 And it is 130. This is a joint meeting of the Senate Finance and House Energy and Technology. Have I got that correct? And we are here to talk with Commissioner Tierney about the Department of Public Service. I think we've all heard the extensive plan to get the entire state hooked up. But I learned this morning, or a few minutes ago actually in joint fiscal, that it looks like right now the guidance from Treasury is that any money we spend from the present COVID money has to be spent and the project done by January. So we are looking at the next eight months, one building season, and I want to talk to the Commissioner about because that emergency plan is also contingent on further federal funding, which right now we don't have. So we want to talk about what could we do in the ensuing six months. And then the end of last week there was an announcement that Comcast was extending service to 400 homes, which was I think news to all of us. And a little surprising. So I thought we'd let the Commissioner tell us a little bit about that and what's involved, and then go on with any kind of plan B. I represent Brighlin is that where you. Okay. Okay. So Commissioner, the floor is yours. I'm muted myself. Good afternoon, Madam chair. Good afternoon. Mr chair is it sir chair. And it's awfully good to see all of you here today. Here's good. Can can everybody hear me okay. You can call me Brian don't don't don't worry about it. You don't have to call me chair. You don't want to be Lord champion is that right. Or Lord Brighlin. All right. So, thank you so much for the opportunity to meet with you today in this manner. I think it's absolutely critical at this time that we have folks in the room together as best as we can. I think we can see plan that the department put out very much contemplates a team Vermont approach to getting something essential and good done for Vermonters who right now have no connectivity. I'm very grateful of what chair Cummings just said about the two specific areas of inquiry. And I want to give all of you comfort that these facts have been front and center for the department and its work in the broadband area during the pandemic. What I mean by that is that I'm under no illusion that the emergency broadband plan can be achieved in the next eight months. But that isn't the point of it. The point of it is to address a need for universal connectivity in Vermont. So that as we move forward in the pandemic and beyond all Vermonters have this fundamental ability to use the internet to protect themselves if they have to shelter at home. To continue their schooling if they have to shelter at home to get telecare telemedicine telehealth if they have to shelter at home and to continue their employment or find new employment if they have to shelter at home. And it isn't just a pandemic that causes Vermonters to need to shelter at home. It is also natural disasters like tropical storm arenas we know too well. There's a continuing question mark around this particular pandemic that we're dealing with. We like to think that we know it's going to last 18 months, but we frankly don't. We like to think that we're getting on the other side of the immediate caseload or infection rate that the state has experienced. But that is our best projection. We can't be sure there won't be a second wave or third wave in the coming months. So that has been the impetus behind the department. Wanting to address the vulnerability of Vermonters who have no connectivity or connectivity that is well below the federal standard of 25 three. Chair Cummings has asked two questions one about the com cat cast announcement and then secondly about what we can do in the next six to eight months. Starting first with the com cast announcement just to put it in context. On April 10, I had asked all of Vermont utilities, all internet service providers in Vermont, I'll telcos cable companies in Vermont to step up and do what they could in order to help us get connection to people who don't have any or very little. And many companies have responded. The announcement from Comcast is their response to that call that action on April 10. They are accelerating their build out that was already in the works for them. And they've committed to having that done now before the end of the year. This is not a draw on COVID-19 money. This is not a draw on state money. The understanding is this is a build out that they are required to do as a result of a proceeding that related to their CPG renewal for the PC last year. So the pickup here is the timeframe to which Comcast has committed. They've said that they would have that 430 house construction project done by the end of the year. And that's really all there is to it. And the second point about the six months chaircomings and chair Brooklyn. I think my, my judgment and I'm happy to be corrected by others, but my judgment is that the COVID-19 money is not fundamentally directed at infrastructure for broadband build out. And it is more directed at putting funding into existing programs or pilots that are directed at buying down the affordability or the cost of broadband under limited circumstances. The money appears to be available to bring about a service drop, for instance, for individuals who qualify for treatment from the veterans administration, but who perhaps don't have a broadband connection at their house. Picture, for instance, the veteran who lives in a neighborhood where there is fiber that is going by or cable that is going by and that veteran has not chosen to take service so far. Under the COVID-19. The CARES Act legislation, as I understand it, that individual would be eligible to get a service drop made so that they could have access to telehealth care. But that isn't the kind of, that's a very limited scenario and otherwise I don't think translates to other uses of COVID-19 money to build infrastructure for broadband build out. So what we can get done in the next six months would be more line extensions, facilitating make ready orders, fast tracking, citing to the extent that companies have projects in the pipeline that could be helpful on the connectivity front if they were completed sooner rather than later. But don't think that the purpose of the plan that the department has put forward is one to be served in six months time. At this point, Chair Cummings, I don't know whether you want me to continue or whether you'd like me to stop for questions, but I hope that today's meeting is every bit as much about getting feedback from from you folks, as it is in doing anything else because the department is presently in the progress of meeting with stakeholders to get feedback on the plan. Because I do have a very firm sense that there will be more stimulus coming out of Washington DC. I was at a town hall meeting with Representative Welch yesterday. And that's very clearly where he and other members of the federal delegation are headed in DC to get more funding down the road. And it is so very important that Vermont be ready for that, and have a proposal that we have consensus behind as much as we can manage. And so that's the conversation that the department kicked off with the emergency broadband action plan. And your feedback, of course, is absolutely critical. Okay, I believe Senator McDonald has a question. I'd also like to get in the queue. Okay, I think we're going up. We are doing blue hands. Okay, if we do the blue hands. I have Senator McDonald flashed a sign that said what speed are we talking about on the Comcast. And then I have Representative Chestnut Tagerman and Representative in Tatchka. And so we'll go with the speed and then. And can you put me up to also. And champion. Okay, Senate, we don't usually do this. Champion. Okay, Commissioner. So I'll have to ask Clay if he has that information of his fingertips. It's a question. Are you with us. Where are the speeds that. Yes, I am. Hello, can you hear me. Yeah, we can hear you. Yes. I don't know if I can see you because you're not on my money for 100. Okay. Is the commissioners testimony. Is the commissioners testimony been in support of putting out 100 or up to 25 three. Okay. I understood the question. I don't know if you're talking about the Comcast announcement because. Yes, that's what I understand. Discussion. Installing. Federal definitions or remote definitions. I think the answer to your question is what. Build out the broadband service. Okay, I'm going to need hands. This is a previously approved build out, right? So Clay, what do you know what speed we're talking about? Are they, what are they streaming? Sure. So Comcast. Just to be clear, it's not a state funded project. Comcast is doing this on their own. The speeds that they'll offer are. They're already offering the rest of their territory. Those are speeds that meet or exceed the federal definition. And all likelihood they're not going to have a service offering that meets the state definition of 100, 100. Okay. So this is generally not, they are not. Stringing fiber. It's not a fiber to the premises project. It's a cable. Okay. All right. So, so we are. Our goal in this. Hearing is to decide whether or not we want to accept that or. To use money to meet. The. Tomorrow's standard as opposed to yesterday's standard. I think Senator, our goal in this committee was to get a report on. What Comcast had announced. I think what I heard is that this was a previously required. Extension. And that they were moving the time up on it. I don't know that we have any. Approval. This approval. On it. