New York Governor Kathy Hochul has announced a dramatic expansion of the state’s Municipal Infrastructure Program (MIP), resulting in an additional $36 million cash infusion for the growing number of creative, community-owned and operated fiber expansion projects in the state.

According to a state announcement, the existing MIP program, launched in early 2024, has already funded more than $268 million in assorted open access fiber projects across the state. A state broadband office dashboard tracks all active municipal projects funded to date.

That includes efforts like the growing open access municipal fiber network in Dryden, New York, which has been steadily delivering affordable next-gen fiber to the long-underserved rural communities of Dryden and nearby Caroline (population 3,321).

New York State officials say the $268 million in MIP grant funding has funded active projects across 24 New York counties, resulting in more than 2,300 miles of new fiber optic infrastructure and 68 new wireless hubs serving more than 96,000 homes and businesses. Most of this funding was made possible by the 2021 federal American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA).

The MIP program is part of New York state’s billion dollar ConnectALL Initiative, and was specifically designed to support municipal broadband projects proven to be a viable, and increasingly popular, way to bring affordable, high-quality Internet service to long-neglected U.S. communities.

In the last two months of the Biden administration, nearly $500 million in grants were announced to support Tribal broadband projects. From Alaska to Virginia, 55 Tribal nations were poised to improve Internet access and advance digital sovereignty in their communities.

As President Trump took office, more than a hundred applicants still awaited word on their proposals, with nearly $500 million still available in the Tribal Broadband Connectivity Program (TBCP).

Then, silence. Ten months of silence.

In early November, Senators Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) and Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) sent a letter to NTIA officials asking about the TBCP. The program was established with two appropriations totaling nearly $3 billion. The first round of TBCP grants rolled out throughout 2022 and 2023, totalling nearly $100 million in use and adoption funding and over $1.7 billion in planning or infrastructure funding.

Image

The $500 million announced at the end of the Biden administration was part of round two of the program, for which applications were due in March 2024. With about $1 billion available, only about half of the funding in round two had been allocated.

What was happening, the Senators asked, with the rest of that funding? There were other questions too.

*The following story by Broadband Breakfast Reporter Jake Neenan was originally published here.

The Commerce Department has approved 18 final spending plans under its $42.45 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program. One state, Louisiana, had access to its funding, according to the agency.

Commerce’s National Telecommunications and Information Administration said Tuesday morning that plans had been approved from 15 states:

Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia, and Wyoming – and three territories – American Samoa, the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam.

Image

NTIA approval is one of the last steps before states and territories can start signing contracts and projects can get underway. Louisiana had gone through the remaining reviews and had access to its BEAD deployment funding Tuesday, NTIA said.

The agency said it would post more information on the approved final proposals on their BEAD website. The documents themselves weren’t online Tuesday morning.

It’s not clear to what extent the approved plans differ from the preliminary grant awards states posted in recent months. A major goal of the NTIA when it updated the program’s rules in June was to push deployment spending down, and as part of the approval process states in some cases had to revise tentative awards the agency considered too expensive.

NTIA said the approved states and territories came in $6 billion under budget relative to their BEAD allocations.

At the New Mexico Infrastructure Finance Conference last week, the Pueblo of Jemez Tribal community was honored with a Project Excellence Award for its broadband project, building out a fiber network to reach more than 670 unserved or underserved households, Tribal departments, programs, and businesses.

In presenting the award, Jeff Lopez, Director of the New Mexico Office of Broadband Access and Expansion (OBAE), highlighted the transformative work the Tribe has been doing since it received an $8.6 million grant for the $15 million project, courtesy of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) in Nov. 2023.

In accepting the award on behalf of the work being done by the tribally-owned and operated Internet service provider known as JNET, Governor George Shendo Jr. of Jemez Pueblo, said in a statement:

“We are honored to be recognized by the Department of Finance and Administration for its inaugural broadband Project Excellence Award. We are excited to fully realize all the opportunities our broadband project will bring to current and future generations in Jemez and the surrounding communities.”

Since January of 2024, JNET has been constructing its fiber-to-the home (FTTH) network, building-out more than 45 miles of fiber to date. More than 40 homes have already been lit up for service with the project expected to be finished in 2026.

Last year the Biden FCC implemented a new rule requiring that broadband providers include a “nutrition label for broadband,” making any fees, restrictions, usage caps, or other limits clear at the point of sale. The proposal was mandated by Congress as part of the bipartisan infrastructure law.

But four years after Congress proposed the idea, a new study indicates that many ISPs aren’t doing a great job adhering to the rules. The Trump FCC has also announced that it's taking formal steps to weaken or eliminate the rules as part of the agency’s broad, frontal assault on consumer protections.

The new academic study (first reported on by Broadband Breakfast) by York University researchers Jonathan A. Obar and Boxi Chen gave 35 different U.S. ISPs a ten-star based grade on how well they are adhering to the FCC broadband label requirements, including label placement, standardized formatting, machine-readable data files, and required policy links.

The results weren’t pretty: only sixteen ISPs properly placed labels at the point of sale as required, and not a single ISP received full marks for completely adhering to the FCC’s requirements. Only six ISPs received a full ten star ranking for proper formatting.

Legal analysts are questioning the recent assertion by the head of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA).

NTIA administrator Arielle Roth said last week that the agency she oversees will withhold federal broadband deployment funds from states that have laws enforcing net neutrality or that have enacted affordable broadband legislation similar to New York’s Affordable Broadband Act.

