The Vermont House gave preliminary approval to a bill that would fund broadband buildout, give towns more say in cell-tower siting, and force the Shumlin administration to keep answering 911 calls.
The House amended H.870, this year’s telecommunications bill, several times before approving the bill in a voice vote. Third reading is scheduled for Wednesday. The bill would then move over to the Senate.
The bill would increase the universal service fee on cell phone and landline bills from 2 percent to 2.5 percent, raising about $1.6 million per year. The bill would also allocate $750,000 in one-time, bonded money from the capital bill.
Both funding sources would go to the Connectivity Initiative, which the Legislature started in 2014. The original program received its funding by raising the universal service fee from 1.8 percent to 2 percent.
The program was originally designed to pay Internet service providers to run cables to hard-to-reach places or places they would not otherwise find profitable. The first grants given out under the program were issued in 2015 for about $875,000.
Under H.870, the purpose of the Connectivity Initiative would be expanded to pay providers to bring cell phone service to hard-to-reach places, and to pay companies to run Internet cables to public schools, especially schools that serve low-income kids.
Jim Porter, the director of telecommunications and connectivity at the Public Service Department, supports the bill. He said there is only a small chance that the money would be used to expand cell service. Most companies, he said, wouldn’t want the money.
He said the increased universal service fund fee “would allow for the connectivity initiative to have a certain amount of money that we could plan on for five years. What we’re hoping is that we will have towns come in that may be willing to contribute money to leverage the grant money.”
Paul Haskell, a telecommunications advocate who lobbied for the funding, called the bill “a very solid entrant in the Better Than Nothing category. I’m glad we’re doing something, but the problem of connectivity in Vermont is a lot bigger than a few shekels on the universal service fund.”
Haskell said Vermont should “seriously look” at how to leverage the universal service fund money to build out more Internet cables. He said the Public Service Department should stop granting money outright to telecommunications companies and award matching grants, revolving loans, or seek private equity.
CJ Stumpf, who advocates with Haskell, said the state needs to build Internet access as fast as possible because students without Internet have trouble finding a way to do their homework and are less likely to participate in after-school activities.
At one of her local schools, Stumpf said, “All of them get their grades, their exam results, and their assignments on PowerSchool. They’re using Google Docs to do their assignments and collaborate on projects.”
“If you want to get your homework done and do well in school, it means you either have to stay after school because that’s where the connectivity is or go to the library,” she said. “In some towns you’ll see a bunch of cars lined up outside the library at night, and you’ll see the glow of iPads and laptops.”
Rep. Patti Komline, R-Dorset, was one of a handful of lawmakers who voted against the increased funding for Internet services. She said, with the level of funding approved, it would take 63 years to bring Internet to the 30,000 people in Vermont who currently don’t have access.
“I live in a rural area, and I have satellite, and I don’t expect anyone else in Vermont to subsidize my service,” Komline said. “It’s my choice, and I accept the responsibility and associated cost of my services.”
Rep. Sam Young, D-Glover, told Komline that schools are dying in areas without Internet, and young people are unlikely to buy homes in the area if there is no Internet access. “We might not be able to get it all this year, but this is the first significant appropriation that we’ve made toward this since my first year here,” Young said.
Rep. Laura Sibilia, I-West Dover, said people in her communities are “literally abandoning their homes” and their kids “can’t take their laptops home to do homework.” She says broadband is “critical infrastructure.”
Cell tower siting, Enhanced 911 services
In another section of H.870, the House voted to give local municipalities more say in the the Public Service Board process that decides where cell towers can be built. Under H.870, the board would be required to give “substantial deference” to town plans when considering whether to approve the location of a cell tower.
Other language in H.870 would require the Public Service Department to retain an expert for certain parts of the siting process. Companies seeking to build cell towers would also be required to give 60 days’ notice of their intent to seek regulatory approval, instead of 45 days’ notice.
Legislature to decide fate of E911
By a 137-1 vote, lawmakers also approved an amendment from Rep. Mike Marcotte, R-Coventry, that would require several groups of stakeholders to meet this year and decide how Vermont should handle answering 911 calls.
The amendment says the Shumlin administration cannot decide to stop taking 911 calls without future approval from the Legislature.
Marcotte introduced the amendment in response to a public relations feud on April 4 between the independent Enhanced 911 Board and the Shumlin administration over whether the Department of Public Safety would continue to answer 911 calls after July 1, 2017.
Public records show the Shumlin administration told the E-911 board verbally that it did not want to be in the business of taking 911 calls. Once the news became public, the administration said it had not made a final decision. The two parties met the next day to assure the public that their 911 calls would be answered.
“I want to assure everyone in Vermont that I do not believe that the Department of Public safety would just flat out drop 911 call-taking services,” Marcotte said. “I believe they would not leave us in the lurch, so to speak.”
“But I do know this has heightened awareness, it’s heightened people being nervous, and (all the stakeholders involved) are very anxious and very nervous when reports like this come out,” he said.