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much. I've been corrected commissioner. If that's not. If I did not hear things correctly. No, no, madam chair. That is correct. And as pointed out, this does not involve the use of state dollars. And. Yeah, that's, that's about where we can leave it here. So they, they have stepped up in and accelerated their construction schedule. And that's what I think is a means of. Trying to further connectivity in Vermont. At a time when it's needed. Okay. All right. So. Let's. Have I got any more questions at this point? Yeah, I have one. Okay. That's right. I've got, I'm sorry. I'm looking for hands. I have representative chestnut. Tagerman and then Yan Tachka. And campion. Okay. So. Representative. Thank you. Yeah. And thank you, June. I have a, I have a lot of questions, but I'll try to condense it. And my major concerns are around the. You saying that the care's money is, does not appear to be for infrastructure, but more for access. But it seems to me that there are pieces of it, particularly for healthcare and education, which could be used for infrastructure. And then. Link to that is with the timeframe of December 31st. So I'm wondering what are the existing technologies that can get us. Some results by then. And, and. I mean, it would seem to me to be pretty much limited to wireless. And I don't know enough about wireless to know what the options are, what the capabilities are, but it's would seem to me that suddenly that's the major. Tool that we're talking about for quick results. I'm wondering what your thoughts are there. Okay. Well, thank you. I think those are excellent observations. And I don't mean to suggest that there's an absolute bar to COVID-19 money being used for infrastructure. Build that with the example of the veterans administration. I was making the point that there are certain narrowly drawn categories, but it's not predominantly directed at, or it's not freely available to be used. So I think that's a good point. And I think that's a good point. And I think that the way this state, for instance, might find it most beneficial, which would be to build out infrastructure and buy down subscription rates. But that said, you're quite right in the telehealth arena. And also in the education arena. There are what I'm going to call stretch arguments to be made. That you could use COVID-19 money. And I have an example of a project. In a moment that I'd like to describe to you along those lines. Yeah. Let's, let's get a touchdown with this, that you would wish the COVID-19 money would be. And so again, the department has undertaken an exercise to devise a plan to address an immediate need that I see that the pandemic has made apparent. And so it's directed at drawing down other federal funding, not making use of the carousel money or not predominantly making use of it. In answer to your question about what the immediate solutions are, this is where the rub is. And this is what all of the folks here are struggling with, I think, as much as we are and other stakeholders. The short-term solutions would contemplate investment in technology that is not fiber to the premises. But our, for many people at least the state of preference is fiber to the premises. And so certainly among the technologies that would be most readily deployable would be Wi-Fi technologies. And in turn, that is one reason why the department was very quick off the mark to seek the deployment of Wi-Fi hotspots because those were immediate ways to get to people who had nothing to get them something. But the state will have to square whether it wants to have an interim solution deployed for people that depends on the use of a technology that is not fiber, which so many people prefer. As for details about technology, I would suggest the thing to do would be for us to talk offline about that if you like because I can get pretty quick to answer any of your questions. Does that answer all your questions? It does mostly. I mean, I think. So you're absolutely right in that I have been one person advocating for fiber to premises and 100, 100 future proofing, call it whatever you want. But recognizing that the landscape has changed. Significantly in that we don't know whether schools will open. We don't know how hospitals will be functioning. We don't know about second or third waves. And our priority needs to be then. Rapid deployment to. Critical areas as opposed to future proof deployment everywhere. So I think it's we're asking a totally different. Question than we were two months ago. Well, far enough, I mean, to the point. And chair Cummings and chair. You'll have to read me in if I'm not following the format that you want this hearing to take, but. There's a project, for instance, that we've been facilitating in the Northeast Kingdom. It's in the. Kingdom East school district. That's a district that has eight towns in it. And 1800 students. Through the survey work that we've been doing. We've identified 150 students who lack broadband at home. And there's a collaboration that's been worked out between. Northeast. Let me say it's. I think no England wireless. There we go. And Velco. And that solution costs $230,000. And could reach those 150 kids in the space of four weeks. And also pass addresses at Linden Institute, I think. That's an example of a project where I would advocate for a very. Stretch argument, if necessary. To draw down such cares monies as are available to fund a project like that. Here's the kicker. It involves a wireless solution. Combination of, um, of. Velcos fiber and wireless. It's not a fiber solution. That's an awfully good option for 150 kids who have nothing. But it also creates the tension that, um, People will say, well, you've got something. So now you don't need fiber, at least not right now. And I think the way I'm trying to approach this problem is to say. What is an achievable objective that realizes a necessary public good. Um, For a price tag that we can afford. In a timeframe that is useful to us. And that kind of solution plays to all of those points. Okay. Um, I'm going to ask that any senator that has a question raised. His or her hand and not flash notes on the screen. And I have. Um, chair Bricklin, I'm going to put you to the front of the line. No point of order. When we are discussing this topic and the word broadband is used. When we define what we mean with broadband. When we offer it. When we're talking about going to towers. What are we talking about? Okay. I think the commissioner just. Did that it would not be fiber to the home. It would be a combination. I'm asking up and down speeds. Up and down. Do you know what the speeds would be commissioner? I do not right now. Okay. I'd have to ask. All right. Something less than 25 three. Okay. Let's, um, I've got representative Bricklin who is the co-chair. So I'm going to him. Um, commissioner, just in terms of, uh, turning to the emergency broadband action plan. And, um, if we're going to focus on some of the immediate actions that you've outlined there, and I think you have. I don't know five or six that you've listed. And I don't know if those are kind of six to 12 month timeframe things, but, um, considering some of the new information we have. Um, I think we're going to be able to focus on some of the, um, our ability to use the federal money that we have at this point. I wanted to focus on some of those. And I'll just ask one question. I've got a bunch of questions about these more immediate actions. Um, the first one deals with, uh, data collection. Regarding broadband needs. Um, specifically, I think you focus on. Um, Uh, the data collection. Um, I think the, um, the challenges have been there. And I know that. Well, at least in this plan, it says you're working with the agency of education, I believe to gather some of that information. Can you give us a sense as to. What that work stream looks like. You know, how granular that data will be and how quickly we'll have that information. I think that will really be helpful. To inform. Your work, our work, uh, at a granular basis. Um, significant issues are in terms of remote learning. Thank you. Uh, chair. My memory is that we just sent over. Um, a map that the department. Um, devised. That reflects the survey results. Uh, spread across Vermont. And it reveals some. Several clusters. Of the data that we need. And I don't know whether you have that map in front of you or not. We don't. Can you put that up if we have it? Yeah. I think it might be on the, uh, on the finance committee website. I think it is. That's why I knew. Yes. It is on the website. Okay. Um, I also can be as a tabulation by town. Of, um, Of responses that we received through a survey that. My memory is the department of public service conducted. This was part of the outreach that, um, began with my, um, my outreach, my. Request that people contact us at a press conference. I think about three weeks ago. Um, I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question for me. What it has posed as a question. Whether. You concentrate