As the assistant secretary overseeing the $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, Roth’s legal reasoning is striking.

All the more so given that the New York Affordable Broadband Act that requires Internet service providers in the Empire State to offer a low-cost broadband service plan to income-eligible households has been upheld as Constitutional – a case in which the Supreme Court twice declined to intervene and overturn.

Yet, last week in speaking before the conservative Hudson Institute, Roth offered remarks that have legal observers scratching their heads in bewilderment. During her speech, Roth said:

“Consistent with the law, which explicitly prohibits regulating the rates charged for broadband service, NTIA is making clear that states cannot impose rate regulation on the BEAD program. To protect the BEAD investment, we are clarifying that BEAD providers must be protected throughout their service area in a state, while the provider is still within its BEAD period of performance. Specifically, any state receiving BEAD funds must exempt BEAD providers throughout their state footprint from broadband-specific economic regulations, such as price regulation and net neutrality.”

The stakes are high for broadband affordability advocates across the nation. 

The mystery of who and what killed the California Affordable Home Internet Act is coming into view.

As a California lawmaker hinted when the bill was abruptly withdrawn in June, the evidence seems to be pointing to the new leadership now directing the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) – the agency administering the $42.5 billion federal BEAD program to expand Internet access.

In a recently released FAQ published by the NTIA this week, a corroborating clue has emerged.

And what may be the smoking gun is a bullet buried on page 48, under section 3.29, after the question: "May an Eligible Entity (states) require a specific rate for the low-cost service option (LCSO) when required by state law?”

NTIA's answer:

“No. The IIJA prohibits NTIA or the Assistant Secretary from engaging in rate regulation. Because the Assistant Secretary must approve the LCSO in the Final Proposal, the rate contained may not be the result of rate regulation. The RPN (Restructuring Policy Notice) addressed this fundamental flaw in the BEAD NOFO. The RPN eliminated BEAD NOFO requirements dictating price and other terms for the required low-cost service option.”

“Per the RPN, states may not apply state laws to reimpose LCSO requirements removed by the RPN. More specifically, the RPN ‘prohibits Eligible Entities from explicitly or implicitly setting the LCSO rate a subgrantee must offer’ (BEAD Restructuring Policy Notice, p.7). Violation would result in rejection of the Final (BEAD) Proposal (emphasis added).”

Last week, a California Assemblymember who had sponsored legislation for a broadband affordability law abruptly withdrew the legislation. 

But what really killed the broadband affordability bill in California? Was it opposition to the proposed legislation from within the state or pressure from the Trump administration?

The Bill Was Advancing Until…

Modeled on New York’s Affordable Broadband Act (ABA), the California Affordable Home Internet Act was first introduced in January. It aimed to require Internet service providers that operate in the Golden State to offer a $15 per month broadband service plan for income-eligible households.

Image

The proposed legislation was introduced as AB 353 by Assemblymember Tasha Boerner and was initially supported by the California Alliance for Digital Equity (CADE).

Over the intervening months, CADE and proponents of the bill offered resources and recommendations on how the bill could be made more effective than the ABA, hoping to avoid the pitfalls that advocates were seeing with the rollout and implementation of New York’s law.

On June 4, the California bill advanced through the state Assembly and moved on to the state senate by a 52-17 margin.

In the wake of the Trump administration’s re-writing the rules around how federal funds can be spent to expand high-speed Internet access, state broadband offices are in the midst of revamping their broadband deployment grant programs to comply with a “technology-neutral” framework recently imposed on the $42.5 billion federal BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment) program.

Though most states hoped to maximize federal grant funding to build fiber networks, the new guidance released by NTIA in June requires states to ignore the aim of Congress enacted under the bipartisan infrastructure law.

The new NTIA rules call for states to de-prioritize fiber and give equal weight to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) satellite technologies – something many observers see as a gift to Starlink and a way for the President’s biggest campaign contributor to hoover up additional subsidies.

As states wrestle with how to re-do their scoring rubrics used to determine grant awards, today four leading broadband deployment scholars working with the X-Lab released an analysis that may help state broadband offices evaluate “the capacities and saturation limits of the Starlink satellite infrastructure.”

The overarching goal is to help states determine where – and if – Starlink can meet federal requirements for broadband, which is defined as delivering minimum connection speeds of at least 100 Megabits per second (Mbps) download and 20 Mbps upload.

For decades U.S. broadband policymaking has been plagued by inaccurate and badly-managed data that has significantly harmed efforts to not just track U.S. broadband deployment, but ensure that billions in taxpayer dollars are being wisely spent to address the problem.

From inaccurate broadband mapping data and an over-reliability on industry-provided coverage claims, to inconsistent broadband definitions and patchwork federal oversight, a new study by the Pew Charitable Trusts examined decades of U.S. broadband policy, and data analysis and found plenty of room for improvement.

Image

According to a 2022 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, there have been 133 programs across 15 federal agencies supporting and funding U.S. broadband deployment efforts, propped up by more than $44 billion in taxpayer dollars from 2015 to 2020 alone.

ILSR studies have historically shown those funds haven’t always been spent wisely; often being dumped into the laps of the very same regional telecom monopolies whose attacks on competition and government oversight resulted in substandard access in the first place.

There’s billions more waiting in the wings: as part of the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), $25 billion was specifically earmarked for broadband expansion.