership and that of the Legislature, the issue of statewide broadband availability has
received growing attention over the years since you established your first Task Force on Broadband in
2011. And because of your leadership and the Legislature’s commitment to this issue, we can report
progress is being made toward connecting every Minnesotan with broadband. Today, more than 88
percent of Minnesota households have access to broadband at the state speed goals of 25 megabits per
second (Mbps) download and 3 Mbps upload.
This Task Force on Broadband has presented you and the Legislature with a report of our work and
policy recommendations to consider. Although this report is our final report to you and this Legislature
that can produce measurable bipartisan legislative action on the critical issue of broadband, the content
and many of the recommendations contained in past reports are just as relevant and important now as
they were when the reports were written.
Of paramount importance, and a focus of this year’s report, is Minnesota’s Border-to-Border Broadband
Development Grant Program and the Office of Broadband Development. The grant program, in its first
four years, leveraged $110 million in matching local and/or private investments, making service
available to more than 34,000 households and 5,200 businesses across Minnesota.
With 26.55 percent of households in rural Minnesota lacking access to broadband at the state speed
goals of 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload, demand for this program continues to outpace its
funding. The Office of Broadband Development received 70 grant applications, with requests totaling
more than $50 million, all competing for $20 million in funding allocated to the grant program in 2017.
Administration of the grant program would not be possible without the Office of Broadband
Development. The Office of Broadband Development does not only administer the grant program, it is
also responsible for carrying out 27 statutory obligations, including those related to measuring and
mapping broadband, broadband adoption and use, and providing support to this Task Force.
Due to the importance of the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program and the Office
of Broadband Development, this report focuses on those two aspects—and provides recommendations
related to them. On-going, biennial funding of the grant program is critical for helping communities and
broadband providers make the long-term, strategic investments necessary to connect more
Minnesotans with broadband. Likewise, fully funding the Office of Broadband Development is critical to
the administration of the grant program, and to carrying out the office’s statutory obligations.
Expanding access to broadband has not and should not become a partisan issue; all Minnesotans,
regardless of political affiliation, need access to broadband. We are confident that with broad,
bipartisan leadership from you and the Legislature, Minnesota will continue to make great strides in
expanding broadband access throughout the state.
Sincerely,
Margaret Anderson Kelliher
Chair, Governor’s Task Force on Broadband
2
Members of the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband
Margaret Anderson Kelliher (Chair), Minnesota High Tech Association
Hannah Buckland, Leech Lake Tribal College
Denise Dittrich, Minnesota School Boards Association
Kevin Hansen, Thomson Reuters
Shannon Heim, Moss & Barnett
Maureen Ideker, Essentia Health
Bernadine Joselyn, Blandin Foundation
Steve Lewsader, Communications Workers of America
Neela Mollgaard, Red Wing Ignite
Donald Niles, City of Wadena
Jody Reisch, Rock County
Daniel Richter, MVTV Wireless
Andrew Schriner, CenturyLink
Richard Sjoberg, Sjoberg’s Cable
Paul Weirtz, AT&T
3
Executive Summary
In 2011, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton signed Executive Order 11-27 (Executive Order 11-27)
establishing his first Governor’s Task Force on Broadband. The current Task Force is the second under
Governor Dayton, and was appointed in 2015. Fifteen members, representing a variety of backgrounds,
serve on the Task Force which is charged with developing, implementing, and promoting state policy,
planning and initiatives to achieve state broadband needs and goals.
This report highlights the work of the Task Force in 2017 and makes policy recommendations to the
Governor and Legislature. This report is also the last report to Governor Dayton and this Legislature.
Over the last six years, the Task Force on Broadband has studied issues related to broadband
affordability, adoption, and accessibility, and has made recommendations to remove barriers to
broadband deployment and modernize Minnesota’s telecommunications regulatory framework.
The Task Force has also consistently recommended funding Minnesota’s Border-to-Border Broadband
Development Grant Program. This program has leveraged state and private investment to provide
broadband service to thousands of households and businesses across Minnesota, connecting unserved
and underserved areas of the state.
Following the recommendations of the 2015 Task Force on Broadband, the Legislature updated
Minnesota’s broadband speed goals in 2016. The updated speed goals, which reflect the growing
demand for broadband Internet and the Federal Communication Commission’s updated definition of
broadband, are found in Minn. Stat. §237.012:
It is a state goal that (1) no later than 2022, all Minnesota businesses and homes have access to
high-speed broadband that provides minimum download speeds of at least 25 megabits per
second and minimum upload speeds of at least three megabits per second; and (2) no later than
2026, all Minnesota businesses and homes have access to at least one provider of broadband
with download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and upload speeds of at least 20
megabits per second.
As reported by Connected Nation in October 2017, 88.11 percent of Minnesota households have
wireline broadband access available at a speed of at least 25 megabits per second (Mbps) download and
3 Mbps upload (25 Mbps/3 Mbps), while 73.45 percent of rural Minnesota households have a wired
broadband connection that meets these speeds. Nearly 70 percent (70.04 percent) of Minnesota
households have wireline speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps. In rural areas of Minnesota, 52.88 percent of
households have access to these speeds. As Minnesota strives to meet its updated broadband speed
goals, much work remains.
This report contains two recommendations to the Governor and the Legislature:
Provide $71.48 million in on-going biennial funding for the Border-to-Border Broadband
Development Grant Program, until the state achieves its broadband speed goals.1
Provide the Office of Broadband Development with $500,000 on-going biennial funding and
maintain the existing partnership with the Minnesota Department of Commerce, until the state
achieves its broadband speed goals.2
1 More details on this recommendation can be found on pages 17 and 18.
4
Continued, on-going funding for the grant program is important because it helps mitigate the cost and
risk for providers and the communities with which they may partner. This, in turn, provides
communities and broadband providers with certainty, so they can make the informed, strategic
investments necessary to expand broadband into the most difficult to reach areas of Minnesota.
Providing the grant program with $71.48 million in on-going, biennial (or $35,741,000 in annual) funding
over the next four years will provide broadband Internet at speeds of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps to the 252,000
households that currently lack such service—and help Minnesota achieve its statutory broadband speed
goal of connecting all Minnesotans with broadband Internet at speeds of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps by 2022.
In addition to administering the state’s Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program, the
Office of Broadband Development is tasked with a number of other responsibilities, each of which plays
an important role in helping the state achieve its broadband speed goals. That’s why funding the Office
of Broadband Development, on an on-going basis, and maintaining its partnership with the Department
of Commerce is so important.
The report begins with a brief historical overview of the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband, followed
by discussion of the state’s Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program and the Office of
Broadband Development.
Introduction
Throughout the course of 2017, the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband heard from a number of
stakeholders, experts and those impacted by broadband or the lack thereof. Broadband is more
important today than ever before, and will play an increasingly important role in the lives of
Minnesotans in the years and decades to come. With the advent of telemedicine, the promise of
driverless and connected vehicles, and the future of next-generation wireless technology, devices
that depend on a broadband connection are changing the ways we interact with each other and our
(built) environment.
