Legislature(2021 - 2022)ADAMS 519
05/06/2021 01:30 PM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB70 | |
| HB19 | |
| HB182 | |
| HB155 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 70 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 19 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 155 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 182 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
May 6, 2021
1:47 p.m.
1:47:19 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Merrick called the House Finance Committee meeting
to order at 1:47 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Kelly Merrick, Co-Chair
Representative Dan Ortiz, Vice-Chair
Representative Ben Carpenter
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative Andy Josephson
Representative Bart LeBon
Representative Sara Rasmussen
Representative Steve Thompson
Representative Adam Wool
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Representative Johnathan Kreiss-Tompkins.
PRESENT VIA TELECONFERENCE
Christine O'Connor, Executive Director, Alaska Telecom
Association; Heidi Teshner, Director, Finance and Support
Services, Department of Education and Early Development.
SUMMARY
HB 19 LIMITED TEACHER CERTIFICATES; LANGUAGES
CSHB 19(EDC) was REPORTED out of committee with
five "do pass" recommendations and four "no
recommend" recommendations and with one
previously published fiscal impact note:
FN1(EED).
HB 70 APPROP: CAP; REAPPROP; SUPP; AMEND
HB 70 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 155 COURT SYSTEM PROVIDE VISITORS & EXPERTS
HB 155 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with two previously
published fiscal impact notes: FN1(ADM) and
FN2(AJS).
HB 182 EXTEND FISHERY RESOURCE LAND. TAX CREDIT
HB 182 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do
pass" recommendation and with one previously
published fiscal impact note: FN1(REV).
Co-Chair Merrick reviewed the agenda for the day.
HOUSE BILL NO. 70
"An Act making appropriations, including capital
appropriations, reappropriations, and other
appropriations; making supplemental appropriations;
making appropriations to capitalize funds; and
providing for an effective date."
1:48:16 PM
CHRISTINE O'CONNOR, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA TELECOM
ASSOCIATION (via teleconference), introduced the PowerPoint
Presentation: "State of Broadband." She shared that she was
a lifelong Alaskan who grew up in Bristol Bay and was
"deeply committed" to increasing broadband access in
Alaska. She discussed the Alaska Telecom Association's
(ATA) providers, where they served, and the broadband
capacity in the state presently and in the future.
1:49:08 PM
Ms. O'Connor turned to slide 2 titled "Alaska Telecom
Association." She related that the association was formed
in 1949 and worked to support telecommunication services
throughout Alaska. Over the past 20 years broadband was not
only the focus but the mandate of the association. The
association represented all Alaska-based carriers. She noted
the broad diversity in membership from small family owned
companies to statewide companies; seven were community
owned cooperatives, four were privately owned companies,
two companies were investor owned, one was a municipally
owned utility, and one company was employee owned.
1:49:53 PM
Ms. O'Connor provided a map from the Regulatory Commission
of Alaska (RCA) of the service areas of each company on
slide 3.
Ms. O'Connor addressed slide 4 titled "Fixed Broadband
Coverage" that depicted a map of the coverage around the
state. The information was based on federal broadband
reports, which were submitted by all internet providers
twice each year to the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC). She reported that recently the FCC required a much
more finely detailed map that would include the broadband
speeds available everywhere in the United States. She
expected that the map would be completed in a year or so.
Ms. O'Connor relayed that the map on slide 5 represented
ATA's cellular coverage from 4G/LTE depicted in orange and
blue to 3G service in yellow, based on the FCC report.
Ms. O'Connor continued to slide 6 titled "Last Mile" and
explained how the networks were structured. The broadband
networks were divided into two parts: last mile and middle
mile. Last mile connected the end user to the provider. She
stressed that the last mile was important because a "robust
connection" was necessary for fast speeds.
1:52:08 PM
Ms. O'Connor spoke to slide 7 titled "Last Mile Expansion:"
She indicated that last mile expansion was happening at a
"rapid pace." Approximately 60 thousand locations were
updated or deployed in recent years. She listed several
projects by providers and noted that every provider was
currently investing in last mile deployment. She relayed a
few projects recently completed:
Alaska Communications has brought high-speed internet
to 16,000 rural Alaska residents since 2017 and will
reach another 16,000 rural Alaskans by 2025.
Communities now served with new or upgraded internet
speeds include Delta Junction, Fairbanks, Homer, Hope,
Kenai, Klawock, Larsen Bay, Ninilchik, North Kenai,
North Pole, Seldovia, Soldotna, Kake, Kasilof,
Sterling and Thorne Bay.
Alaska Power & Telephone has completed FTTH in the
Klawock Lake Subdivision, fiber to the school and
clinic in Dot Lake, high speed broadband deployments
in Tok and Wrangell, Skagway, Haines, Petersburg,
Craig, and Metlakatla.