resources on where the, um, the hotspots are. That emerge from the map. One of which is, for instance, in the Northeast kingdom and the project I just described. Would. Nail a good portion of that hotspot. Or do you focus on. The scattering across the state. Um, I think that's a good question. I think it's more difficult to get a connectivity solution to those kids. That's the kind of question that I think, uh, discussion. Um, again, this is an area where I, I like to, um, to hope that stretch arguments can be made that cares money could be used to reach these kids. Uh, one of the challenges is, uh, I think that's a good question. Um, The question is, is flow directly to the supervisory units themselves. The local educational. Institutions. And so it's for them to decide how they, they use that money. But your question was about workflow. And, um, I think the short and the long of it is that the department has been conducting a survey. We've provided this information to the, um, department. And they've taken it under advisement. Um, my understanding is that the secretary of education has also reached out from his position through the supervisory unions. To get information from them. Um, I don't recall seeing the results of that outreach yet. So this map is the, um, is the work of the department in terms of the surveys that you have done and people have responded to. Um, I think that's one of the things that we've been doing. Um, kind of specific surveys of the supervisory unions and building principals to find out how many kids in your. School are lacking. In the early days. That was our ask. The agency of education. They had quite a bit on their plate though. So I wouldn't go so far. I think it probably invest to speak with the agency of education to find out how many kids are missing. Um, I don't know, I don't know, I don't know if this is finger up, so maybe you want to add some. Okay. Yeah, just add one thing. Um, I think we've been working with the agency of education. Uh, fairly well. Uh, to collect this data. We are getting this data from a variety of sources. One is. An online survey we have. Uh, two is folks can call our. Consumer affairs hotline. Um, We have a lot of work either through AoE or, uh, individually with. Uh, supervisory unions to. Uh, get information. So some of that information that's on that map. Actually about half of it. Um, comes from data collection efforts that supervisory unions have. Uh, been conducting. Um, with the assistance of AoE and with us. Um, Okay. I'm going to go back to my list and I have representative. Senator campy and representative Sabilia representative Campbell. And Senator Pearson. That's the order that your. Blue hands popped up. So. Representative Yantoshka, it is yours. Okay. Thank you commissioner for being here. I think that we should try to. Make whatever arguments we can to get some of that COVID-19 funding. The cares act. To support broadband deployment. I would imagine that that, whether it's CUDs or Ilex or. Cable companies. They probably already have plans. Where they're, where they're, uh, Intending to. Expand their coverage. And many of these may be ready to go. Lacking may, maybe only permit process and money. So I'm wondering, God, whether any of those. Might be accelerated to the point where, where they could use me. Any COVID-19 money that we can get. To start early and move faster. Thank you. Do we have ready projects out there? We have. Of course. Sorry. We have two approaches on that one is the April then called action representative Yantoshka. That I sent out. And so for instance, the Comcast project is an example of one of those companies that is accelerating its build schedule. There are others, for instance, Franklin telephone that has stepped up and lashed, I think something over a thousand. I forget the unit that Kim gets used the other day in the conversation. So, I don't know. I don't know. Feet, I think. Of fiber since the onset of the pandemic. There are the other approach that we're taking is. To look back at the bids that we've had over the last three years from the connectivity fund initiative. These were projects that were engineered and ready to go, but they're not. So, I don't know. I don't know that we've piled to see which ones. Perhaps could be revived at this point. And perhaps either Kara's money could be used or. Another funding source could be located. And the criteria that I've been using in working through that list. And I believe we shared it today with. House energy technology, if memory serves. My criteria on there is to focus on the fiber projects. And there are quite a few on the list by my math. There was well over a thousand. Locations that could be reached in this fashion. So. That's what we have by way of shovel ready. A point of concern that I have is. Again, in listening to Kim Gates give remarks yesterday at the town hall with representative Welch. She reports that. If you are trying to procure fiber right now, you're looking at September. Before you get it. And then there's an additional challenge of workforce. I used this cable is a company that provides a lot of workers who do. Either cable or fiber stringing in this state. Or you know, you know, they are pretty much the go to company for folks who work in this. They are going to be limited at some point in their workforce capability. And so the question becomes whether we can get. Enough line workers and to do work, assuming we have the shovel ready projects. Does that answer your question? Okay. Okay. So we've got projects that might be shovel ready. We've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of work to do. We've got a lot of work to do. Can we get the cable to string. And can we get the workforce to string it? We seem to have some supply chain. Issues. That have. Not. We're not strangers to at this point. Are we also looking at where those proposals are. As compared to. The, the. Clusters of need. Are. Yeah. Certainly. We've got. That's a very intuitive question. And the answer to that would be, that would be my first thing to look at. Yes. This is a list that we, I think, just finished compiling when I testified before you folks. On the 29th, I said that work is underway and it was just. It's just like, you know, it's not the best way to do it. But that's, that makes perfect sense to, to do. And that's pretty much the. At a political framework that we're using here is how can we take the information that we're getting. How can we fit it to the. Area of most pressing concern, which is getting to kids who don't have. Remote learning capability and getting to folks who need telehealth. Telemedicine. And then of course folks who need to work from. We need to look at our data and our maps that we generate through that paradigm. Okay. Senator Campion. Senator Campion. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. You were frozen there for a minute. Oh, I'm sorry. So two questions. First, the build out that Comcast is doing. I'm not sure how that plan was put together. And then secondly, you know, we keep, and this is just something, you know, we keep talking about 100. 100 100. I don't think there's another state out there that is at 100 100. I'm trying to understand 100 100 myself in a way to. They're getting kind of close to some towns in my district that. That could use their work. And I'm not sure maybe you could direct us if it's possible to, I'm not sure how that plan was. Was put together. And then secondly, you know, we keep, you know, We're going to come back to that. I think I'm, I don't know. I think the question I gave myself in a way to me, the question is, isn't so much that, but is it fiber or is it not fiber? And maybe I'm, you know, you or Clay could weigh in on that. So thank you. I'd be happy to take that question. I think. Okay. So do speaking. Is it quite. It is yes, ma'am. Thank you, Madam Chair. So the speed thresholds, they're really buckets. It's the best way to think of them. And the buckets are labeled in a way to exclude other technology. So when we talk about 25-3, that is the upper limit of DSL. So we know DSL really can't do that. So we've decided that 25-3 is a metric to measure by because it excludes DSL. 100-100 excludes cable. So we know that if it's 100-100 or better, that it's probably not going to exclude cable. The thing with DSL and cable is that they all have some amount of fiber in their network. They are upgradable to fiber to the premises someday. So even if you are making an investment in cable video, future upgrades to that same network would someday achieve the 100-100. But it is not fiber to the premises and therefore it can't do 100-100. So when we talk about 100-100, it really is fiber. Someday it might be 5G wireless. So whether our 5G deployments, we would expect those to meet the 100-100 threshold. Okay. Great. Senator Campion decided to answer your question. That's very helpful. The question about Comcast and Build Out. I think I wasn't quite sure. I understood it. I'm getting people frozen. Yeah, let me see if I can mirror it back. Okay. Senator Campion, I'm going to try to mirror it back to you and just nod your head. Well, no, I think I understand what you were asking. You had two points to it. One was you noted that the build out is getting close to your towns. And then secondly, you asked whether there's a way to weigh in on the build out. Okay. So on the first one, I'm not okay. I'm sorry, it's close to what? Okay. It was the land grower. So it's a way to weigh in. Okay. Brian, we're having trouble with your audio and also I think with the commissioners audio or your video freezes. Is the question that this Comcast Build Out is getting close to some of the towns that are in the local CUD? Is that the issue? Just one town in particular. Senator Campion is definitely frozen. Okay. So it seems to be just build out its impact on the CUD. Yeah. I think what we could do, Senator Campion, is the department can get a hold of you and we can download your concern. And we can certainly get in touch with Comcast and the CUD and see what can be facilitated by a way of conversation between them. At the end of the day, you know, Comcast holds the reins on its build out, but there's always the bully pulpit. So we're certainly happy to try. Okay. All right. I've got Representative Sebelia, followed by Campbell, Pearson, and now Brock. I think that's all the hands I've seen. So Representative Sebelia, the floor is yours. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to try and be on camera. No. Okay. And I've got to plug my computer in my low battery. I don't know this. So I will be off for a minute. Plugging in. Can someone give me a thumbs up if you can hear me. We can hear you. I can hear you. Okay, so it appears that there is a delay between when I start speaking and when you hear me, and I can actually hear the echo. The irony of this call is not lost. I'm hopeful on all of those watching it. So I have a couple of questions on commissioner. Can you or or clay. Can you tell us a bit more about the map. And the dots that so the map that has the dots, the different colored dots. What does that mean, like, how was that created just simply how was it created. Representative Sebelia, I'm going to share my screen so everyone's seeing the map. Okay, now we can see. It is coming slow, but sure. There it is. Surely. Okay, so I can, I can speak to this. We can move it up just a little bit. Or not get the better half of the state is as Senator can say. Okay, so that's where the better. All right. Okay. This map was created using data that we've collected from a variety of sources. We have the survey data that individual districts have put together, working with AOE and with the Department of Public Service. So we don't have data from every district, but a few districts. The other is data that we've sourced from the surveys that we've put out. So if you go to our website, you can take a survey. Based on your address and the issues that you're, you're seeing, obviously for people that lack broadband. That's a difficult ask. So people can. Yes. I wrote for instance in one of the towns, which I can't say because you haven't gotten all the way to the best of Vermont. There is a single dot that is red. And I believe the town of Whitingham. And I'm trying to understand what what that means. We have geo coded all the survey results to our broadband availability data. So you'll see the legend on the right. This is what should be available at the consumers house. Red is red is bad that's not served with broadband. Orange is served with DSL. And then yellow 10 one is also DSL the lime green and the dark green are cable and fiber. Yep. You'll notice that not everyone who has an issue has an issue with accessibility that to us indicates an affordability issue. So play the color that I'm seeing, for instance, in the town of Whitingham depicts that that is a town that is either served by 401 or underserved is that. That's all it means, because some towns have multiple dots. I don't understand the dots or individual locations. That's that's the consumers. Okay, so that means you've received one location in Whitingham. That's right. Yes, okay, it would be stronger if we had more locations. And so you can share the, the link with you so that consumers in your districts can take the survey or call us. Because I know my supervisory unions have both compiled data so I'm just wondering where that data exists and lives. Yeah, we may have been in touch with them. This is an iterative process. We're still collecting data so this is subject to updating. I can't speak to whether we've been in touch with your district supervisory unions or not. I hope so but if we haven't, we'd love to hear from them. And it does, you know, I'm very interested in this I do feel like this is a pretty probably our number one priority at this point is making sure that our kids and I mean for the fall that we have a backup plan here. Madam chair, I have another question. Which is the work together last year we brought forward, you know, I think it was a really great foundational bill act 79. And what we've been talking about, at least my colleagues in the house and I is about how do we accelerate that work that is envisioned in 79. And so my question is for the commissioner. You know, is this plan built to accelerate or is it built to spend money and do you understand do you understand what I mean by that question. So did you build it in order to get things done faster or did you build it in case we had money to spend like what is how is it prioritized. And Amelia, are you talking about the emergency plan. Yes ma'am. Okay, so it was the big plan. The plan is built to address what I consider to be a fundamental inequity in the state that has been highlighted by this emergency. It has been built with the anticipation, as has happened in prior crises that what follows is the availability of sizable federal funding. It is designed to be ready to go should such a funding opportunity come our way. In terms of getting things done quickly. I have, I have been managing this crisis with three different schedules in mind. One was the immediate need. The other the intermediate and the other the long term. The way I would classify this plan is it is overwhelmingly directed at something long term, which in this case would be a three year window, or two to five years if you prefer on either side. There is a component of the plan though that is directed at immediate actions that I think are necessary in order to provide a variety of tools to a variety of stakeholders who all have an interest in bringing this particular goal to pass which is to connect the unconnected in Vermont. So, in that sense there are things that the legislature could do immediately that would make it easier or more expeditious for certain kinds of projects to get built. There are things that need to be done if the CUDs are going to be supported in participating in the art off auction at the federal level. And that is going to be happening in October of this year. So, those are, you know, I hope that's responsive to your question. It's not so much either or as much as it entails all of the above that you mentioned. It is responsive. Thank you. Madam chair I have one more. More just with regard to wireless technologies and act 79 and this emergency plan. You know, I certainly when we talk about kids and getting kids service for school making sure we have a backup plan for the fall. It's easy to understand why, you know, kind of piecemealing together some wireless solutions may be what we need to do. With the line of sight issues that have been so well demonstrated through the failure of large federally funded wireless projects in the state. We do not support any kind of wholesale employment of wireless in this emergency plan. You know, certainly on a case by case piecemealing together, you know, last mile solutions, certainly, but I just wanted to put that note that. Thank you madam. Okay, thank you representative Campbell. Thank you. I wanted to ask clay first about the joint project with Velco and New England wireless in a kingdom east district. You mentioned that you thought the speeds we were talking about were less than 25 three do you have a, an estimate of the speeds that we are talking about. I thought I had unmuted myself my apologies. You know with wireless speeds are always dependent on a variety of environmental factors trees and the terrain, the distance from the tower so I think you're going to see a variety of speeds, depending on on how the project is designed inside it so it won't be the same for everyone. I think with these kinds of projects it's, you know, something is better than nothing and New England wireless does provide a decent affordable service in the Northeast Kingdom for those who can get it. So I, you know, what I've heard of folks in up that way you know they're they're happy to have it. And that this, this could be the difference between being not connected and connected but it's, it's not going to. It's not going to be the best possible broadband that you know money can buy. It'll be somewhere in the, you know, five megabits to 15 I would guess. Okay. Michael Bernbaum emailing me any minute now with the correct answer but that would be my guess that most people like can receive the service to get something between five and 15. Okay. Okay, is there any money in that place or any state money going into that project. Not yet we're looking for funding resources. I don't know, I don't think we know yet what the final price tag is. I heard