 Good afternoon. Thank you for joining us today. My name is Clay Purvis. I'm the director for telecommunications and connectivity with the Department of Public Service. The purpose of this meeting is to get preliminary input on issues and items for inclusion in the 10-year telecommunications plan before we issue a public comments draft. These meetings are also an important opportunity for Vermonters to hear from other Vermonters on the issues of importance to them. This meeting is the first of two public input sessions. Today's meeting focuses on broadband. Tomorrow's meeting, which starts at six, will focus on cell service, public safety, and public educational and government access TV. Each session will be led by our moderator, who will guide the discussion. Members of the public are encouraged to provide input on these topics, but also any other topic related or unrelated that members believe should be included in the plan. To complete the plan, the department has hired CTC Energy and Technology, along with Rural Innovation Strategies Incorporated, RISI. Today's discussion will be led by Matt Dunn of RISI. He will ask a series of guided questions that are meant to increase participation and guide the discussion. Staff from the Department of Public Service will monitor the chat room and coordinate the discussion. We will call on speakers. We will collect comment first from folks who attend the meeting through Microsoft Teams. We will next take comments from those who've joined by phone. If you wish to speak at today's meeting, please indicate your desire by raising your hand using the raise hand feature. You may also indicate your desire by stating so in the chat function. Once we have moved through each person online, we will request comment from those who've joined by phone. Each participant will be allowed three minutes to speak at a time. Please bear in mind that we are recording today's meeting, and the recording will be posted on our website. Comments are being taken in advance of the public comments draft of the plan, which is set to be delivered May 10. These two public input sessions are not the exclusive means by which members of the public may comment. You may submit written comments to the department at any time between now and May 9. Please keep in mind that the sooner you file comments, the more likely we'll be able to consider them. Once the public comment draft is published, the department will solicit public comment on that draft. In June, the department will issue a final draft, and again, seek public comment through a series of public hearings. We'll be scheduling those sometime later in the spring. Members of the public may provide written input at any and all stages of the plan process. The department will accept written comments on our website. Additionally, we will have a residential and business survey that you can take. The link to this material will be posted in the chat. You may also send written comments by email to psd.telecom at vermont.gov or in writing to 1112 State Street, Floor 3, Montpelier, Vermont, 05602. Now, I'll turn it over to Matt, who will begin the discussion. Great. Thank you, Clay, and thank you for everyone who are coming out on a spring afternoon, or at least a March version of a spring afternoon, to have this important conversation. I think as everyone who are participating knows, this is a time like no other to discuss broadband, because the issues of broadband have never been more prominent coming out of the impacts of the pandemic and the response, particularly at the, or most recently at the federal level, to provide real resources to address this problem has never been more significant. So as we are undertaking this process of creating a 10-year updated telecom plan, we all agreed that it was a good idea to have an opportunity for folks to be able to contribute to that plan early on in the process, not just in a response to a draft version, and to do so in a way that could allow for, again, as Clay mentioned, Vermonters to hear other Vermonters, because there may be variation in how people are prioritizing various aspects of the telecommunication plan. And so having that dialogue in a truly Vermont way made a lot of sense to us. We've provided two opportunities for folks to be able to comment in this kind of fashion, one that's the middle of the workday and one that's in the evening to try to accommodate folks. We have also tried to distinguish between the two times to focus in on particular topics. As Clay mentioned, this timeframe is intended to be around the issues of broadband, terrestrial-delivered broadband, whereas the next one would be largely around things like cell service. But obviously, if this is your only opportunity to be able to participate because of time constraints, once we've actually had folks had the chance to talk about the core issue of broadband that we're hoping to focus on today, you are more than welcome to add in other feedback as well. And again, we will be reading any comments that are submitted in writing to the Department of Public Service website as we're contemplating this. Three minutes is not a huge amount of time to tackle as complex an issue as telecommunications. And so we both welcome and encourage folks to augment or if that's an easier way for you to submit information to do so that way. The kinds of things that we are thinking about as we're getting input from various stakeholders across the state are things like what are the values that Vermonters are wanting to bring to broadband and what are the most important things that people are considering, whether it's net neutrality, affordability, competition or choice, public ownership or some element of local control. All of those are different considerations, things like where has the state succeeded in improving it, where has the state fallen short that we could take this time to deliver a plan to strengthen it. And with the broadband stimulus that is already on the way and more resources that may be forthcoming, where do we prioritize? Is it where there is very poor infrastructure? Is it where there is only okay infrastructure and there's room for competition? Or is it making sure that people who aren't digitally literate or know how to use it can use it