Copper Valley telecom completed a FTTH project
supporting speeds of up 25 Mbps downstream in
Tatitlek.
GCI Increased wireless speeds in Dillingham and
surrounding communities, and constructed new towers,
in 2020-2021.
Co-Chair Merrick indicated that Representative Edgmon
joined the meeting.
1:53:23 PM
Ms. O'Connor turned to slide 8 titled Middle Mile -
Fiber. She explained that the last mile connected to
middle mile networks that connected to the world. Alaska's
middle mile was a combination of technologies. Alaska had
thousands of miles of fiber that allowed for huge capacity
and very fast speeds and was the best method where
possible. She characterized it as the gold standard.
Ms. O'Connor spoke to slide 9 titled "Middle Mile -
Microwave." She pointed out that since it was not always
possible to build fiber, broadband providers constructed
microwave networks extending hundreds of miles. The
microwave networks allow for delivery of high speed
broadband. However, the technology had lower capacity and
higher operating costs when compared to fiber
1:54:48 PM
Ms. O'Connor continued to slide 10 titled "Middle Mile -
Satellite. She offered that in Alaska there were still
middle mile gaps in fiber or microwave connection.
Satellites provided the backhaul connection to the world
and had been used for decades. She delineated that multiple
geosynchronous, or traditional, satellite providers served
the state. However, Alaska still had large gaps where the
only middle mile connection was through satellites, which
were limited in capacity, experience latency (lag), and was
vulnerable to interference. She noted that the Lower' 48
[Continental United States] had nearly ubiquitous access to
fiber backbone connections and rarely considered the middle
mile connection or its cost.
1:55:55 PM
Ms. O'Connor turned to slide 11: "Middle Mile is Key -
2010" and voiced that Alaska middle mile networks were
changing rapidly. The slide depicted a map of the middle
mile network in 2010. She pointed to the undersea cables
connecting Alaska to the Lower '48, the TERRA microwave
network in Western Alaska, and the black dots showed the
locations where schools were served solely by satellite.
Ms. O'Connor highlighted slide 12 titled "Middle Mile is
Key - 2020." She expounded that in recent years massive
investment in middle mile was made. She pointed to the map
portraying new connectivity along the North Slope coast,
expansion of microwave networks in southwest, northwest,
and southeast Alaska, new fiber running up the Dalton
Highway, and terrestrial links into Canada. The map would
depict more fiber links as projects were being completed
and funded.
1:56:55 PM
Ms. O'Connor reviewed slide 13 titled "New Middle Mile."
She highlighted some recent new middle mile projects:
Alaska Power & Telephone constructed an undersea cable
between Juneau, Haines, and Skagway, and was doubling
the capacity of their microwave network between Juneau
and Ketchikan.
Cordova Telecom expanded its microwave network in
Prince William Sound.
GCI completed a multi-year upgrade to equipment at 42
microwave sites in Western Alaska, adding more
capacity.
KPU completed Ketchikan 1, the first undersea
connection to Canada, connecting to its Fiber to the
Home (FTTH) network.
MTA constructed its AlcanOne project, the first
terrestrial fiber connection from Alaska into Canada.
Nushagak Cooperative completed a major expansion of
its microwave network.
1:58:30 PM
Ms. O'Connor commented that investment in projects like the
one's listed resulted in nearly 80 percent of Alaskans
having access to 100 Megabit speeds, or gigabyte speeds
that were all fed by the expanding fiber middle mile
networks.
Representative Rasmussen asked how much the companies
listed on slide 13 expended in dollars on the projects. Ms.
O'Connor responded that since 2017 ATA companies invested
over $1.2 billion in capital expenditures.
1:59:22 PM
Representative Wool cited slide 12 and asked about middle
mile locations. He related that he had good connectivity
since fiber had been installed on his street. However,
neighbors close to him in Fairbanks, did not have good
internet connection. He understood that some sparsely
populated neighborhoods were not economically feasible for
internet service. He wondered who was responsible for
providing service. He wondered if she would address the
issues in her presentation.
Ms. O'Connor answered that she would talk about last mile
spending opportunities. She emphasized that resources were
needed for last mile and middle mile to fill the gaps.
2:01:10 PM
Ms. O'Connor addressed slide 14 titled "ReConnect Pilot
Program Round 1." She relayed that on December 3, 2019, the
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) awarded
Cordova Telecom a $18.9 million grant to connect Yakutat.
The program's mandate was to fast-track broadband grants.
Cordova Telecom Company (CTC) would connect the village
with a series of five tower sites, accessible by
helicopter, which would create a microwave middle mile
network and would then construct a FTTH network in Yakutat
capable of high speeds.