an estimate somewhere in the two to $300,000 range but I could be off on that so I don't think we have a final price tag yet but that would be certainly something that would be right for either connectivity initiative, or if there is emergency broadband funding available. Something that we could easily get up quick. I think we need to tie down the speed then because that is important to some members of these committees so just put that in the top of the question list. Could I follow up with the commissioner though. I think I think that it is important to have something more than nothing. I'm just talking to you on a wireless connection now that is I just measured that it was about seven, which is it sometimes is higher than 10 but never very much higher than 10. And we're able to do mostly, you know, meetings and streaming videos and everything at that speed so it's something it's better than nothing. I can actually qualify my answer. I'm sorry, as I said, Michael berm bomb will be emailing me anytime soon. And here we go. So the equipment that they're proposing actually would deliver a minimum of 25 five up to 15. Okay. Where am I signed up. My question for the commissioner is, there must be other locations in the state where we could have a partnership between Velco or distribution utility and and a wireless provider to do the same sort of thing do we have anything else in the hopper or is it would this be a fruitful place to explore, you know, for for something that can be rolled out quickly because I think it's represented just a tandem and said, we got to get something out, you know, immediately. The, the company that put the wireless hotspots out has a similar proposal. The Velco New England wireless is going to use the citizen broadband radio frequencies CBRS I can't remember the full acronym but that's what they're using to bring these higher speeds and the company that did the wireless hotspots RTO has a similar solution that can be deployed elsewhere so we'd be looking at that as a possible project too. Okay. Anything to add commissioner, you're still muted. Sorry, yes. Thank you. So it's very helpful to have that feedback representative Campbell and also representative civilian and chair comings, because it's instructive to know that it matters to a variety of members, whether state dollars are being used for certain speeds or not, and the department notes that in terms of whether there are other projects that certainly my hope and that is the, the function that the department has been trying to serve in brokering these discussions. The Velco was extremely responsive this was for instance, their step up after April 10. And I think it's, it's promising that we have your project already identified. I don't know sitting here today whether there are others but you can be assured that we're going to be pursuing that angle. Just as we have been having discussions with the electric utilities about what their role could be in terms of a more robust expansion of broadband accessibility in the state. So, I, I wish I could give you a punch list of 10 or 20 projects that we know we can nail down the way we've done this one. But when you think about getting a start. It's so very important to have a an early success that is demonstrable, and that can deliver so that people can see that as a model for more things to come. I also chair Cummings if I may, there's another map I think that we sent to the committee that shows the survey data by school district that I think it might be useful for the committee to see as well. Clay, are you able to put that map up to because that might help to represent a stability a little bit in picturing. Yes, but I want to be clear that that's not our survey data by school. It's broadband availability data by school district. Okay, well then I'm misunderstood. Okay. I have a question for you and that is, we're not using any state money to augment the Comcast build out right now but I'm wondering if, if, if that would be another viable way to get again some service to some to some people from households. Well, it's like this, there isn't a lot of state money, meaning Vermont state dollars. And I'm aware of there are some dollars in our connectivity initiative fund. And it has not been lost on me that a number of your colleagues objects strenuously to such dollars being used for purposes of grants to Comcast and the like. And I regard that to be a serious issue that I I tread very lightly on I really don't know how to answer your question because there is a sizable contingent that does not want to see that money used in that fashion. And there is a sizable contingent that wants a solution deployed if it involves them. So be it. What I am trying to do right now, frankly, ladies and gentlemen is keep us focused on what we can be team Vermont about. And it seems to me that so far, unless I'm mistaken, we can agree that kids need to have connectivity if they have to school at home. And I think there are people who have nothing ought to have something. And as I understand it, there is some willingness, maybe not universal to contemplate interim solutions that may not strictly be fiber to the premises. And if I've gotten that wrong, I would very much welcome hearing from you. Okay, that's my feeling so thank you commissioner. Okay, thank you commissioner. Senator Pearson next followed by Senator Brock representative the entochka and representatives Sabilia. I think that's it. Thank you. I guess a good second way into my questions. I think the concern that we're only interested in fiber to the home. I think Mrs a small detail which I don't know we wrestled with all of the speeds and technological parameters last year but I think we landed on symmetrical service and so my question is, Okay, and I've spent a fair amount of time using internet at a property that has this fixed wireless solution that delivers symmetrical service. And that means really what it means is a faster upload, enabling us to, to have conversations like this. And I think that's kind of the principle we landed on not actually directing necessarily that it be fiber, but that the value of symmetrical was was clear for the future. My question is fixed wireless seems to be assuming I understand the technology to some degree seems to be something that we have the best shot at deploying quickly. And my, what I'd like to hear is, what is the plan I appreciate the attempt here is a plan on connectivity for everybody. What is the plan here for the rest of the year so that in the fall when we have flare ups and kids are forced to learn from home again. Are serving more of our more Vermonters than we are serving today, then today. What is the short term plan, I'm assuming it's fixed wireless, but could could we talk a little bit about that please. Okay, I think Commissioner that once for you or clay. I appreciate the observation very much Senator Pearson. I think that you're asking for a plan. And I think that the emergency plan we've put out has certain short term measures that I think need to be done so that we can deploy as many connectivity solutions in the short term as possible. And the plan there is very much all hands on deck, who are able to help provision those connections. The first step in that plan has been to identify where the need is greatest and reachable. So, if we had, for instance, a, an expedited citing process that would enable polls to be put up that could carry technology whether it is a wireless solution as you suggested, or whether it's extending align some place. If we had an ability to offset the costs of a line extension so that a family that has no connectivity can afford to get some, because their share of a line extension has been defrayed that would be an immediate step. If there is a cluster that becomes apparent from the maps that we've been creating the ones that you've seen here for instance today, if you look at the Northeast Kingdom you see one of the clusters that we've been targeting. The plan is to design a project with such partners as can be located and persuaded to participate and get a solution rolled out. Also assumes that we can locate the requisite funding for that. So these are all actions that are being taken in the service of the objectives that you've identified. So the, the easy one to start with is the streamlining permit requests that I'm assuming was change in law or authorization of a temporary suspension suspension. Yes. And just so it doesn't slip off anybody's radar screen there's also the need to extend to 48 a. But at this point in terms of the convert compressed timeframe we're talking about what is very much needed is a permitting acceleration. For telecom much as you folks enacted for energy infrastructure in the wake of tropical storm has that request been made or are you making that request today. I keep feeling like the sense of urgency is not quite matching you're just worried about that so has that is a committee working on that request is the administration made it officially or where we at. And we're having a conversation like this today to see what the appetite is for that. So I mean if it's the considered wisdom of this group here that that is something the legislature would support, then that is a proposal that I'm prepared to make. And those are