better? Or in helping people who have trouble affording it but have the infrastructure are able to overcome that kind of affordability as well as our great state experiment in communication union districts has been very exciting. Other states are looking at us. Are there ways that we can support those kinds of efforts better? So those are all things that we're taking into consideration and perhaps could inform some of the comments that folks would have. But with no further ado, Clay is going to be facilitating calling on folks when they raise their hand. We will please ask for people to limit their comments to three minutes because, you know, out of fairness and in the constraint of time. If we've gotten through everyone who would like to make a comment and someone would like to do a follow on or respond to something someone else has said, we will make room for that if there is time available between now and 1.30. So with that, Clay, I'll turn it over to you to identify folks who may wish to provide comments. Great. If you'd like to comment, please raise your hand or say so in the chat. All right. First one is Adam Heelman. I apologize if I've put your name. No worries. Adam Heelman from Weston. Yeah, thanks for putting this together. I guess my thought and priority as you outlined in that was just on access. You know, I live in a community in a part of the neighborhood that doesn't have access to broadband and relies on dial-up service still. So it's really prohibited to, you know, conducting business and for school kids. So I guess my thought is just, you know, being able to expand access of broadband is a really key priority for not only myself, but, you know, folks in the community that's constrained by that. Great. Thank you. We'll move next to FX Flynn. Yes. Hi. Thank you for the opportunity. I think that you're all familiar with my thinking on the broadband aspect of this project. So I just like to reiterate publicly that I hope that the 10-year plan does include a strong restatement of the goal to get Fiverr to the premises everywhere in Vermont. I think that that sets us up for the economic future that's in front of it. I think that that most readily facilitates things like expanding cellular service throughout the state in a much more flexible and less expensive way. And I think it will create competition that will lower costs throughout the state. And I believe that this can be done in conjunction with not only the Communication Union Districts, but the local telcos, private broadband providers, and the cable companies. I really do believe that we can find a Vermont solution going forward. But most importantly, we really need to have an agreed upon mountaintop that the state as a whole is climbing. And we need to be working together regionally. And we need to make sure that we're talking about every premises and not leaving any places at the end of the valley alone. Because I also believe that in 20 or 30 years, we're going to have a population influx because of climate change. And the end of those roads are going to be more populated than they are now. You know, fortunately or unfortunately, as the case may be. Anyway, thank you very much for letting me participate. Thank you. And we'll go next to Rick Hubbard. Rick, you're on mute. There we go. Can you hear me now? Sure can. Yes, we can. The picture's a little far away from me. I apologize for that. I wanted to raise a more general conceptual issue. You know, as citizens, we organize and we set up a state government, the state of Vermont, to work and make decisions on behalf of citizens. Yet when we approach problems, very often we don't start with the premise, how do we serve all our citizens the very best way? And we typically go to the profit making private sector to perform functions that ultimately have an impact on citizens. If you take this issue, you can make a pretty strong argument that like electricity, like good roads, like decent medical and emergency services, fire, etc., safety, this is an essential service that we're talking about. The way we do business today is really tied to it. So we want really high quality broadband accessible to everybody. And yet when we approach it through the private sector, the incentives are not set up to accomplish that. So my question is, the state government, when you think it through from this point of view, why don't you simply start from the opposite end and work backwards? What will serve all the citizens of Vermont first? And my argument would be that like happens in other countries, it's a role, a proper role for government to simply build and own and maintain the infrastructure of the broadband lines and then lease access to the profit making companies with regulation and appropriate things to make sure that the way they're used serves citizens. And I just would like to make sure that that's a chunk of the focus of this study as you go forward, because we don't often talk about it in those terms. And I have to add that I understand the profit motive pretty well. I've got a master's in business administration from the Tuck School and a law degree. And yet as I grow older and maybe a little more obstreperous, I notice the failure to connect the dots when we move to state government. And I'll hear and I don't know you probably don't have any option to respond to this, but I just like to have that duly noted. Thank you. Good comment. And we will not be responding to comments directly in this forum, but we'll be addressing them in the telecom plan. So thank you for your input. And it'll be something that we consider draft plan. We'll move next to Deb M. Can you hear me okay? Yes. Okay, great. So I don't want to repeat what Mr. Flynn said about fiber to the premises because I couldn't ever do it as well. And he's already said it. But my comment has to do with, I guess, distinguishing whenever a discussion of broadband comes up, it seems that nobody ever distinguishes between fiber to the premises or cells somehow, you know, wireless. And it's just such an important distinction because there's so much involved with well, with that distinction and particularly there's never ever when I see you know, articles in from a digger or the pay anywhere, there's never ever any discussion about the