Ms. O'Connor spoke to slide 15 titled "ReConnect Pilot
Program Round 2." She reported that on October 12, 2020,
the USDA awarded a $21.5 million grant to Alaska Power and
Telephone (APT) for service to Coffman Cove and Kasaan on
Prince of Wales Island. She indicated that round 2 of the
ReConnect Pilot Program was even more successful for
Alaska. Alaska Power and Telephone was building a new
subsea cable between Juneau, Petersburg, and Prince of
Wales Island. The undersea cable would support buildout and
increased speeds across Prince of Wales Island.
2:02:57 PM
Ms. O'Connor discussed slide 16 titled "ReConnect Pilot
Program Round 2." She conveyed that another round 2
ReConnect program was awarded to General Communication
Incorporated (GCI) to build an 800 mile subsea fiber system
from Kodiak along the south side of the Alaska Peninsula
and the Aleutians to Unalaska. The fiber would come ashore
in Larsen Bay, Chignik Bay, Sand Point, King Cove and
Akutan, served by fixed wireless networks capable of
providing 100Mbps of symmetric speeds.
Ms. O'Connor turned to slide 17 titled "ReConnect Pilot
Program Round 2 Kaktovik Microwave Project Scope." She
detailed that on November 12, 2020, the USDA awarded a $5.3
million grant to Arctic Slope Telephone Association
Cooperative (ASTAC) to connect Kaktovik. ASTAC would build
a microwave connection to Kaktovik and FTTH connections
throughout the village. In addition, ASTAC was also awarded
a Community Connect grant from the USDA to build a fiber
line extension between Utqiagvik and Atqasuk, and a FTTH in
Atqasuk. She furthered that the application process for the
grants was burdensome, as well as rigorous and expensive.
She opined that the awards were a testament to the
commitment of the companies.
2:04:21 PM
Ms. O'Connor advanced to slide 18 and continued to discuss
the ReConnect Pilot Program Round 2. She communicated that
on November 12, 2020, USDA awarded a $4.1 million grant to
TelAlaska to build fiber connections from Nome to Teller
and Brevig Mission and a $1.9 million grant to Matanuska
Telephone Association to build FTTH connections to Caswell.
She believed that the ReConnect program was a powerful
example of what can happen when a new program aligned with
existing state and federal programs and created a
springboard for great advances in Alaska's broadband
infrastructure. She characterized it as a missing puzzle
piece that turns a need for connectivity into real projects
that serve Alaskans.
2:04:58 PM
Representative Carpenter asked if Ms. O'Connor would speak
to the amount of grant money received for last mile
funding.
Ms. O'Connor would follow-up with the committee. She noted
that the ReConnect grants included funding for both last
mile and middle mile.
2:05:45 PM
Representative Carpenter commented that his community of
Nikiski in Northern Kenai was not served by high speed
internet. He wondered if other communities were in the same
situation. He remarked that "a lot of money" supported the
middle mile and wondered if the "business model was
insufficient to address non-government spending at the last
mile.
Ms. O'Connor agreed that there were many places in the same
situation and feeling frustrated. She commented that "it
was a balancing act" for providers trying to increase
service with limited resources. She relayed that more
resources were currently being distributed for broadband
services. She believed the industry would finally have the
resources and the opportunity to connect more places. The
association was working arduously to obtain the resources.
2:07:56 PM
Ms. O'Connor moved to slide 19 titled "Low Earth Orbit
Satellites (LEOS)." She announced that coming soon in the
middle mile space was a new generation of satellites the
low earth orbit or LEOs. She deemed that the satellites
might be game changers in connecting remote communities.
Ms. O'Connor reported on satellite companies. She expounded
that Starlink had launched over 1,200 satellites and were
beta-testing their "better than nothing" service in the
Lower '48. Starlink was waiting for approval from the FCC
to complete their new constellation to cover the Arctic.
OneWeb launched 110 satellites and predicted being in
service in 2022. Telesat secured millions in funding from
the Canadian government as it looked to deploy a smaller,
more efficient constellation of nearly 300 LEO satellites
by 2023. She noted that at least one Alaskan company was
purchasing LEO capacity from Telestat. She posed several
questions regarding how the technology could connect
Alaskans, cost, timelines, capacity, lifespan, reliability,
and sustainability. The questions were all things the ATA
members were investigating.
Representative Carpenter asked if any of the LEOS would be
placed in the Northern latitudes.
Ms. O'Connor responded in the affirmative. She indicated
that satellites were being deployed to serve all of Alaska.
The Arctic was currently a big interest to many entities
for various reasons, and it was a very welcome change in
deployment.
