BROADBAND EXPANSION PLANNING FOR JEFFERSON COUNTY Kevin Streett, General Manager February 25, 2020 1
BROADBAND EXPANSIONPLANNING FOR
JEFFERSON COUNTY
Kevin Streett,General Manager February 25, 2020
1
INCREASING DEMAND, UNCERTAIN PROVIDERS2
Residents, community groups demanding increased access to
broadband
EDC plans and County Comp plans list increasing access to broadband as a key element of sustaining and growing our economy
Large ISPs not expanding infrastructure, small ISPs few in number, growing
slowly
3
PUD BROADBAND HISTORY
2000 NoaNET Member
2010 BTOP grant funds installed initial fiber
20+ miles installed to anchor institutions
20+ miles added since 2013 for SCADA system
Approx 45 fiber connections today
NoaNet manages PUD network
CURRENT CHALLENGESFOR JEFFERSON PUD BROADBANDEXPANSION
No Retail Authority
Low Revenues
High Debt from Power
System Purchase
Spread out rural
population
Limited Staffing
Few ISPs
4
OPPORTUNITIESFOR JEFFERSON PUD BROADBAND EXPANSION
Improve, Modernize our Grid
Increase Customer
Base
Grow Local Economy
Strengthen Community Relations
Prep for New
Technologies
5
RECENT ACHIEVEMENTS
IMPROVED PARTNERSHIPS
6
CenturyLink fiber swap on Marrowstone• Improved Internet to existing customers• Boosted Cellular on Indian Island
Colocation with Wave• Rack Space in CO• Increased fiber capacity, improved service
County PIF Grant Award• 1 mile of Fiber along Water street• Nearly 2 miles installed in last 6 months
New NoaNet Contract (March 1)• Improved Revenue Share• Clearer roles/responsibilities
STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS PHASE 1FUNDED BY WA STATE COMMERCE CERB GRANT
MAGELLAN ADVISORS CONSULTING CONTRACTOR
CO-SPONSORED BROADBAND SYMPOSIUM
JBAT FORMED
SURVEY DISTRIBUTED
STAKEHOLDERS INTERVIEWED
FULL PLAN RECEIVED LATE FALL
7
2019 SURVEY RESULTS
10mbps or less
More than 25mbps
10 – 25mbps
70%Respondents do not have Broadband Speeds
1208 respondents
8
MAGELLAN RECOMMENDATIONSIndustry Partnership Model Fiber, fixed wireless and potentially cellular Shared resources, expenses and profits with partner
LUD/Fiberhood Projects Follow Mason 3 and Kitsap PUD based models Neighborhood Approach
Expand Business Services: Rack Space, Pole Attachments, Fiber swaps/lease Dark Fiber, DIA (direct internet access)
9
Partner provides capital and network management
Partner should be nationally recognized agency
Partner needs to have spectrum available for fixed wireless service
Partner to share revenue based on contributions
Expect deployment of fiber and fixed wireless
Must be agreeable to Open Access Network
Partner will capitalize on the assets of the PUD for reducing the network costs
Cellular communications will also improve for the whole community
10
INDUSTRY PARTNERSHIPDETAILS
STAFF FINDINGSFTTP (Fiber to the Premises) not Feasible
• Cost too much, takes too long, risk of obsolescence before complete
LUD approach is Achievable but Limited
• Slow process, will provide low number of connections to customers
Industry Partnership Model High Risk/Reward
• High up front costs, less control, potential backlash, but best chance for highest number and hardest to reach connections over shortest time frame.
11
BROADBAND QUESTIONS
12
Strategic Priority Key service, or nice to have?
Engagement Level Lead or support agency? Alone or partner?
Service Level Broadband for All or All who want it? Backbone or Last Mile provider?
Investment level Tax Dollars? Debt/limited low interest
loans? Funded in part by Electric, SCADA?
Timeline Realistic timeframe based on options and monies available? 5, 10, or 20?
PHASE 2 BUSINESS PLANNING SCOPE OF WORK
13
Last Mile Policy and Program Development
Broadband Products and
Wholesale Rates
Identification of Funding Sources
Detailed Five & Ten year Cash
flow projectionsStaffing Plans Marketing Plan
and Strategy
NEXT STEPSCOMMISSIONER FEEDBACKISSUE RFP/SELECT CONSULTANTBEGIN WORK ON BUSINESS PLAN
14