Transportation systems, emergency communications systems and emergency response systems, for
example, are rapidly becoming more dependent upon telecommunications infrastructure. Continued
funding to deploy broadband infrastructure is key to assuring the viability of these systems as a matter
of public safety and to drive economic growth and stability.
New technologies in the area of transportation are swiftly emerging with numerous tests and trial
deployments occurring in the United States. These new technologies include various forms of vehicle-
to-vehicle communications, self-driving autonomous vehicles, and smart highway systems to control
traffic and directly interact with vehicles.3 “[N]early every major car manufacturer has set a deadline of
producing autonomous cars by 2021, with China’s Baidu aiming for 2019 and Tesla aiming for the end of
2017.”4
2 More details on this recommendation can be found on page 21.
3 See “Federal Automated Vehicles Policy – Accelerating the Next Revolution in Roadway Safety,” at 9-10, National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (Sept. 2016) (found at:
http://www.safetyresearch.net/Library/Federal_Automated_Vehicles_Policy.pdf).
4 “Autonomous Vehicles – A Policy Preparation Guide,” at 2, National League of Cities Center for City Solutions
(2017) (found at: http://www.nlc.org/sites/default/files/2017-04/NLC%20AV%20Policy%20Prep%20Guide.pdf).
5
Emergency communications and response systems are rapidly evolving to meet the critical needs of
public safety and obtain the advantages of better and more secure technologies. Next Generation
911, for example, will include features such as text to 911; 911 video; vehicle sensor data
transmission to 911; and interoperability of emergency networks. The decision announced on
October 4, 2017 that Minnesota will participate in the FirstNet plan to deliver secure, dedicated
wireless network services to Minnesota’s public safety providers is a positive example of support of
these new technologies.5
Broadband has also become a cornerstone utility in healthcare. Every-day and every-minute functions
in hospitals, clinics, labs and medical provider offices are intricately reliant upon reliable, high speed
broadband. Life-changing examples of broadband’s importance to modern healthcare delivery include:
Ambulances use broadband to send cardiac tracings from the ambulance to the hospital in
advance of arrival;
Stroke patients receive time-critical evaluations in rural emergency rooms from metro sub-
specialists using CT scans sent via broadband;
Electronic medical records are shared instantly with any health care entity;
Patients use broadband to communicate with health care providers;
Telemedicine uses broadband to enable visits to the home;
Broadband allows doctors to more quickly and accurately research symptoms and identify
treatment options; and
Broadband helps connect scarce medical specialty and training providers across the state.
The deployment of broadband technologies continues to exponentially expand in health care as in other
areas. Broadband technologies are being used in combatting the current opioid crisis. Essentia Health
in Duluth, for example, is using broadband to supplement in-person patient visits with remote
teleconference visits with clinical pharmacists in tapering opioid dosing. Telemedicine and remote
prescribing to combat the opioid crisis will continue to expand as a result of the recent declaration of
the opioid crisis as a national emergency.6
Leveraging the benefits of these technologies, however, requires a robust connection to the
Internet. And while many Minnesotans already have a broadband connection, 12.06 percent of
Minnesota households (252,000 households) lack access to broadband at the state’s speed goals of
at least 25 megabits per second (Mbps) download and 3 Mbps upload (25 Mbps/3 Mbps). Without
access to broadband, these households have limited or no access to telemedicine (a service that is
particularly important for residents of rural Minnesota), online curriculum for school or training, or
online job search tools and job applications. Businesses without access to broadband lack a crucial
connection necessary to compete in a global, 21st Century economy.
The benefits of broadband are not new, and have in fact been discussed in previous reports by the
Governor’s Task Force on Broadband. We encourage readers to consult past reports for more
5 “Minnesota to Transform Communications for Public Safety: Governor Dayton Approves Buildout Plan for First
Responder Network,” (Oct. 4, 2017) (found at: www.firstnet.gov/news/minnesota-transform-communications-
public-safety).
6 L. Schmitz Mazur, R. Marcus & M. Jackson, “The Opioid Crisis: Declaring a National Emergency and the Effect on
Remote Prescribing through Telemedicine,” (Oct. 20, 2017) (found at www.ofdigitalinterest.com/2017/10/the -
opioid-crisis-declaring-a-national-emergency-and-the-effect-on-remote-prescribing-through-telemedicine/).
6
details on the associated benefits of broadband.7 The intent here is to highlight Minnesota’s
Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program, along with the recommendations of the
Task Force. Appendix B contains letters from various stakeholders, including a letter from a group
of 24 organizations representing many rural interests that expresses support for on-going funding of
the grant program and the Office of Broadband Development, but raises some concerns, including
with the current challenge process.
Overview of Governor’s Task Force on Broadband
In 2011, Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton signed Executive Order 11-27 (Executive Order 11-27)
establishing his first Governor’s Task Force on Broadband. Fifteen members, representing a variety of
backgrounds, serve on the Task Force which is charged with developing, implementing, and promoting
state policy, planning and initiatives to achieve state broadband needs and goals. This Task Force—
Governor Dayton’s second—was appointed in 2015 and will serve through 2018.
Throughout each year, the Task Force hears presentations from various stakeholders interested in
broadband, tours facilities and organizations that use broadband, and assembles the annual report to
the Legislature and Governor Dayton. In 2013 the Task Force recognized the importance of having an
office to help promote the expansion and adoption of broadband throughout Minnesota, and a
dedicated fund to match private investment in broadband, successfully advocating for the creation of
the Office of Broadband Development and establishment and funding of the Border-to-Border
Broadband Development Grant Program.
These represent two key advocacy successes of the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband. The Task
Force has also helped advocate for funding for Telecommunications Access Equity Aid, E-Rate and
Regional Library Telecommunications Aid, one-to-one devices in the classroom, the establishment of a
cybersecurity legislative commission, along with other policy and funding recommendations. These
recommendations, and more, are contained in past reports.
This report is our final report to this Legislature and Governor that can produce measurable bipartisan
legislative action on the critical issue of broadband.
Overview of Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program
The Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program, created by the Legislature in 2014 and
initially funded at $20 million, provides funding to build the state’s broadband infrastructure and
promote broadband access in unserved and underserved areas of the state, where “unserved” and
“underserved” are defined in Minn. Stat. §116J.394(h) and Minn. Stat. §116J.394(i), respectively:
(h) "Underserved areas" means areas of Minnesota in which households or businesses lack
access to wire-line broadband service at speeds of at least 100 megabits per second download
and at least 20 megabits per second upload.
(i) "Unserved areas" means areas of Minnesota in which households or businesses lack access to
wire-line broadband service, as defined in section 116J.39.
7 For past reports from the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband, visit https://mn.gov/deed/programs-
services/broadband/task-force/.
7
The grants provide up to a dollar-for-dollar match on funds, not to exceed $5 million for any one project,
and are distributed to qualified entities, including a(n)8:
1. Incorporated business or a partnership;
2. Political subdivision;
3. Indian tribe;
4. Minnesota nonprofit organization organized under chapter 317A;
5. Minnesota cooperative association organized under chapter 308A or 308B; and
6. Minnesota limited liability corporation organized under chapter 322B for the purpose of
expanding broadband access.
The Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program has now been funded for four
consecutive years, with grants distributed during 2015 (two rounds), 2016, and 2017. The Office of
Broadband Development reviewed 70 grant applications, with requests totaling more than $50 million,
all competing for $20 million in funding allocated to the grant program in 2017. In November 2017, the
office announced $26.47 million in funding for 39 projects across the state (approximately $6 million of
which was carried over from the previous grant years), which will bring broadband service to 9,973
households, 2,169 businesses and 60 community institutions across Minnesota.
In addition to updating the state’s broadband speed goals and the state’s definitions of unserved and
underserved with respect to broadband availability, the 2016 Legislature added a formal challenge
process to the grant program.9 This process allows an existing broadband provider to challenge an
application if the proposed broadband deployment overlaps on the existing provider’s territory or if the
proposed area is one that an existing provider plans to build to within 18 months of the award
announcement.
The State Speed Goals and the Grant Program
In 2016, the Legislature updated Minnesota’s broadband speed goals (Minn. Stat. §237.012):
It is a state goal that (1) no later than 2022, all Minnesota businesses and homes have access to
high-speed broadband that provides minimum download speeds of at least 25 megabits per
second and minimum upload speeds of at least three megabits per second; and (2) no later than
2026, all Minnesota businesses and homes have access to at least one provider of broadband
with download speeds of at least 100 megabits per second and upload speeds of at least 20
megabits per second.
The Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program provides matching funds to an eligible
applicant that agrees to provide broadband service to unserved areas (i.e. areas that do not have access
to wireline speeds of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps) and underserved areas (i.e. areas that do not have access to
wireline speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps) of the state. The grant program is helping connect unserved and
underserved areas of the state, but more work remains to help close the broadband availability gap.
8 In some cases, applicants commit more than 50 percent of the total cost of the project to further leverage state
funds.
9 The Office of Broadband Development provides a summary of the challenge process and procedures:
https://mn.gov/deed/assets/grant-challenge-process-2016_tcm1045-257998.pdf.
8
Historical Estimate of Wireline Broadband Service Availability in the State of Minnesota
Date 10 Mbps/5 Mbps 25Mbps/3 Mbps 100 Mbps/20 Mbps 1 Gbps/1 Gbps
February 2015 86.46% 85.83% 39.14% 4.33%
July 2016 87.54% 87.72% 68.45% 14.00%
October 2016 87.38% 87.53% 68.53% 14.28%
April 2017 87.02% 87.94% 69.86% 16.93%
October 2017 87.24% 88.11% 70.07% 17.10%
Statewide, 88.11 percent of households have access to broadband at speeds of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps, while
70.07 percent of households have access to broadband at speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps, as reported by
Connected Nation in October 2017. In other words, 11.89 percent of Minnesota households are
unserved (down from 12.64 percent in October 2016), while 29.93 percent of Minnesota households are
underserved (down from 30.14 percent in October 2016).
Historical Estimate of Wireline Broadband Service Availability in Rural Areas of Minnesota
Date 10 Mbps/5 Mbps 25Mbps/3 Mbps 100 Mbps/20 Mbps 1 Gbps/1 Gbps
February 2015 69.55% 68.08% 40.68% 5.81%
July 2016 71.86% 72.24% 48.93% 11.39%
October 2016 71.69% 72.03% 49.33% 12.03%
April 2017 70.99% 73.07% 52.46% 14.24%
October 2017 71.43% 73.45% 52.88% 14.62%
Examining households in rural Minnesota yields a different picture.10 A smaller share of households in
rural Minnesota—73.45 percent—have access to broadband at speeds of 25 Mbps/3Mbps, while 52.88
percent of rural Minnesota households have access to broadband at speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps, as
reported by Connected Nation in October 2017. Within Minnesota, 26.55 percent of rural households
are unserved (down from 27.97 percent in October 2016), and 47.12 percent of rural households are
underserved (down from 50.67 percent in October 2016).
Despite the challenges that continue to face Minnesota, particularly rural Minnesota, the state
continues to make progress toward connecting households with broadband. Since 2014, and including
the $20 million allocated in 2017, the grant program has received $85 million in funding, which has
leveraged $110 million in matching local and/or private investments, making service available to nearly
34,000 households and 5,200 businesses, along with 300 community institutions.
10 The Office of Broadband Development uses the National Telecommunications & Information A dministration’s
definition of “rural area.” A rural area is “any area, as confirmed by the latest decennial census of the Bureau of
the Census, which is not located within: (i) a city, town, or incorporated area that has a population of greater than
20,000 inhabitants; or (ii) an urbanized area contiguous and adjacent to a city or town that has a population of
greater than 50,000 inhabitants. For purposes of the definition of rural area, an urbanized area means a densely
populated territory as defined in the latest decennial census of the U.S. Census Bureau.” (Federal Register, Vol. 74,
No. 129, Wednesday, July 8, 2009, page 5,
https://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/publications/fr_broadbandmappingnofa_090708.pdf ).
9
The maps on the following four pages illustrate11:
1. Which areas of the state are unserved, underserved and served;
2. The percentage of households served by wireline broadband service by county at speeds of 25
Mbps/3 Mbps;
3. The percentage of households served by wireline broadband service by county at speeds of 100
Mbps/20 Mbps;
4. The percentage of households served by wireline broadband service by township at speeds of
25 Mbps/3 Mbps; and
5. The percentage of households served by wireline broadband service by school district at speeds
of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps.
11 Additional maps can be found at: https://mn.gov/deed/programs-services/broadband/maps/general-maps.jsp.
10
11
12
13
14
15
Impact of the Grant Program on Minnesota’s Communities
The Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program is the state’s primary mechanism to help
connect unserved or underserved areas of the state with broadband. These areas of the state tend to
be more rural (and less densely populated) than other areas, while also having terrain that is more
difficult to navigate. This, in turn, drives up the cost for broadband providers to connect households in
these areas.
Minnesota’s Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program helps mitigate the cost and risk
for providers and the communities with which they may partner. That is why continued, on-going
funding for the grant program is so important—to provide communities and broadband providers with
certainty, so they can make the informed, strategic investments necessary to expand broadband into
the most difficult to reach areas of Minnesota.
Communities that partner with providers, and who have received grants through the Border-to-Border
Broadband Development Grant Program, largely appreciate the program and recognize that without it,
they might not have wireline broadband available. From Alvarado to Westbrook, stories of the
importance of a broadband connection echo across the state.
In Aitkin County, Mille Lacs Energy Cooperative (MLEC) partnered with Consolidated Telephone
Company (CTC) to bring fiber optic service to a significantly underserved area in Aitkin County. MLEC
expects that the benefits of providing connectivity will improve the lives of those in the area through
increased access for education, workforce development and lead to increased time seasonal residents
spend in the region, resulting in increased spending locally on goods and services.
The City of Westbrook (Cottonwood County), population 740, is the smallest city in Minnesota with a full
hospital. To help their hospital get the faster speeds and better reliability it needed to stay competitive,
the city partnered with Woodstock Communications to build a fiber-to-the-home network that will serve
the entire community.