possible health effects of wireless and all that's to do with wireless, whether it's Starlink or or or cell towers or whatever. And I understand about the FCC regulations and all that, but that should really be irrelevant when we're discussing this basic, this fundamental conversation about broadband throughout Vermont. I just think it's so important to acknowledge that, to at least have a discussion and open discussion about if if the well first to distinguish and if we're only talking about fiber to the premises, then great, but say it. And if if it's confused, then that distinction really needs to be made. And if it's just fine with everybody to proceed with more development of wireless, then then we have to have a discussion about the health effects. And there is a ton of science that is getting ignored. The and you should know if you don't that the FCC is currently in the middle of a there is a lot a lawsuit against the FCC and there's a very good chance that they will lose the lawsuit. And it's very largely about health effects that they have ignored. So I just think it's it's a huge important part of this discussion and I never see it. That's my comment. Thank you. Thank you very much. I'll just comment in the sort of facilitator process that that's one of the reasons why we decided to have two different time periods to talk about terrestrial broadband in the traditional sense for this block and then wireless for the one tomorrow. And I think you will certainly see that we will be pulling apart those different pieces as part of the as part of the plan itself. But appreciate your comments. Well, good. Glad to hear. Yeah, thank you. Thank you. We'll move next to Michael Rooney. Michael, if you have a comment. All right. Well, Michael, I'm not sure if you're experiencing technical difficulties. What we can do is come back to you after we after we go to the phones. Would anyone else online though? First, would anyone else online like to make a comment before we move on? Right. Anyone on the phone? I see it looks like we only have one participant by phone. All right. And then Michael Rooney, just giving you one last chance. If you're having trouble today, please write us with your comments so we can consider it. You're in the chat room and you're saying that we can't hear you. Okay. Well, you're not on mute, so this is very odd. I would say maybe leave and come back and see if that helps. Maybe an issue with your internet or maybe an issue with Microsoft Teams. Matt, I'll just turn it back over to you to move on the agenda. Great. If there aren't any other comments in the general area, I would love to prompt some thoughts on those other kinds of big questions that we were talking about. And I know folks have opinions about them if they would like to participate in those discussions. Again, one of the things that does come up and is a little bit of attention is the balancing of three things. One is the expense of building out, world-class broadband, the amount of other kinds of things that are baked into that broadband, including multiple competitors to provide choice for consumers, the public ownership that I think we that Rick certainly identified, as well as the ability for a democratic entity of some kind, whether it's through the state and the PUC or it's through a CUD or a municipality to allow for individual citizens to participate in the decisions that are made, not just in the first year that something's built out, but down the line. And so just as a prompt, if folks have thoughts around that, would love to hear where you see the priority needing to be in that continuum as we're evaluating options. Anyone have thoughts on that particular subject? All right. Well, if we were asking that at a town meeting, I'm sure it would be a hotly debated type of issue, but this is a different kind of medium. So appreciate that. Other kind of larger picture pieces about where people feel, I would like to go into this with the assumption that the state has been trying a variety of things to try to address the broadband issue with best intentions all the way through. Some of them have worked in a way that have exceeded other parts of the country by a long shot, particularly with rural populations and others that other efforts that didn't work out as well as the folks who have been putting them out there. And I think from folks who are on the implementation end would also say we're not working as well as they would have hoped as well. I would love to hear on a top level and, in fact, I don't mean to pick on you, but at least to start a conversation. If there was some ways that you think the state has done a good job in executing those and some programs that might be able to work better in your view and maybe others would then chime in as well. Well, yeah, I have to say from my, I guess, nine years of actively participating in the EC fiber leadership initially just as a board delegate sitting and listening, but then over the course of the last four or five years being vice chair and on the executive committee and now as chair, in a lot of ways, our experiences that we've been insulated from the state in many ways, because we essentially had to go off and do it on our own and figure out how to do it. And it was very gratifying in 2019 to have the state recognize that we had actually cracked the code on how to deliver fiber to the premises to every place on the grid in rural Vermont. And so now I think that our hope is that the state can develop state leadership that is as committed to that goal as the leadership of EC fiber was committed to that goal because without that, what I think we've observed is that there's a temptation to narrow the focus, which is where we get the notion that the problem that we need to solve is a problem of 60,000 addresses. And so I'm hoping that between the 10-year telecom plan and whatever entity gets stood up this year to tackle the questions whether it's the the Vermont community broadband authority or a reconstituted VTA, that all of that can go hand in hand to creating a blueprint and a commitment to that blueprint that will empower persons who are, who get paid to help make that happen, really stick to their guns and really and really have the ability to resist pushes for