all attached to the plan, correct. No, they're not but my memory is that we gave a draft legislative language early on in the session and the legislature take it up. I remember a whole lot of licensing and suspensions and issues attached to the plan you gave us last week I'm assuming those are what you would like. And if there are others. Yeah, okay. But to the specific request about emergency waiver authority and the like. Yeah, it's just had to pierce this question by memory is that the legislature was approached with that in March and I, I'm happy to look into it again. If there's anything that's not attached to the plan that came in last week let us know and yes, we'll see. Yes. I know there's no official bill because I just went over them but if there's a draft bill out there somewhere if you send it over. We can chase it to ground. We can get to both of us. Yeah, they will be ready. Okay. Senator Brock, you are next. Thank you madam chair. Commissioner, what's the strategy to get to the statewide broadband goal of universal access at 100 100. What's the strategy. That strategy is laid out in the plan senator and the item one which plan are we talking about the emergency broadband access plan. Actually, excuse me. I've read it. It contemplates that we would go it contemplates that we would go for federal funding that we would use that federal funding through the connectivity initiative to conduct a reverse auction. Yes, through that reverse auction this funds would be dispersed, and the projects will be constructed by the winning minutes to bring universal access to 25 three by 2024. So you believe that the reverse auction would result in a combination of bidders who would bring broadband either through wired connection, or through Wi Fi. Yes, my suggestion in the plan is that it be technology neutral. And the purpose of having these conversations right now is to ascertain to what degree there is a consensus that that would be the thing to do. The condition that would be, in my opinion, optimal would be for the auction to be conducted such that the winning bids are symmetrical 100 up 100 down. It is well within our purview to structure the auction so that bids could be made that perhaps don't contemplate 100 up 100 down. That's a decision that I would expect us to either reach a consensus on or not. And that would allow for solutions other than just fiber to the home. But if need be, we can construct that reverse auction in order to further the 100 up 100 down fiber to the premises goal that is the preference of the consensus. But I think your express opinion that if we did seek 100 100 that it is unlikely that we'd be able to accomplish it within the time frame is that correct. I don't think so. But I think I need to know what you mean my time frame senator. Well, there are two time frames we're talking we're talking about the time frame in your emergency plan. These are the COVID funding. Yes. So starting with that, what do you think we could accomplish. But I just said the line extensions, the make ready orders and the like the wireless solutions and so forth but the reverse auction is not directed at anything we can do in the next eight months conclusively. The reverse auction is directed at projects that we've been built by 2024. We're using federal funds. I'm sorry to say again please the last. I think we're having trouble hearing you commissioner. You're the reverse auction, the reverse auction is directed at projects that could be built by 2024 using federal funds. They're not projects that we've built by the end of the year using COVID money. So the various funds that you are suggesting using could you describe them. They're appended at the back of you mentioned the COVID funding and the restrictions associated with COVID funding. These are the having to be committed prior to year end. They're also other funding sources in their senator there in the list. There's the. We have to go find it for you. Okay. They attach, they are attached to the. The emergency plan. Yes, they're all called out from pages 18 through 20 for instance, non broadband program, such as the economic development administration. The northern borders regional group. The northern borders commission, either one of which is COVID-19. Either one of which is the federal initiative that I think we're presented with. Obviously the issue of using the COVID money seems to be a bit of a moving target. Okay. I'm assuming that the definition of the availability of funds is that the administration's definition at this point. I would not be comfortable saying that, Senator. That is my learned definition. And I'm certainly member of the administration, but I cannot say that across the board. I'm representing the administration's definition. Okay. I'm just going to say that depending upon when we heard it from JFO and others as to what that commitment means that do you know whether that is firm at this point? I'm sorry, Senator. The ability to use those funds vis-a-vis commitment versus actual expenditure versus. In the ground and completed projects. I have to say what I can give you is my. My opinion is that the money has to be spent by the end of the year. I don't think that in my opinion, there is no ambiguity about that. And it is one of the big challenges of this money. Quite frankly. I am, I am. I am puzzled as to why the federal government has sent this amount of money. With these strings and strictures attached. Because at least in my world. I'm finding it very difficult to actually apply the money to benefit the people it's supposed to help. So it's, it's, it's a challenge, but I think we can all agree that the money has to be spent by the end of the year. That's my understanding. That there was a meeting we were told that money chairs today with treasury yesterday. I gather people from the administration and joint fiscal. And that's what they were told that it wasn't committed for it almost sounded like it had to be spent and built. So it didn't even sound like we could prepay if we were so inclined. I mean, to be clear, I'm committed to pursuing whatever uses can be lawfully made of that money. In this context, if it isn't for stringing a pole and a wire, at least it can be used to buy down the cost of access for people. I think there's a clear case to be made for that. Fundamentally, one of the reasons why the plan that the department has put out is targeted at subsequent federal funding is because of at least my early recognition for which I take responsibility that the coven team money isn't the gift that it seems to be. And I hope that the federal delegation is successful in getting some of the strictures reversed or relaxed. But, you know, time will tell that. Well, based on what you know right now based on what's in your emergency plan, how many addresses or areas will be left unserved once that money is spent. Which money. The code money. I'm not sure that we've done that analysis to Senator Brock the plan is directed at fun. It assumes funding that has not yet been granted. If the funding that we believe is necessary is forthcoming. In my opinion, universal access is is achievable, which means nobody would be left behind. That is with it with the emergency money, assuming that you get the amount that you are. Right, it's not tied to coven 19 money. I'm talking about the though right now I'm talking about the coven mountain 19 money in the emergency plan. At this point, would we how close would we get to universal coverage or would there be significant gaps and if so I'm just trying to get a sense for, you know, what we what we will be accomplishing if we spend this coven money as as as we think might be available. I don't think I can give you the answer that you need. I, what I can think what I can tell you is that you will, you will reach many Vermonters who do not have any right now for instance the 150 students in the Northeast Kingdom. If we were to assume for a moment that every project that has been submitted to the connectivity initiative. Over the last three years. In fact, were to get some funding to be built. That would probably be another couple, at least, I want to say a couple thousand locations but I would want to do the math and add up the spreadsheet that we sent you before I tie myself to that number. I'm sitting here today, I can't tell you what percentage of the problem, we can take care of between now and the end of the year. A lot of that depends on how much the companies and the codes are able to step in to do this work. A lot of it also depends on what the appetite is to accept wireless and possibly cable solutions as interim solutions so I think asking a very acute question that it would be good to have an answer to but sitting here today I'm not able to give you that answer. Thank you. So, right now, the question for the legislature is to take a look at some of those licensing and permitting issues that got brought up to have the discussion about what speeds will we willingly accept or how much will we hold out for and what impact will that have. And I think that's it, we are talking, but your plan requires further funding from the feds. We're also, I think today trying to figure out that money isn't here. There's probably a better than equal chance that at some point in the fall or next