In Itasca County, Harris Township partnered with cable provider Mediacom to bring broadband
infrastructure to unserved households, businesses and anchor institutions. Now, students in the served
area will be able to do their online homework with iPads issued by their local schools. Without internet
access at home, students in the unserved households were falling behind.
BEAMCO and Wikstrom Telephone partnered to build a Fiber-to-the-Home network for farms and
businesses in rural Alvarado (Marshall County). This project will connect BEAMCO’s rural engineering
and manufacturing facility and many nearby farmers and residents. The new network will provide the
necessary infrastructure to keep the BEAMCO facility in operation and address the education and
business needs of area farms, including, for example, process monitoring of agricultural operations.
Other highlights from the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program include the
following projects.12
12 For a more complete list of projects funded by the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program
visit: https://mn.gov/deed/programs-services/broadband/grant-program/.
16
Highlights of 2017 Projects Funded by the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program
Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa - Brookston Project
This last mile project will serve up to 108 unserved homes, 8 unserved businesses, and 1 community anchor
institution in a project area in the Fond du Lac Indian Reservation in northeastern Minnesota. This area also
includes the town of Brookston. A funding partnership with the State of Minnesota and the Fond du Lac Band
of Lake Superior Chippewa will improve broadband service levels up to 1 Gbps down and 1 Gbps up, exceeding
the 2026 state speed goals. It will also add needed additional network redundancy for the Fond du Lac
Reservation. The fiber-to-the-home network will open up many opportunities such as telemedicine, Home
Health Care, and improved and secure electronic health records; and online education and improved business
development and more. The total eligible project cost is $538,052, with a $279,787 local match.
Wikstrom Telephone - Wiktel NW MN Broadband
This project will serve rural sparsely populated areas in Kittson, Marshall, and Roseau counties in far
northwestern Minnesota, passing 300 unserved homes and 31 unserved business locations. In a funding
partnership with the State of Minnesota, Wikstrom will improve broadband service levels to 1 Gbps down and
up, exceeding the 2026 state speed goal, on a fiber optic network, and in some locations will extend the
service from routes built via the 2016 Border to Border State Grant program. The total eligible project cost is
$2,906,189, with a $1,598,404 local match.
CenturyLink - Fish Lake Township FTTH Project
This last mile, fiber-to-the-home project will serve 919 unserved households, 7 unserved businesses, and one
unserved community anchor institution in Fish Lake Township in rural Chisago County. In a funding partnership
leveraging federal (CAF II), state grant and local township funding, CenturyLink will improve broadband service
levels to 1 Gbps down and 1 Gbps up, exceeding the 2026 state speed goal. Consumers will be able to work
from home, have better access to education and healthcare, and businesses will be better able to compete
locally and globally. The total eligible project cost is $4,584,310, with a $2,750,586 local match.
Albany Mutual Telephone Association - Two Rivers Area
This last mile project will extend the existing Albany Fiber-to-the-Home network to serve 121 unserved
households and home-based businesses in an area northeast of Albany in Stearns County. In a funding
partnership with the State of Minnesota, Albany Mutual Telephone Association will improve broadband
service levels to exceed the 2022 state goal of 25 Mbps download and 3 Mbps upload. The all-optical network
will provide more opportunity for the creation of new businesses, educational advances and access to
healthcare services including wearable technology and home monitoring devices. The total eligible project cost
is $1,233,486, with a $616,743 local match.
Mediacom Minnesota LLC - Fountain 2018 Broadband Build
In a funding partnership with the State of Minnesota, Mediacom will leverage its existing hybrid fiber and
coaxial network in the City of Fountain in Fillmore County in southeastern Minnesota, to increase and
extend advanced broadband to 161 unserved households and 20 unserved businesses, exceeding the 2022
state speed goal of 25 Mbps down and 3 Mbps up. The project will unlock opportunities for distance
learning, telemedicine, and telecommuting and other increased business development. The total eligible
project cost is $421,094, with a $218,969 local match.
Winthrop Telephone Company - Cornish Township FTTP Project
This last mile project will serve 58 unserved households and 2 unserved businesses in Cornish Township
located in Sibley County in south central Minnesota. In a funding partnership with the State of Minnesota,
Winthrop Telephone Company, Inc. will improve broadband service levels to 1 Gbps down and 1 Gbps up,
exceeding the 2026 state speed goal. The 60 locations are primarily agricultural-related sites, which given
the size and technical sophistication of these operations, need advanced broadband to remain vital and
competitive. The total eligible project cost is $813,100, with a $447,205 local match.
17
Deployment of broadband in unserved or underserved areas of the state faces significant challenges
without the state’s Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program. The projects noted
above are a sample of projects funded by the state’s grant program. The success of the program is
remarkable; yet, there is still the need for more funding to help deploy broadband to those areas of the
state that are most difficult and expensive to reach.
The Task Force does not, however, recommend funding the grant program with a blank check. Instead,
it recommends on-going biennial funding at $71.48 million per biennia until the state achieves its
broadband speed goals. This is a measured, responsible approach that provides fiscal constraint and
guideposts for the Legislature, while providing providers and communities with the certainty they need
to make advanced, long-term investment plans.
Minnesota’s rural carriers are receiving $85 million per year for the next five years from the second
phase of the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC’s) Connect America (CAF II) fund.13 Available
since 2016, CAF II funding subsidizes the costs of the largest telephone providers, known as price cap
carriers, to deploy broadband in areas that are expensive to serve. In addition to receiving funding via
CAF II, Minnesota’s rural carriers will also be receiving funding from the FCC’s Alternative-Connect
America Cost Model (A-CAM), which subsidizes the costs of the smallest broadband providers, known as
rate-of-return carriers. Minnesota providers will receive $54.3 million per year for the next 10 years as
part of A-CAM.
Based on the most recent data, there are 252,000 unserved households in Minnesota. The average cost
of connecting households in projects financed with funding from the Border-to-Border Broadband Grant
Development Grant Program is $5,527. Using those average costs as a guide, the total cost of
connecting the remaining 252,000 households is $1,392,804,000; the cost to the state, however, via the
Border-to-Border Broadband Grant Development Grant Program is $696 million (50%). There are four
years remaining for the state to achieve its speed goals by 2022, at a cost to the state of $174 million
annually.
This cost is reduced, however, by the FCC’s CAF II and A-CAM funding. Minnesota telecommunications
carriers will be receiving $85 million per year via CAF II and $54.3 million per year via A-CAM. Together,
these programs will help reduce Minnesota’s cost burden by $139.3 million per year. Covering the
remaining cost of connecting all Minnesotans with broadband by 2022 will require an investment by the
state of $34.7 million per year for the next four years. Accounting for the standard 3 percent
administrative costs, the Task Force recommends providing the Border-to-Border Broadband Grant
Development Grant Program with $71.48 million in on-going biennial funding, until the state achieves its
broadband speed goals.
13 The FCC’s CAF II program requires broadband providers to meet a minimum speed standard of 10 Mbps/1 Mbps.
Recommendation
Provide $71.48 million in on-going biennial funding for the Border-to-Border Broadband
Development Grant Program, until the state achieves its broadband speed goals.