2:10:52 PM
Ms. O'Connor continued to slide 20 titled 2.5GHz Rural
Tribal Spectrum." She purported that spectrum was a program
set up by the FCC in the prior year. The 2.5 gigahertz
(GHz) spectrum set aside was a unique opportunity for
tribes in rural areas to directly access unassigned
spectrum over tribal lands, subject to buildout
requirements.
Ms. O'Connor presented slide 21 titled "How can we use
2.5Hz in Alaska?" She reported that there were a couple of
potential uses for the spectrum. One way was using fixed
wireless deployments that was effective but was challenged
by trees and rugged terrain. She added that Alaska
Communications had deployed many of these systems on the
Kenai Peninsula and would soon expand service around
Fairbanks using free, unlicensed spectrum. She related that
over a dozen Wireless Internet Service Providers (WISPs) in
Alaska used this technology. Another possible use would be
for a 5G mobile network.
2:12:28 PM
Ms. O'Connor addressed slide 22 titled "What's Next?
Private investment
Federal Programs
State
Congress
Ms. O'Connor posed the question of how the pieces worked
together for the massive investment needed to serve
Alaska's most remote communities. She indicated that
currently, some of the pieces were working together. First
was investment from Alaska's telecom community. She
elaborated that in the past 4 years, ATA member companies
have spent over $1.2 billion on capital expenditures.
Nearly 85 percent of Alaskans to receive at least 25/3 Mbps
service, and 80 percent were able to access 100Mbps or
faster service. Second, she believed that it was critical
to have stable, predictable programs at the federal level.
Very often, federal programs made a project viable. She
commented that the state played a role. She expounded that
Administrative Order 310 (AO 310) directed the Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT) and the
Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to streamline its
respective permitting processes for broadband facilities
deployment projects. Right of way policies and fee
structures can either accelerate or impede broadband
deployment. She voiced that Congress played a large role.
President Biden's American Jobs Act proposed $100 billion
for broadband to build future-proof networks.
Ms. O'Connor continued to slide 23 titled Federal
Communications Commission (FCC)
Emergency Broadband Benefit
Emergency Connectivity Fund
Connect America Fund
Ms. O'Connor spoke to some of the programs which support
broadband at the FCC. She explained that Emergency
Broadband Benefit (EEB) provided a $75 credit on broadband
services for qualifying low income consumers, until $3.2
billion was expended and began on May 12, 2021. The
Emergency Connectivity Fund added $7 billion to the e-rate
program to support connected devices for students. She
furthered that the Connect America Fund provided critical
support for both constructing and operating broadband
networks in rural, high cost areas. Without the fund,
Alaska's networks would not be where they are today. All
the programs required meeting performance obligations and
had strict accountability metrics. Every company reported
financial information, performance benchmarks, and more to
both the FCC and the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA)
throughout the year.
2:16:45 PM
Co-Chair Foster noted she mentioned that the application
process for the EBB program began on by May 12, 2021. He
inquired whether there was a deadline for applications. He
also wondered if she had done any estimates as to when the
$3.2 billion funding would run out.
Ms. O'Connor replied that there was no deadline and
applications were available through the local telecom
provider. She guessed that the program would last for six
months unless Congress added funding.
Ms. O'Connor turned to slide 24 titled "USDA:"
ReConnect
Community Connect
Distance Learning & Telemedicine
Ms. O'Connor informed the committee that Round 3 of the
ReConnect program would begin in the summer of 2021. The
program was another opportunity to bring $1 billion
injection of grant funding to Alaska and continue to
advance broadband services to Alaskans. USDA also had the
Community Connect grant program that offered grants to
applicants to provide broadband service in rural,
economically-challenged communities where service did not
exist. The grants were up to $3 million for broadband
projects. There have been multiple awards in Alaska in
recent years including to ASTAC in Point Hope, Matanuska
Telephone Association in Glacier View and Chickaloon, and
Copper Valley Telecom in Tatitlek. Finally, the Distance
Learning and Telemedicine grants helped rural communities
acquire the technology and training to connect educational
and medical professionals with the teachers and medical
providers who serve rural residents. The previous fall,
USDA awarded $4.4 million to six projects in Alaska.
2:19:45 PM
Ms. O'Connor turned to slide 25 titled "National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA)
Tribal Broadband Connectivity Grants, $1B
Broadband Infrastructure Program, $300M
Connecting Minority Communities $300M
Ms. O'Connor discussed that the most recent COVID relief
bill directed significant funding for broadband to NTIA.
