BbTF Minutes 05-19-2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

- Make sure RFP"project completion within 6-month window' isn't ruling out fiber as an option (Page 8, Section 2.2)-JN - Put RFP in Google drive/Word OneDrive so can be shared by group—set it to"suggest edits"—JN - Proceed with releasing RFP(for long term solution)while working on RFP for short term solution—JN Approve Minutes(April],April21,May 5): Motion to approve meeting minutes—approved (Sally to make one edit to May 51h minutes per Pat Hull's feedback) Estimated Number of Towers to Service 5,000 households and Motorola Emergency—JN: Motorola; ES looking for ways to collaborate using ES towers; Motorola has technology for infrastructure but not ISP,expects County to light up service on the tower;trying to see if any synergy that might be able to consolidate funding; no next steps— ES(Kirby Saunders)will work with Jim in case a way to collaborate arises. OCAttorney's Office Statutory review and recommendations—James Bryan;talk about County Authority; in NC local govts only have authority granted by General Assembly;G.S. 153A-459 explicit grant authority;ambiguous about what grants are for; principal thing is to make all ISPs aware of these grants;for past few years League of Municipalities has pushed to give them more authority;just today Gov Cooper released his recommendations(ARP doc attached)—broadband for bridging the digital divide; not a lot of details right now; broadly broke down categories for use and specific goals—goals for general access and a specific one for students; not jurisdiction-by- jurisdiction; primarily the Federal $$ being doled out; more info from earlier meeting: Local governments have been trying to obtain the authority to do just that,but thus far have not been able to get specific authority. In the 2017 session of the NCGA there was a bill introduced but not passed entitled the BRIGHT Futures Act(HB 68). Among the proposals was to add the ability for jurisdictions to enter into public-private partnerships for"digital infrastructure to support broadband,computing,and communications components" in addition to the existing improvements such as grading, paving or construction of a public facility. This was echoed later in 2019 in the NC FIBER Act. The introduction of these bills is not conclusive itself, but does indicate the legislature's acknowledgement of a gap of authority. In contrast,the County does have explicit authority for the type of broadband grant previously issued and currently considered. The County is authorized to issue grants to ISPs by 153A-459(recodified from 153A-349.60),which requires notice following the rules set in§160A-340.6(c). As I mentioned,the North Carolina League of Municipalities has been pushing for the clarification of this authority for some time. It was gaining some traction in the news before being derailed by the pandemic. There are several bills currently with expectations that they will be wrapped up into one or two bills that move forward. The Wilson story was more anecdotal, but for reference here's an article about that situation specific to its attempt to get service to neighboring Pinetops. The story is interesting for a number of reasons, including the layering conflict between local state and federal laws, but it is also partly the reason why the NCLM phrases it as a 'clarification'of state law. While Wilson started service in 2008 and the state quickly restricted them by 2011,the legal battles continued well into 2016 when it was resolved by council action---that is to say that the city decided not to further appeal the matter(likely considering not only the cost and uncertainty, but also acknowledging the potential to provoke retaliatory measure by the general assembly). If I recall correctly they exhausted every method,from direct service to leasingto for-