18
Minnesota IT Service’s Strategic Plan for Security
The Internet enables the transfer and storage of information, and with it the potential for unauthorized
access of such information. Minnesota businesses and the state’s enterprise system continue to face
cybersecurity threats. Then-Minnesota State Chief Information Officer, Chris Buse, shared with the Task
Force the current state of threats facing information technology systems, and provided an overview of
Minnesota IT Service’s multi-year strategic plan to protect state systems from such threats.
2017 Threats to Systems
Exploits to Internet of Things devices
Cybercrime as a service
Massive denial of service attacks
Increase in cyber espionage
Increase in attacks against elections
More attacks against control systems
Increase in attacks against open source
software
Increase in phishing campaigns
Ransomware
In response to these threats, and to prepare for future threats, Minnesota IT Services developed a multi-
year strategic plan. Below are highlights of that plan.
Minnesota IT Service’s Multi-year Strategic Plan
1. Build secure systems- Improve security of state systems by improving security engineering in
building systems, securing data centers where the systems run, and the networks they run on.
2. Improve Situational Awareness—Develop risk management and training programs to enhance
security awareness.
Calculation of Recommended Funding Level for the Grant Program
252,000 (unserved households)
x $5,527 (average cost of connection)
-------------
$1,392,804,000 (total cost of connecting unserved households)
x 50% (state’s share of total cost)
-------------
$696,402,000 (state’s total cost to connect unserved households)
÷ 4 (number of years remaining to achieve state broadband speed goals)
-------------
$174,100,500 (state’s annual cost to connect unserved households)
− $85,000,000 (annual CAF II funding)
− $54,300,000 (annual A-CAM funding)
-------------
$34,700,000 (state’s remaining annual cost of connecting unserved households)
x 1.03 (accounting for standard 3 percent administrative costs)
-------------
$35,741,000 (annual contribution from grant program to connect unserved households)
x 2 (years in a biennium)
-------------
$71,482,000 (Task Force’s biennial recommendation)
19
3. Minimize Operational Risk—Improve monitoring and vulnerability management methods to
better handle denial of service and other types of attacks. Build and test disaster recovery
plans.
4. Foster strategic relationships—Leverage relationships to gain better threat intelligence and
create a strong talent pipeline.
The deployment of broadband throughout
Minnesota is critical for connecting every
Minnesotan with the educational and economic
opportunities of the 21st Century. Protecting the
personal data of Minnesotans is also critical for
providing access to such opportunities. Without
proper protection and mitigation efforts, access to
personal information can be compromised.
Minnesota IT Service’s strategic plan and
cybersecurity funding requests are aimed at
protecting the personal data of Minnesotans and
mitigating against unauthorized attempts to access
that information.
Overview of Office of Broadband Development
The Office of Broadband Development (OBD), located within the Department of Employment and
Economic Development (DEED), was established during the 2013 Legislative Session.14 OBD plays an
important role in developing Minnesota’s broadband infrastructure, including working with partners on
mapping broadband availability to more effectively direct state investment.15 OBD also assists the
Governor’s Task Force on Broadband, the Governor’s Broadband Subcabinet, and oversees the state’s
Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program. 16
In administering the Border-to-Border grant program, the Office of Broadband Development considers a
number of criteria, as defined in statute, in evaluating and awarding the grants to eligible entities,
including cost, community support, the number of households and community institutions impacted by
the project, and demonstrated need for economic development, among others. 17
In addition to administering the state’s Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program, the
Office of Broadband Development is tasked with a number of other responsibilities. These
responsibilities are assigned in state statute, and include serving as the central broadband planning body
for the state of Minnesota; monitoring broadband development efforts of other states and nations in
areas such as business, education, public safety, and health; driving job creation, promoting innovation,
and expanding markets for Minnesota businesses.
14 Minnesota Session Laws, 2013 regular session, chapter 85 at Article 3, sections 13, 14, and 26.
15 Danna Mackenzie, Executive Director, Office of Broadband Development, received the 2017 Community
Broadband Hero of the Year from the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA).
16 More information about the Office of Broadband Development can be found in its annual report:
https://mn.gov/deed/assets/broadband-dev-report_tcm1045-132774.pdf.
17 Minnesota Session Laws, 2014 regular session, chapter 312 at Article 3, sections 3.
Chris Buse, former Minnesota State CISO,
now deputy legislative auditor for the Office
of the Legislative Auditor’s financial audit
division—"When you look at all of the major
breaches that are in the news today and the
fact that almost everybody's data recently got
hacked with the latest Equifax breach, we're
almost at a point now today where we don't
even need to talk about whether
cybersecurity is a real risk. It's pretty clear
now that we operate in a threat-laden
world."
20
The Office of Broadband Development has 27 statutory obligations, spread across Statute 116J.39 (see
Appendix A for a complete list of obligations). The Office’s responsibilities are broken into eight broad
categories: broadband access, measuring broadband, adoption and use, Broadband Task Force, resource
center/information clearinghouse, outreach and engagement, policy, and planning.
Current Office Activities and Responsibilities18
Broadband Access
B2B grant administration
Community anchor institutions
Deployment facilitation (permitting/ROW, dig once, etc.)
Measuring Broadband
Mapping program
Adoption and Use
Adoption and use survey
Data inclusion efforts
Broadband Task Force
Administrative and logistical support
Resource Center/Information Clearinghouse
Coordination of OBD information resources
Outreach and Engagement
Coordination of outreach and engagement
Policy
State policy development and consultation
Federal policy analysis
Planning
State broadband planning
Local planning, advancement and support
As part of its work to serve the on-going and growing needs of Minnesota’s education systems, OBD (in
coordination with the Governor’s Office) has established a partnership with the nonprofit
EducationSuperHighway (ESH) called the K-12 Connect Forward Initiative. The goals of the partnership
include: compiling better data about K-12 connectivity levels; developing an accurate picture of costs;
using information on costs, provider pricing, and available state and federal subsidies to identify
opportunities to improve connectivity; facilitating ESH’s work with individual school districts towards
achieving the federal standard of at least 100 kbps per student to all schools and meeting bandwidth
demands for the future; working towards ubiquitous Wi-Fi on school campuses; and maximizing the
impact of state and federal funding for school districts.
A Minnesota work group, with representation from various sectors of the K-12 community, meets
monthly to guide the partnership.19 The group helps facilitate outreach between ESH and school
18 Provided by OBD. A complete list of OBD’s statutory obligations is included in Appendix A.
21
districts identified as not fully using federal subsidies. ESH maintains information on its website to
enable school districts and providers to see connectivity information
(www.compareandconnectk12.org/), and that information is linked to OBD’s interactive map. While
Internet access costs have been known to vary widely between districts, the data compiled by ESH
documents and makes transparent that disparity.
The work group, like the Task Force, has for several years supported increasing
Telecommunications/Internet Equity Aid (TEA) to fully fund the gap left after federal E-Rate program
funding is applied. Full funding would address the disparity faced by districts in higher cost areas, as
noted in the article “Inequity in Funding Internet Services in our Schools.”20 Unfortunately, the bills to
increase TEA funding stalled in the 2017 session (see HF881/SF936). A separate effort, with language
developed by the work group with assistance from ESH, intended to increase school district’s ability to
maximize federal funding opportunities by providing a ten percent state match for special construction
charges (see HF2449/SF2237), also failed.