She elucidated that $1 billion went directly to tribes. The
money was one-time funding. She defined eligible entity" as
a Tribal Government; a Tribal College or University; a
Tribal organization; or a Native Corporation. The funding
could be broadly used: expand access to and adoption of
broadband service on Tribal land, or for remote learning,
telework, or telehealth resources during the COVID19
pandemic. She detailed that at a high level the funds could
be used to support broadband service for students or people
working from home. She emphasized that the tribal grants
were not competitive, and every qualifying tribal entity
had access to a share of the funding. She indicated that
the Broadband Infrastructure Program was a partnership
between states, municipalities, or boroughs and providers
to support broadband infrastructure deployment to areas
lacking broadband, especially rural areas. She qualified
that the scoring criteria was not favorable for Alaska, and
the awards were spread nationwide. There was also $300
million for the Connecting Minority Communities program
that supported broadband for tribal colleges and those
serving minority communities that included some University
of Alaska rural campuses. The program was a pilot and was
likely to become an ongoing program.
2:22:09 PM
Representative LeBon returned to slide 23. He cited the two
bullet points: Emergency Broadband Benefit and the
Emergency Connectivity Fund. He brought up the public
safety issue of the 9-1-1 caller and location information
in rural Alaska. He asked Ms. O'Connor to update the
committee on the issue.
Ms. O'Connor responded that ATA continued to work with the
Public Safety Answering Points (PSAP) to help identify how
they wanted calls routed and what technology and
connections were needed. She related that a new technology
called "rapid SOS provided location information at no
charge to the PSAP. The service had been deployed in many
PSAPs because of the 9-1-1 working group from the prior
year. When a call was received from a cell phone, the
location popped up on a screen and pinpointed the caller,
the system even reported a caller's movement.
Representative LeBon asked how close rapid SOS was to
universal use.
Ms. O'Connor indicated that the technology was currently
used in Alaska. Representative LeBon wondered how
widespread the use was in rural Alaska. Ms. O'Connor
answered that she did not recall all the locations but
acknowledged that it was not in comprehensive use in all of
rural Alaska. The software relied on the cellular network
being data capable.
2:25:31 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz referenced slide 25 and asked if Ms.
O'Connor had provided information about how different
tribes could access the grants.
Ms. O'Connor responded that the grants were administered
through NTIA. The administration was holding a series of
tribal engagements through webinars and calls. She
furthered that any tribe that was interested could reach
out to NTIA or ATA.
Ms. O'Connor moved to slide 26 titled "State - Potential
Action Steps
Coordinate
Gather Data
Extend Availability
Support Affordability
Expedite Deployment
Ms. O'Connor declared that ATA's members had "incredible
expertise and a decades-long successful track record"
working closely with other stakeholders in education,
healthcare, and commerce. ATA was eager to find
opportunities and support broadband expansion. She
understood that Governor Dunleavy was forming a working
group of stakeholders. She observed that collaboration
worked very effectively in the prior year when a broad
group of stakeholders formed a working group focused on 9-
1-1 services in Alaska where experts from multiple areas
worked together to share expertise and made
recommendations, with very broad consensus. She suggested
the approach for the working group. She recommended that
the group could gather data to identify the unserved areas
lacking broadband connections or where speeds and capacity
could be increased. She relayed that in urban areas more
than 97 percent had access to 25/3 speeds and higher versus
64 percent in rural areas.
Representative LeBon asked what the legislature could do to
help encourage the rapid SOS upgrades to extend the 9-1-1
capabilities in all of rural Alaska.
Ms. O'Connor thought coordination was important and could
be accomplished through an advisory board made up of
stakeholders to find the solutions to solve the technical
issues. She shared that the 9-1-1 working group engaged in
many hours of problem solving work. It was made possible by
the state convening the group. She concluded that a
coordinated advisory board would be a "very helpful next
step."
Representative LeBon hoped that by next year the state made
tangible" progress.
2:31:28 PM
Ms. O'Connor continued with slide 26. She highlighted that
extended availability was a goal that required extending
networks. She made some recommendations. She suggested
making funds available to support matching requirements of
the next round of ReConnect that took advantage of the
process and standards already built into the program. She
proposed offering grants to add connections to the Lower
48, increasing capacity and reducing costs. She offered
that perhaps funds could support more speed and capacity on
existing satellite and fiber infrastructure. She stressed
that inviting feedback was important since every provider
in Alaska has projects on the drawing board but were on
hold due to lack of resources. The feedback would help
policy makers in directing resources. Her next suggestion
was to support affordability. She commented that Alaska had
some "incredibly impressive networks" but in many areas it
was extremely expensive to build and operate the networks,
and those costs drove rates. She recommended providing
funds during an interim period while more broadband
infrastructure was deployed. Finally, she suggested
expediting deployment. She remarked that a funded project
could be delayed for years and even blocked due to
permitting processes. The state could accelerate deployment
through timely permit approval and reasonable fees. She
deduced that the state could promote broadband projects by
eliminating sublease surcharges which add significantly to
the cost of a project.