modifications that will come from the legislative branch or the executive branch. It's a very, I guess that is the thing that I'm very concerned about right now. Great. Thank you, FX. Looks like that prompted a few other requests for comment. Maybe we should just circle back with Mike Rooney just to make sure if he's got audio to work. Looks like he's talking and it's not registering. Let's see if it works now. Oh, it does. Perfect. If we keep trying different things, it eventually suffers. So the main thing that I'm interested in is portability. Mike, could you get closer to your microphone? It's just very faint. It seems like something's over the microphone because we can hear you a little bit. Michael, I'm sorry. We can't hear you right now. We did hear your primary concern was around affordability. All right, Michael, we'll just, you could please submit written comments or maybe participate tomorrow. Hopefully things are better. We'll go back to Rick. Rick, you're on mute. I don't think we can unmute you. You've got to unmute yourself. Phone is strange. You just keep going back on mute. There you are. Rick, it appears you keep double clicking on it and it goes off and on. There you go. Can you hear me now? Yes. Yes. Interesting. On my end, it says, well, okay. Anyways, we've solved the problem temporarily. I apologize for speaking more than once. It's just that you don't seem to have as many people and I wanted to add one other aspect of this. It relates to the rates that are being charged for the broadband we receive. I'm in South Burlington now and I have Comcast as my broadband provider. We only get Comcast for broadband internet. We're trying to wean ourselves off the packages, programs that we basically don't watch most of them. And so we're kind of forcing ourselves to play with options. I pay for about 300 megabytes down and about 11 or 12 up with Comcast, $101 a month. Burlington Telecom is now beginning to build out fiber to our area. And we don't have the option yet to compute to connect. But their pricing would give me a gigabyte down and a gigabyte up at $70 a month. Or if I wanted 300, I would get for 65. Now with that difference, let me segue to something. Remember back when Burlington Telecom got in trouble? And just as an aside, they were required under their public services agreement and authorization that they basically had to make a profit within a year. They could not rely on the city of Burlington to fund them. And if you think about that, within the context of any other business starting out in life, there's almost no way in hell an average business expects to be profitable. It's an absurd requirement. And yet it crept in somehow to the public service board authorization. I think you should take a look at that. And then moving on from that, when it got in trouble, it hired a consultant from New Hampshire to run for a couple of years. And as part of that, real person, they sent over to kind of from an accountant, if you get it in this case, was a woman who stayed in the Burlington area for more than a year. She needed a place to live and she ends up living with my partner, Sally, and I and some others. And we got to know each other pretty well. And half a year in over glass of wine, she shared after she'd shaped things up, she shared some of the margins. And this is what gets back to price. The margins from memory went something like this. They, the cost is the most for the TV programs they have to package and pay for. And maybe they, that costs them, you know, 70 ish cluster minus cents out of every dollar of in of inflow. The second most expensive was the telephone. And that was 40 to 50 cents of cost. The cheapest by the internet, because you just needed central facilities, good ones, and then lines. And that was down to 20 to 30 cents cost. Now apply that, what's going on with Comcast. And Comcast is just ripping off its customers in terms of the margins and the profits they're putting on the broadband because it does not regulate it. And that's part of the point. I think it should be regulated nationally, as well as in Vermont. And it's coming at the expense of customers like myself. We can afford to pay it in our case, but other people who are trying to educate kids don't have those options. And, and, you know, so it becomes this question of how essential broadband is. And so when you're looking at it, we don't really have decent competition in broadband. And the prices are basically close to as high as a provider wants to charge, subject to public shaming or maybe inviting or competitor in, but it's so difficult to do that we don't have good competition. And I think that's really important to take into account when you're coming up with your recommendations. Because unless the state set steps in a way that looks at it from a consumer point of view, people will be commercially exploited. Thank you, Rick. Thank you. Very good. Just make one last request for comments. Would anyone else like to provide a comment of any kind? Raise your hand, speak up. Anyone on the phone? Matt, I think, I think we've heard all the comments that I think we're going to get today. Do you have any closing remarks? No. Just thank you, everyone, for coming out, either to listen in or to participate in comment. Do know that we will have another opportunity tomorrow evening. Again, the focus of that will be on more on wireless. And we welcome comments for that aspect of the telecommunication plan. But if you, or if you know folks who would like to also comment on broadband, we'll make room in that conversation to include those comments as well. And please do submit written comments if you have any. It's super, super helpful in informing a comprehensive telecommunication plan. Great. Thank you so much for everyone who came out and participated today. We really appreciate it. And we look forward to reviewing your comments as we produce the plan. Do keep in mind, I've put the link to the webpage for the telecom plan. If you'd like to provide written comments, please do so. We also have a residential and business survey that you can take. So please take a look at that. And let us know if you have any questions. Feel free to call or email us with your questions or comments. All right. Thank you and take care.