Currently, $500,000 per biennium from the state’s General Fund supports OBD’s operations and
administration, which include: two full-time employees; office space, utilities, computers, advertising,
printing, supplies; expenses for holding meetings of the Governor’s Task Force on Broadband; outreach;
and staff research and development. The Minnesota Department of Commerce provides one full-time
employee, as an analyst and general support to the program. Finally, as specified in statute, up to three
percent of the grant appropriation is available for grant administration, mapping, data acquisition, and
analysis.
Maintaining the volume and quality of work provided by OBD requires sufficient funding from the
Legislature. While OBD has received sufficient funding from one legislative session to the next, the
uncertainty of biennial funding hinders long-term planning and could impair continued successful
implementation of the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program. The success of the
Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program is in large part tied to the success of OBD.
That’s why providing OBD with on-going biennial funding is so important—and that is why we are
including it as a recommendation.
Conclusion
We urge continued funding, on an on-going biennial basis, of Minnesota’s Border-to-Border Broadband
Development Grant Program. The grant program, in its first four years, has leveraged $110 million in
local and/or private investments, making service available to more than 34,000 households and 5,200
19 For more information on the K-12 Connect Forward Initiative and the work group, see
https://mn.gov/deed/programs-services/broadband/connect-forward/.
20 https://www.mnasa.org/cms/lib/MN07001305/Centricity/Domain/152/MASA%20Newsletter%20F17.pdf at
page 10.
Recommendation
Provide the Office of Broadband Development with $500,000 on-going biennial funding and
maintain the existing partnership with the Minnesota Department of Commerce, until the state
achieves its broadband speed goals.
22
businesses across the Minnesota. We know that broadband plays a critical role to help educate our
children, care for our chronically ill and expand access to markets for our businesses.
Limited access to broadband will continue to be a challenge facing many Minnesotans, but the state
continues to make progress toward connecting every Minnesotan with broadband service. Statewide,
88.11 percent of households have access to broadband at speeds of 25 Mbps/3 Mbps. In rural areas of
Minnesota, however, 73.45 percent of households have access to those speeds—that is a difference of
14.66 percentage points. The disparity is even larger when considering the state’s long-term speed goal
of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps by 2026. Here, 70.07 percent of Minnesota households have access to broadband
at speeds of 100 Mbps/20 Mbps, while 52.88 percent of rural Minnesota households have access to
such speeds—a difference of 17.19 percentage points.
Achieving our state broadband speeds goals and reducing the broadband availability gap requires a
commitment from the State Legislature and the Governor to provide sustained funding to the Border-to-
Border Broadband Development Grant Program.
The success of the grant program, however, depends in large part on the Office of Broadband
Development and its ability to effectively administer the program and carry out its other statutory
responsibilities. Without sufficient on-going funding, the Office of Broadband Development will struggle
to achieve those outcomes.
These two areas—the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program and the Office of
Broadband Development—are the focus of the recommendations of this Task Force:
Provide $71.48 million in on-going biennial funding for the Border-to-Border Broadband
Development Grant Program, until the state achieves its broadband speed goals.
Provide the Office of Broadband Development with $500,000 on-going biennial funding and
maintain the existing partnership with the Minnesota Department of Commerce, until the state
achieves its broadband speed goals.
The issues of broadband and funding for the grant program and the Office of Broadband Development
has received various levels of political support or opposition throughout the years. The Task Force has
tried to stay out of those political debates and advocate for policies that most effectively expand access
to broadband throughout Minnesota. This year is no different. Access to broadband is important
regardless of political stripe. That is why we urge continued, bipartisan leadership on helping expand
broadband throughout Minnesota.
23
Appendix A: Office of Broadband Development Statutory Charges
Office of Broadband Development Statutory Charges/KPI Source
All state residents and businesses have access to high-speed broadband that
provides minimum download speeds of 25 megabits per second (Mbps) and
minimum upload speeds of 3 Mbps by 2022; and 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps
upload by 2026. Statute 237.012
The top five states of the United States for broadband speed universally accessible
to residents and businesses Statute 237.012
The top five states for broadband access Statute 237.012
Rank among top 15 when compared to countries globally for broadband adoption Statute 237.012
Encourage, foster, develop, and improve broadband within the state Statute 116J.39
Drive job creation, promote innovation, and expand markets for Minnesota
businesses Statute 116J.39
Serve the on-going and growing needs of Minnesota's education systems, health
care system, public safety system, industries and businesses, governmental
operations, and citizens Statute 116J.39
Improve accessibility for underserved communities and populations Statute 116J.39
Serve as the central broadband planning body for the state of Minnesota Statute 116J.39
Coordinate with state, regional, local, and private entities to develop, to the
maximum extent practicable, a uniform statewide broadband access and usage
policy Statute 116J.39
Develop, recommend, and implement a statewide plan to encourage cost-effective
broadband access, and to make recommendations for increased usage, particularly
in rural and other underserved areas Statute 116J.39
Coordinate efforts, in consultation and cooperation with the commissioner of
commerce, local units of government, and private entities, to meet the state's
broadband goals in section 237.012 Statute 116J.39
Develop, coordinate, and implement the state's broadband infrastructure
development program under section 116J.391 Statute 116J.39
Provide consultation services to local units of government or other project sponsors
in connection with the planning, acquisition, improvement, construction, or
development of any broadband deployment project Statute 116J.39
Encourage public-private partnerships to increase deployment and adoption of
broadband services and applications, including recommending funding options and
possible incentives to encourage investment in broadband expansion Statute 116J.39
Monitor the broadband development efforts of other states and nations in areas
such as business, education, public safety, and health Statute 116J.39
24
Consult with the commissioner of Commerce to monitor broadband-related
activities at the federal level, including regulatory and policy changes and the
potential impact on broadband deployment and sustainability in the state Statute 116J.39
Serve as an information clearinghouse for federal programs providing financial
assistance to institutions located in rural areas seeking to obtain access to high-
speed broadband service, and use this information as an outreach tool to make
institutions located in rural areas that are unserved or underserved with respect to
broadband service aware of the existence of federal assistance Statute 116J.39
Provide logistical and administrative support for the Governor's Broadband Task
Force Statute 116J.39
Provide an annual report Statute 116J.39
Coordinate an on-going collaborative effort of stakeholders to evaluate and address
security, vulnerability, and redundancy issues in order to ensure the reliability of
broadband networks Statute 116J.39
Perform an analysis of current availability and use of broadband, including average
broadband speeds, within the state Statute 116J.39
Analysis of actual speeds and unmet need for schools, libraries, hospitals, and public
safety facilities Statute 116J.39
Analysis of incumbent broadband infrastructure within the state and its ability to
spur economic development Statute 116J.39
Analysis of the degree to which new, additional, or improved broadband
infrastructure would spur economic development in the state Statute 116J.39
Encourage and coordinate "dig once" efforts for the planning, relocation,
installation, or improvement of broadband conduit within the right-of-way in
conjunction with any current or planned construction, including, but not limited to,
trunk highways and bridges Statute 116.J.391
Develop a strategy to facilitate the timely and efficient deployment of broadband
conduit or other broadband facilities on state-owned lands and buildings Statute 116.J.391
The office shall encourage and assist local units of government to adopt and
implement policies similar to those under paragraphs (a) and (b) for construction or
other improvements to county state-aid highways, municipal state-aid roads, and
any other rights-of-way under the local unit of government's jurisdiction, and to
other lands or buildings owned by the local unit of government. Statute 116.J.391
Administer the Border-to-Border Broadband Development Grant Program Statute 116J.395
Contract for the collection of broadband deployment data from providers and the
creation of maps showing the availability of broadband service. Household and
business broadband use surveys. Statute 116.J.396
25
Appendix B: Letter from Coalition Representing Many Rural Interests
26
27
28
Appendix C: 2017 Meeting Details, Presentations and Other Correspondence
January 26, 2017—DEED—James J. Hill Conference Room
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
February 21, 2017—Harold E. Stassen Office Building
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Minnesota Telephone Assistance Plan (TAP) & Federal Lifeline Program Overview
Tracy Smetana and Mike McCarthy from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
March 22, 2017—DEED – James J. Hill Conference Room
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Broadband Needs for Transportation
Frank Douma and Adeel Lari, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota
Emergency Communication Networks
Jackie Mines, Director, Emergency Communication Networks
New Frontiers in Autonomous and Connected Vehicle Policy
Bill Kohler, Dykema
Preparing for Connected and Automated Vehicles in Minnesota
Ray Starr, Assistant State Traffic Engineer; Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology,
MNDOT
April 19, 2017—DEED – James J. Hill Conference Room
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Consolidated Telecommunications Company Presentation
Kristi Westbrock, COO, Consolidated Telecommunications Co.