2:35:22 PM
Ms. O'Connor turned to slide 27 titled "Congress." She
reported that there were consistent discussions about
broadband in Congress. She was very optimistic about
President Biden's American Jobs Act that proposed $100
billion for broadband to build future-proof networks and the
ambitious goal to, "bring affordable, reliable, high-speed
broadband to every American." She believed it would bring
significant infrastructure funding to Alaska.
Ms. O'Connor thanked the committee for the invitation to
testify on behalf of ATA.
Representative Edgmon considered some of Representative
Carpenter's comments about last mile investment. He
wondered if the next phase of extending broadband in Alaska
was obtaining more resources for the last mile. He wondered
whether it was too broad a statement considering the work
needed for the middle mile and other capabilities
throughout the state.
Ms. O'Connor responded that it was both it was a chicken
and egg situation. She reported that through Connect
America funding significant resources was available to
upgrade last mile but until the prior two years the funding
to upgrade middle mile was lacking. She noted that if
either last mile or middle mile was missing service was
inaccessible.
2:38:09 PM
Representative Wool realized that money was necessary for
broadband projects, however, the last mile situation in
many communities "was very real." He asked what the state
could do to incentivize broadband installation in
communities where it was not economically feasible "other
than saying we need more resources."
Ms. O'Connor answered that how to enhance the buildout was
the puzzle telecom companies wrestled with. The programs
the telecom companies were involved with helped bring the
extra pieces necessary to extend service. She emphasized
that resources was funding and amounts such as the $1.2
billion invested in the previous 4 years was an example of
funding being received and "pushed right back out." She
concluded that the answer was "finding the resource and
putting it where it was needed."
2:40:20 PM
Representative Wool relayed that in Fairbanks many teachers
had to work from the school parking lot during COVID
because they lacked adequate broadband to communicate with
the classroom. He reported that the legislature had passed
a $7 million bill that supported internet for rural Alaska
[SB 74-Internet for Schools, Chapter 5 SLA 20, 03/25/2020].
He recalled that in a small rural school the internet bill
was approximately $30 thousand per month. He wondered how
costs could be trimmed down to an affordable level. He
wondered about low orbital satellite and if that would
alleviate the high costs.
2:41:36 PM
Ms. O'Connor replied that the SB 74 brought an important
boost to schools that were only getting 10 megabits or
less. She conveyed that a couple of things were happening
in the e-Rate area that were lowering costs. There was more
competition in the eRate arena. In addition, LEOS would
influence costs. She delineated that many LEOS providers
were expected to enter the market. Some new providers would
likely sell lower cost capacity to existing providers and
drive prices down or provide service directly to the
schools.
Representative Rasmussen clarified that the $7 million
fiscal note associated with SB 74 was the state's share of
a 90/10 federal/state match for federal grants. She
delineated that the fiscal note was predicated on all
districts being awarded grants. The fiscal note was
expected to decrease as broadband capacity increased. She
reiterated that the bill did not offer a full subsidy it
was based on a 90/10 match with the federal government.
Representative Carpenter thought that much of the
discussion was centered around growth funded at the state
and federal level. He was concerned with business decisions
at the last mile. He shared that his neighbors were willing
to pay more for broadband, but it was not available. He
shared that he wanted a Digital Subscriber Line (DSL)
service and was told that the capacity was full. He thought
that the issue was the company's decision not to add more
service capacity. He considered that the situation equated
to government owned telecommunication services because the
only way service for the last mile was increased was via
federal and state subsidies. He stated that the companies
were promising broadband speeds but were not able to
deliver it due to its business decisions. He was a little
frustrated with the rosy picture being painted and not
seeing increased service in his neighborhood due to
business decisions and not lack of federal money. He was
alarmed that the companies were not addressing the concerns
of customers that were not receiving the service they were
promised. Ms. O'Connor responded that she was unfamiliar
with the representative's neighborhood situation. She
elucidated that the problem was there was a finite set of
resources available that were not based on federal funding.
Private capital or cooperative members money was being
invested but was insufficient.
2:47:18 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz was made aware that the RCA now had
regulatory authority over broadband providers. He wondered
if Ms. O'Connor saw that as a positive change that could
assist in making broadband more affordable. Ms. O'Connor
answered that the RCA had not yet publicly commented and
was uncertain as to what it might be contemplating. Rep
Ortiz wondered if RCA involvement was thought of as
favorable in the industry. He inquired whether she viewed
the Regulatory Commission of Alaska's involvement as a
potential avenue to make broadband more affordable. Ms.