The Economic Impact of Rural Broadband
Dusty Johnson, Vantage Point Solutions
Cost Modeling Overview
Mike Wilson, CostQuest
Feasibility Studies for Broadband
Mark Mrla, Finley Engineering
May 11, 2017—St. Paul Neighborhood Network
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Community Technology Empowerment Project (CTEP) Handout
Community Technology Empowerment Project (CTEP) Summary
June 28, 2017—Herreid Board Meeting Room – Rock County Courthouse
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Alliance Overview of Rock County Project
29
July 19, 2017—Essentia Health Sandstone-Pine Medical Center
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Telecare Services
Rebecca Sienko, Manager
Success of Telestroke
Sandra Hanson, MD, Stroke Neurologist
Promoting Economic Development in East Central Minnesota
Nancy Hoffman, Chisago County HRA/EDA
Robert Musgrove, Pine County Economic Development
Doyle Jehlsing, Kanabec EDA
Essentia Health Telehealth Update
Maureen Ideker, RN, System Director of Telehealth
The Value of Broadband at Essentia Health
Dennis Smith, System IT Director
Steve Altendorf, Manager Networks
August 16, 2017—Minnesota Senate Office Building –Room 2308
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Bug Tussel Wireless
Steve Schneider, Bug Tussel Wireless
Advantenon Broadband Wireless Internet
Paul Hess, Advantenon
InvisiMax Fixed Wireless ISP
Dave Giles, Invisimax
MVTV Wireless
Tim Johnson, MVTV Wireless
September 28, 2017—Minnesota Senate Office Building –Room 2308
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
Microsoft Airband Initiative
Sid Roberts Microsoft Affordable Access Initiative Team
The 5G Wireless Future: Apps, Devices, Networks, Spectrum
Bret Swanson Entropy Economics
October 12, 2017—Minnesota Senate Office Building –Room 2308
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
MNIT- Securing Minnesota: A Plan to Fill the Gaps
Chris Buse, Former Assistant Commissioner for Information Security and CISO, MNIT
November 2, 2017—Minnesota Senate Office Building –Room 2308
Meeting Agenda
Meeting Minutes
December 7, 2017—Minnesota Senate Office Building –Room 2308
Meeting Agenda
30
31
32
33
34
Chair Margaret Anderson Kelliher
Minnesota Broadband Task Force
Saint Paul, Minnesota
August 16, 2017
Chair Kelliher and Task Force:
Thank you for your interest in our shared vision of ubiquitous broadband access for all Minnesotans.
Minnesota has achieved measurable progress in recent years through private and public investment,
meaningful cross-sector partnership, and, not least, our nation-leading Border-to-Border Broadband
competitive matching grant fund – which in its first three funding rounds has extended the reach of
broadband to over 25,000 homes and businesses, as well as hundreds of community anchor institutions.
Of course, much work remains. We must stay focused on viable solutions to bridging Minnesota’s
broadband access gap – a gap that adversely impacts approximately 20 percent of Greater Minnesota
and the homes, businesses, and community anchors therein.
To this end, I write to offer public comment regarding your August 16 meeting agenda discussion on
non-terrestrial internet service, and in response to isolated but persistent misperceptions about how
Minnesota can meet its current state speed goals to extend basic broadband connectivity to all homes
and businesses by 2022 and world-class broadband access by 2026.
Specifically, I call attention to the shortcomings of non-terrestrial internet service generally and, in
particular, to the inability of satellite-based service to meet Minnesota’s broadband speed goals due
to limitations with bandwidth, latency, weather-induced interruption, cost and data caps, etc.
Although we should welcome investment in expanded internet service and choice, we must not
confuse short-term, make-shift options with sustainable, long-term solutions. Quite simply, Greater
Minnesota residents and businesses deserve no less.
Following dozens of listening sessions across the state involving hundreds of Minnesotans from all walks
of life, input from respected national industry experts, and countless stories from frustrated
Minnesotans looking for more reliable broadband connectivity, this much is clear to me: non-terrestrial
internet service generally and satellite service in particular, while a welcome alternative where no other
choices exist, are not viable long-term solutions for extending the reach of reliable, affordable
broadband service. These alternatives will not reliably and affordably support home-based business,
enable distance learning or telehealth applications, or empower Minnesotans to take full part in 21st
century communication, culture, and commerce.
Please join me and others in pushing back against misperceptions and baseless rhetoric undermining
Minnesota’s commitment to reliable, affordable broadband access and those suggesting that satellite-
based internet service, in particular, is the solution for residents and businesses in Greater Minnesota
lacking access to the level of service they need to compete and thrive.
Best,
Matt Schmit
35
Ms. Kelliher and to whom it may concern,
My name is Tim Larson and I am a resident of rural Staples Minnesota in northern Todd County,
we actually only live 3 miles from town. My wife and I have worked in the Information Technology
industry for over 20 years and about 4 years ago we made a decision to move our family to a rural small
town in Minnesota to be able to raise our boys within a community that is built on small town values
and a good work ethic. Certain values that only growing up on a farm in small town setting can
teach. When we made this move high speed internet was the major determining factor as to if we could
move or not. I work for Microsoft and am a home office worker so I required high speed internet at
home where ever we live. Also our youngest son has Juvenile Idiopathies Arthritis and we wanted to be
able to communicate effectively with his doctors located in the Minneapolis/St Paul area. Aside from
those two critically important reasons we needed good internet for school work and learning, to keep in
touch (video and voice call) grandparents and other relations, for TV and entertainment, leverage all the
newest technology in our home from internet connected garage doors, security and surveillance
systems, to digital assistance like the Amazon Echo for music and news, and lastly with two young boys
we had to have the ability for them to play video games and talk /interact with the their friends both
local and away.
So with all that being said prior to building our home I did a great deal of research and testing
different internet connections and technology both available and in development. I gathered
information about wired and wireless solutions, spoke with local telecoms, and private wireless vendors
alike and after many months came down to only one viable and not economically efficient solution. We
had to go with two T1 connections from the local telco company, for a total of 3mb internet speeds
(both upload and download) and after negotiations I found the lowest cost possible but still pay $400 a
month just for internet.
Now the why copper T1’s for internet versus wireless or satellite:
All wireless plans (Verizon, ATT, etc.) were limited to 25GB a month of data downloaded and
several did not have a solution that would allow my whole home to be connected, meaning that I had to
use my cell phone connected to a computer to access the internet on a PC. Along with that the highest
plan you could get was 25GB per month for around $125-$150 a month then the overage charges
started to kick in at a per MB rate and the costs would go through the roof. Beside those after testing T-
Mobile, Verizon, Sprint and ATT the only vendor with good enough signal was ATT and that was 2-3 out
of 4 bars.
Satellite was the same issue as wireless, no matter if I looked at a business plan or a home plan
there were high upfront costs and high monthly costs with a limit on the amount of data that could be
downloaded a month (usually 25GB or less) then there were very high fees after that. On top of the
limited data and the high costs the latency (delay) in the data travelling from the earth to the satellite
and back to the earth then across the internet was such that voice, video and Virtual Private Network
services (VPN) would not function at a usable level. This automatically removed this solution for any
form of work from home and trying to communicate with Doctors or relatives via video and
voice. Satellite technology works for data that is not affected by latency (i.e. backhauling data from oil
rigs and devices in the remote field locations) but it not to a point where it can support live voice and
video for solutions needed in the home for communications like telemedicine, or live online learning let
alone the occasional video call to family.
36
The other factor besides speed and latency for the wireless and satellite options was the
amount of monthly data download. This may seem trivial but it is very easy to go over 25GB a month
when watching TV and video on the internet or gaming. A prime example is that I have two boys and
they play videos games. When they buy a new game and have to download it from the internet that is
usually between 30GB-60GB of data to get it installed and then more as they play it. This one game
alone would consume 1-2months of data allowed from a wireless or satellite vendor, and that is doing
nothing else on the internet for the other 30 days of the month. That is not a solution that will work for
modern day families.
Please note that there are two very key metrics in internet connections; speed and latency. For my
situation 2 T1’s provides 3mb of internet speeds (which is barley sufficient for me to work from home
but does suffice as long as we are not doing other things on the internet) but the latency is so low that I
can easily make voice and video calls for work. These is a perfect example of satellite will not work not
even with faster upload and download speeds.
Having moved to this rural setting and working in technology I have become very passionate about rural
high speed internet access. My family and I see if first hand every day, in kids in school that do not have
access at home, and have to be driven into town in the evenings to use internet at the library. We have
neighbors who home school their kids and only have a cell phone to access the internet, because in our
area there is no other options other than satellite and it is not an affordable or viable solution for many
types of communications.
I could go on all day long on how the lack of home broadband internet negatively affects the lives of
rural Minnesotans and hinders their ability to get educated and find good paying jobs. But I will leave it
at this, I am always willing to speak to anyone about these issues and my vast experience in trying to
find viable options for our area residence.
Please take this information into consideration when discussing funding rural broadband initiatives, or
thinking that a satellite providers if offering a solutions that is affordable and works in our situations.
Thank you for your time and attention.
Tim Larson
37
State Broadband Task Force:
I am a resident who resides within the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe Indian Reservation. It
appears that the state broadband guidelines may forego me and my neighbors again. I am a
constituent who access to broadband via satellite. Although the Gen 5 internet that I have
most recently acquired for a rate of $69.00 per month is touted as high speed, it is not what I
need to satisfy myself. This rate is the introductory rate and I am sure as time passes it too will
be beyond the rate that most people who reside in the boundaries of the Leech Lake Band of
Ojibwe Reservation may afford.
Issues I have already experienced the first month with this service:
1. It stalls out and I must reboot the receiver.
2. I get a lot of buffering
3. If it rains, I have zero access to internet at all
I genuinely ask you to consider to move forward with fixed wireless and/or fiber optics to all citizens in
Minnesota. It is only fair to include the most rural areas in your scope of future broadband to all.
Sally Fineday
38
Dear Ms. Kelliher,
The Minnesota Broadband Task Force will be discussing the merits of wireless internet including satellite
systems this week. I wanted to give you some first hand experience with satellite internet. Here is a
letter to the Duluth News Tribune that I submitted this spring and it was ultimately published, shortly
after the MN Broadband Day at the Capital.
While current satellite internet systems can deliver up to 25Mbps down, as I point out here, they are
very expensive, with cost increasing as data plans are exceeded with a necessity to purchase additional
data to get through the month.
Once people have access to fast internet, they find more and more ways to use it, with multiple family
members or home based businesses all trying to use the internet at once from multiple devices. And
the internet of things, such as home monitoring systems, also tap internet data. Data plan- based
systems are generally much more expensive than comparable non-data plan offerings. This includes
mobile wireless and satellite systems.
We currently have wireless internet from a set of towers established by our electric cooperative. The
speed is up to 7Mbps down, with no data caps, and the cost is $60 per month. The electric coop says
that the technology they have and the spectrum they use does not allow them to increase the speed
beyond 7Mbps. While fairly reliable (although they are currently having difficulties with their service
provider and the system is very erratic (off and on), the speed provided is quickly becoming
frustrating. And the distance of service from each tower is 1.5 miles, so this system cannot cover all the
residents in my township, approximately half of them cannot get service. We are located at the very
margin of Century Links CAF map and they have told us that they may not be able to reach us by the end
of the CAF2 program. There are still many rural areas in Minnesota that are caught between very slow
vs very expensive internet access.
I urge you and the Task Force to listen to wireless and satellite subscribers, not just to the
providers. And include subscribers from the hilly and conifer forested parts of Minnesota, not just the
open agricultural areas, as wireless behaves quite differently “up north” than it does in southern
Minnesota.
The only update I suggest from my letter to the DNT is that, previous to the MN Broadband Day, Exede
offered at 150Gb plan. At about the same time, when Hughesnet began offering 25Mbps, Exede
dropped it’s highest data plan to 50Gb. Now, probably owing to pressure from subscribers, Exede is
back to offering a 150Gb plan. At the time of my letter to the DNT, Exede only offered a 50Gb plan (in
response apparently to its competition).
Thanks for your consideration,
Janet Keough
North Star Township