O'Connor replied that she was unsure the RCA could affect
affordability because the issue was cost. She detailed that
in some places 88 percent of the cost of the service was
for the middle mile connection that was passed through in
rates.
2:49:41 PM
Representative Rasmussen commented regarding frustration
with speeds in various neighborhoods. She disclosed that
her father had installed fiber in his job while she was
growing up and that made her uniquely aware of the issues.
She suggested that Alaska was the largest and youngest
state in the nation with one of the lowest population
levels. She stated that Alaska was "way behind where it
should be" with internet capacity. She opined that state
and private partnerships were necessary to move the state
forward. She would never condone a private company for
making a financially feasible decision. She thought Alaska
could be a leader in broadband service, utilizing
public/private partnerships and delivering equity
throughout the state.
Co-Chair Merrick thanked Ms. O'Connor for her presentation.
2:51:57 PM
HEIDI TESHNER, DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND SUPPORT SERVICES,
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT (via
teleconference), provided the committee with a brief review
of the broadband needs within Alaska's school districts.
She read from prepared remarks:
This afternoon I will be providing a brief overview of
the broadband needs within Alaska's school districts.
The information I will be speaking to is only what the
department is aware of; it is not an all-inclusive
list of the broadband needs within Alaska's school
districts.
I'm going to start my presentation this afternoon by
speaking briefly to the Elementary and Secondary
School Emergency Relief Funds (also known as the ESSER
III Funds) under the American Rescue Plan.
The department has been allocated two-thirds of the
total ESSER III award. In order to receive the
remaining one-third, the department needs to submit a
State Plan. And part of the state plan development
requires the department to gather stakeholder input.
We have conducted a few stakeholder webinars earlier
this week, and the department asked attendees the
question: "What are the biggest needs in Alaska given
the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on teaching and
learning?". And to help gather statewide feedback on
this question, the department is using a tool called
Thought Exchange (which online tool to collect
responses and gives respondents an option to rank
others' responses). The Thought Exchange opened this
past Monday, May 3rd, and it will close on Sunday, May
16th, at 11:59PM. As of yesterday, we had 57
participants, 71 thoughts, and 510 ratings.
I share this with you because so far, the Highest
ranked theme is Internet Connectivity. That is what
respondents are saying.
The Highest ranked response is: "Reliable internet
connectivity: It is not equitable. There are
financial, geographic, and other barriers for
students."
Other responses that we have received related to
broadband include:
?Internet access in small, isolated, remote villages
is needed for entire villages- so that we can provide
level access to native Alaskans.
?And consistent and reliable internet access across
the state is essential. Virtual instruction opens up
an option for some families, but without statewide
internet some communities will not have access.
These are just a few of the responses the department
has received so far, but it is already evident that
districts are in need of more bandwidth and internet
connectivity. This is especially true if districts
continue to provide remote instruction.
Also, districts are in need of hotspots within their
district and communities, especially outside of school
locations where students can connect to the internet
(especially for when school is closed due to the
pandemic or due to some other reason why the school is
closed).
In an effort to see what information the department
already has on hand regarding the broadband needs of
school districts in Alaska, we looked at our FY2022
Major Maintenance Grant Fund list to identify if any
projects districts are already thinking about that are
either fully or partially related to broadband
infrastructure needs.
The department identified two projects that total
approximately $1.3 million:
?One is a high school security upgrades project where
they will be installing high-resolution cameras with
remote monitoring capabilities around the exterior of
the facility and additional network wiring.
?And an electrical and security project at a different
elementary school in which part of the project
includes data cable wiring.
Districts are already thinking about what they can use
their money on, or they can go through the
construction projects list to see what could get
funded.
2:56:44 PM
In addition, the department looked at the budgets and
budget narratives that districts submitted to the
department for how they intend to spend their
allocations under the federal ESSER I and II Funds
under the CARES and CRRSA Acts. Through that review,
the department identified approximately $7 million
worth of planned broadband and technology related
expenditures within 25 school districts.
The needs vary across district, and in scope and size.
Some of these broadband and technology related needs
that districts are planning to address include:
?Increase Internet services and bandwidth for distance
learning purposes.
?Purchase hardware to improve connectivity for remote
and hybrid instruction.
?Purchase of hotspots and MiFi devices for students
without internet access.
?High speed modems for home-internet services to
support student home network use for low-income
families.
?Purchase of equipment to upgrade the technology
needs.
?Purchase of a web-based VPN (virtual private network)
solution for employees working from home:
?Teleconference lines.
?Video-conferencing lines/equipment.
Districts are already planning to use some of their
COVID relief funds to address their needs. This is
not an all-inclusive look at the need, but a snap-
shot.
2:58:17 PM
One option or recommendation that could be done with
the $112 million, is that if it was the desire of the
committee or legislature to provide additional funding
to school districts for broadband needs, one option
could be to appropriate the funds to the Department of
Education and Early Development, and we do a
competitive grant, because we don't know the full
need, and then report back to the legislature on what
that is. Again, just an option and a policy call for
the committee to make. There are options out there
beyond what they are already getting. We already have
the School Broadband Assistance Grants which allows
the reimbursement to districts, up to the 25 mbps, an
already $7.8 million program, and FY2021 was about
$6.0 million that was paid out to school districts.
I am available for questions but wanted to provide a
brief overview of what we know of as the broadband and
technology needs within districts.
2:59:34 PM
Representative Rasmussen asked how many districts
participated in the school bag program. Ms. Teshner
responded that 28 districts and 153 schools were reimbursed
through the program. Representative Rasmussen asked if it
was at the 25 megabit level. Ms. Teshner replied in the
affirmative. Representative Rasmussen asked how many
districts operated above the 25 megabit threshold. Ms.
Teshner did not have the information available. Ms. Teshner
would submit the information to the committee.
3:00:35 PM
Representative Rasmussen reminded the committee that one
way streaming like Netflix used 3 to 5 megabits per device
and a two way streaming activity used between 5 and 10
megabits per device. She asserted that broadband capacity
in the state was extremely inadequate. She suggested that
Alaska was well below desired speeds especially in rural
areas.
3:01:37 PM
Representative Wool recounted the information regarding the
legislation that provided the matching funds for the school
bag grant program. He stated that the telecom companies
favored the program in order to receive the millions of
dollars in subsidies that allowed schools to afford the
high internet rates. He asked how much of the grant funding
had been used and if she could comment on the internet
rates charged to rural schools. Ms. Teshner did not have
the information but offered to reply later. She reported
that roughly $6.1 million was distributed to the 28 school
districts out of the approximately $8 million
appropriation. Representative Wool assumed that the amount
districts needed to pay for internet was 9 times what they
requested. Ms. Teshner replied that for FY 21 the total
cost of broadband for the state's schools and libraries was
$133 million. She delineated that out of the total amount
almost $110 million was the eRate contribution, $16.8
million was attributed to school and library contributions,
$6.1 million was the total for the school bag access
grants, and $111 thousand was from the Online With
Libraries (OWL) library assistance grants.
3:03:44 PM
Representative Wool thought there was significant federal
money flowing into the telecommunication companies and he
deduced that they were greatly profiting from it. He deemed
that the telecom companies were hesitant to take on
projects that were not as financially lucrative like
installing highspeed broadband in some urban neighborhoods
and in rural areas. He hoped the inequity could be
addressed. He emphasized that tens of millions of dollars
were obtainable, and the resources were available. He hoped
the connectivity as described in the presentation would
continue in all areas of the state.
Co-Chair Merrick thanked Ms. Teshner for being at the
meeting.
HB 70 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Merrick indicated amendments for HB 19, HB 155,
and HB 182 were due the prior day and none were received.
3:05:10 PM
AT EASE
3:07:02 PM
RECONVENED
HOUSE BILL NO. 19
"An Act relating to instruction in a language other
than English; and establishing limited language
immersion teacher certificates."
3:07:09 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz MOVED to report CSHB 19(EDC) out of
Committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal note.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
CSHB 19(EDC) was REPORTED out of committee with five "do
pass" recommendations and four "no recommend"
recommendations and with one previously published fiscal
impact note: FN1(EED).
HOUSE BILL NO. 182
"An Act extending the fishery resource landing tax
credit for certain taxpayers that harvest fishery
resources under the provisions of a community
development quota; providing for an effective date by
amending the effective date of secs. 16 and 23, ch.
61, SLA 2014; and providing for an effective date."
3:07:48 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz MOVED to report HB 182 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
note.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 182 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with one previously published fiscal
impact note: FN1(REV).
HOUSE BILL NO. 155
"An Act relating to court-appointed visitors and
experts; relating to the powers and duties of the
office of public advocacy; relating to the powers and
duties of the Alaska Court System; and providing for
an effective date."
3:08:29 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz MOVED to report HB 155 out of Committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes.
There being NO OBJECTION, it was so ordered.
HB 155 was REPORTED out of committee with a "do pass"
recommendation and with two previously published fiscal
impact notes: FN1(ADM) and FN2(AJS).
3:09:10 PM
AT EASE
3:12:27 PM
RECONVENNED
Co-Chair Merrick reviewed the agenda for the following
morning meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
3:12:39 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 3:12 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 70 HFIN Capital State of Broadband 2021 - ATA 5-6-2021.pdf |
HFIN 5/6/2021 1:30:00 PM |
HB 70 |