winter that we're going to have students back learning from home. And I think our concern is how many more of those students can we have hooked up. And I think those are the numbers. We've got the, the, you know, the Northeast. And, but, you know, we've got Comcast how many more kids are going to get hooked up with these Comcast initiatives how many more with the other program in the kingdom. And what else can we do to target those, I believe, red in orange school districts where a large number large percentage of your students are not connected and that's probably where we want to focus is those red and yellow districts. So I'm going back to my list right now I have representative Vietachka representative civilian and representative chestnut Tagerman and all I got two more hands. And that's, well, Senator Brock you have a further question. I just have one brief question and that is this these documents the plan and the emergency plan that we've been reviewing. These are I assume the work of the department is that correct. Yes. So, have you sought or obtain any outside expertise to review what you've done and to comment or provide additional input to you. So this plan has been published for comments on our website and it has been released, meaning we've sent out a press release to all media outlets to let people know it's there. This is a process of meeting with the stakeholders as I said at the top of this hearing. So we certainly will be getting that expertise that you've, that you've pointed to. So the product here any independent expert to assist you or to review your work. You mean a consultant of some kind. No. Okay, thank you. This is a discussion starting piece and I very much hope that we will get the benefit of other stakeholders. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You consider the Magellan report. Joint fiscal is interviewing people to provide some technical assistance to the legislature because we don't have any in house technical assistance. And hopefully they're trying to move that along I know they've done some interviews so we may have some of our own in house technical assistance. This is moving along. Okay. Representative yantatchka. Thank you, Madam chair. I have a question about the world develop digital opportunity fund. In your report, it says that addresses 24,000 locations. And over what time period would that be deployed. Have any idea about that. And I also have a question about five G but I'll wait for your answer first on that. My understanding of the art of order, keeping in mind that they're coming up with rules right now for this auction is that there will be a three year. Shot clock on the projects. Once they receive a bid, they have to be built within three years. And would that tie in with that tie in with any plans that we that are already on the books for where Ilex or see you these may be planning. For instance, if the funds were approved. I'll say in December, what they do, what do we have projects ready to go. I would have to think that that there would be a period of time where a bidder would refine their engineering design. Before they would be putting shovels in the ground. So I'm not sure that somebody who wins a bid in the October auction. I'm not sure that somebody who has shovel in the ground in the following construction season. Clay, are you able to shed any light on the question. The, the winning bidder will receive support from the universal service fund over 10 years. They'll have six years to complete construction in all of the census blocks that they, they've been awarded so many milestones for each year. And I can't remember the exact milestones, but I think they have to be 80% done by year three or four. I don't anticipate there will be a significant build out in the first year, as Jim pointed out that'll largely be a period of design and make ready. That's two through six would certainly expect significant build out in each of those years, unless the winning bidder is a satellite provider, or a fixed wireless provider that might go faster, and they're certainly eligible for bidding. When they, when they say 24,000 locations, is that like 24,000 residences and businesses. I think they use the term households and they're using census data so it's not, they're not mapping physical buildings like we map buildings. And they're looking at census bureau data for each census block company household during that block. And so the, the eligible number is households and it's 24,000 statewide but they're in very discrete areas they're in census blocks that are completely broadband. Okay, and on the section about 5G the FCC 5G fund. I thought that the, the range of 5G units is only a couple 100 feet. And I'm wondering how that would work in rural Vermont where we have all these mountains and trees and everything else to deal with. Is that very feasible for Vermont. That's a, that's a good question so under what they call option a in the 5G fund report. They make available about 85% of the geographic landmass of Vermont. That includes areas that are well covered today with 4G LTE. So the fund could be used to bring wireless 5G service to areas that already have good 4G LTE. So it might just become a public subsidy for 5G infill in areas that frankly the market might take care of by itself. There is discussion in the 5G fund and PRM about prioritizing areas that have no cell service. That's an area where we'll be commenting and imagine those states will be commenting on that. But the problem with that is that the federal mapping is not adequate right now. There was a federal law passed a few months ago called the data act, which requires the FCC to straighten out its mapping of wireless service. And if they do that, we might have a better idea of what's possible, but it's not clear that what we think of as 5G small cell is what's going to be built. It might just be what the industry really calls 4G advanced, which will be a better 4G LTE service that utilizes existing macro towers and new spectrum that's now available to them, both at the low end, you know, the 600 megahertz up to and beyond the 1900 megahertz. Hope that helps. Well, I think so but I was really questioning at 600 to 1900 megahertz. How far does the signal travel and what, you know, how many, how many different things so we have how many cell towers we're going to have to put up in order to serve them on. So the lower spectrum bands go further distance generally the higher spectrum bands go a shorter distance. So you'll see the, you know, if it's to, you know, by 5.4 gigahertz or something is gigahertz it's going to be a small cell thing and a suburban environment. And then if it's, it's in a lower megahertz 600 TV spectrum that they've taken back or other spectrum that they've repurposed that that will be reserved for rural deployment. And then there's spectrum that they foresee being deployed along highways to little installations along roadways to provide service. There are a lot of different ways to achieve the 5G speeds that they're aiming for. Okay, thank you. Okay, Clay, we've been being told that when there was all the upset about 5G that because of the range. It might work in the big cities but that it wasn't going to be coming to rural Vermont anytime soon, just because of the distance in the trees. Is that changing? I mean, are we looking at 5G is a viable alternative for last mile service? I don't think that without a public subsidy contemplated in the 5G fund, which is $9.5 billion. I don't think that we would see appreciable deployment of 5G service in rural areas, but it'll be interesting to see as the rules developed for this fund, how it occurs. I think you'll see it in a place like Burlington first. Over time, you may see it in places like downtown Montpelier, downtown Rutland. I think it's already there. But in Northfield or Bethel or something, we're not going to see it anytime soon unless something like the 5G fund really focuses. And just for clarity, the 5G fund is an FCC federal fund. The state of Vermont is not going to fund for the deployment of 5G. That's correct. Vermont does not have $9 billion. We just cut our email quotient in about half. All right. I've got Representative Sabilia and then Representative Chestnut Hagerman, Senator Ballant, and I've got Chestnut Hagerman again, so Representative Sabilia. Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to, I do want to back up and just state, I mean, obviously, we have seen pretty serious effects from not having adequate broadband for our students for those of us trying to work from home for access to government. And so I want to say I really appreciate actually the department coming forward with a plan to get us moving in the timeframe that it was done. I think there's always room for improvement for collaboration for expansion. And I want to say thank you for putting something on the table. And I also want to commend and make sure that both committees are aware that the department's work was recently cited during an FCC debate. The work that was done by Corey Chase and Clay to map wireless signals. Unfortunately, that argument I don't believe won the day, but it was a very important work that was done. And so I do want to make sure we take the time to just acknowledge that work. So putting this plan down on the table. One of the, another question that I have for you is if we were to say to you, Commissioner, please go back and tell us. Come back and tell us, give us a rough timeframe for this. When is this achievable. And I mean physically achievable and then maybe financially achievable. Right, so then those may be two different questions. For me I have a sense of urgency if there are $0 on the table, I still have a sense of urgency because this is still a problem that we have to solve. So I'm going to ask you to go and and come back with it with a timetable of some sort. How long do you think it might take. And I know we're talking rough, we're talking rough here we're not talking perfect. How long do you think it might take you to come back with a timetable for the current plan. While we've been sitting here. A bill dropped in the US House of Representatives that proposes $4 billion for an emergency broadband connectivity fund and $1.5 billion for emergency connectivity fund, and then a $50 broadband lifeline credit. And these funds could be used through 2021. So, if that money were to come available, meaning it becomes law, and we're actually able to get some of it. Right there, it has a 2021 timeframe. So we would try to tailor our uses to that timeframe under the plan itself that we have right now. What's contemplated through the reverse auction is that those projects will be built by 2024. Okay, so, and again. I want to, you know, if we took all of the money off the table, say there's no dollars. Okay, still have had this problem that we were aware of underscore highlighted exclamation points. And, you know, we have to find a way so we don't have the resources, how could you come back to us with a plan. Here is, you know, the timeframe that we think this could be done it, you know, the resources could be secured the knowledge the data. Like how long the actual work would take for the items that you have, at least the immediate items that you have laid out here. Okay, so you're living for a physical work schedule how time you know, if we had all the money in the world or if we had no money. How long would it actually physically take. Yeah, just string everything we need strong. I'm saying with the plan that she's that the commissioner has brought madam chair and okay emergency places. Yeah. Okay. The immediate pieces if we were to say to you okay there's no dollars like just come back and tell us physically how long was to accumulate the resources and kind of stage the work. Okay, so I think I'm struggling with the question because absent money. I don't see, because it's not an idle question. The money lives with the people who are doing the work. Yeah, to me though, for instance how much time it takes a cut to do something, as opposed to how much time it might take Velco to do something as opposed to how much time it might take a cable company that's going to string fiber to do something. A lot of that depends on how they manage their capital and their work plans. So I would be making an academic guess at that or production if that's what you are looking for. But it's not it's not entirely clear to me so perhaps I can take another pass at the ask. I'm not going to belabor this point and perhaps this is something we can pick up a little bit later but for instance, you know, could you tell us like. So let's say you have all the money that you need. What would the time what would the time frame be like, you know, money is not a question then. Again, there are there are variables in there such as whether the workers are available, whether the the fiber can be acquired. I don't want to interrupt you but I'm going to interrupt you because please do my actual question is, could you come back to us with some sort of a rough time frame. We can we can we can rough something out for you. That would be assuming that the wire the light that everything went according to plan that you didn't find out that you had a three year backup in cable supply. We're looking for a rough, you know, these folks are the, you know, these are the experts in, you know, that have been hired to do the job in our state. You know, can they come back and tell us roughly how long this might take I know we're not going to get precision at this point because we're moving quickly because we have an emergency. Can I ask representative civilian what for one moment, what will what will that let's say that we come back with this plan for you. How will that help your next thinking so that we have that in mind as we're trying to answer your query. I do have funds to spend commissioner, it would be helpful to us to just understand and anticipate the time frames. You know we've heard that there could be time frames attached to when those funds need to be expanded so I would like to hear from the department about how long you rough roughly would I might also suggest that if the legislature so inclined when you retain the experts in the joint fiscal office that you have them do that as a parallel project so that you have to answers to to compare. Madam chair may I just ask a quick question. This is burning camping just related to this or statement I just want to make sure that we know every time we ask the department to do these you know scenarios that could take a lot of time and a lot of effort. That they it is taking away I suspect from other work so I just want to put that out there. I think that's. I'm still struggling representative Sebelia. Yeah, to say how long would it take to do the entire plan that was the auction and the build out or if we got a small amount of money. Some money. How long would it take to do the I think that's divided by county. And how long would it take to do the project in each one of those county districts. And then you could email it to the commissioner. It might get a little clearer. I'm talking about the in the actions that would be able to be taken immediately. So immediately. Okay. The first part of the plan. Yes. Okay, that's very helpful. Thank you. Your question that I have is with regard to the reverse auction. And building out with the proceeds from the reverse auction at speeds of 25 three. You tell me why we would go to 25 three with the reverse off what your what the thinking was with 25 three on the reverse auction funds when with x 79, we require build out with the beta funds to be symmetrical speeds. I'll take a first crack at that. I don't think we should put undue emphasis on that part of the reverse auction. Okay, if you keep in mind that this is a plan that we've put out there seeking comment. That is the kind of comment that I would welcome as a lawyer. I would like to offer you this building some flexibility into a plan or into a rule or law is advisable because there's always that one off scenario that can't meet the the goal or the ideal, but that needs a solution. So it's when when when I put in the plan the concept of an exception to 100 up or down and being willing to accept the 25 three solution. It's not intended in any way to be a broad application or to make it the norm, but rather it's to provide for that one off scenario where that might be the most desirable thing that's attainable. At that time, that's okay. Commissioner, I would just note in read. Thank you. That's helpful. So you're receiving feedback. I would offer this feedback as well. The last time that we received a large amount of federal's federal dollars for broadband build out. We thought that that was going to make things better in my region and in fact it made it worse. And it set us back it set the kingdom back a decade. And so for me, when I think about this, I think about not investing, you know, once in a decade, unfortunately, or, you know, really limited dollars in anything except, you know, the future, a future proof. So I wouldn't want to put us back. I think I understand in the law they call that fencing certain solutions out it's putting a fence around something and saying, not this. And so by adopting the symmetrical standard that we have at the level that you have you effectively fenced out a recurrence of the scenario that you just brought up. And I can understand the instinct to do that. It's as I said, there's always that one off but feedback heard and understood and of course eager to hear from others as well but the example you cited is not at all lost on me or the or others at the department. Okay. I have represented chestnut tagerman next and then Senator balance. I've already asked a question of Senator ballot hasn't yet. Only to. Okay, Senator ballot you want to. Thank you representative is very kind of you. I want to bring us back to something that I know is on the minds of all the representatives and senators on the call which is that we want to know that we are going to meet some metrics and and some measurable progress. I mean, we together you at the department, us where we sit. And so I know that I believe on April 13 districts and schools were supposed to submit to the AOE their continuous learning plans for their, their schools and districts and that was supposed to give us information about how many families within a district did not have access to broadband or wifi some means for these folks to do learning at home. I don't know how specific that information is whether it's an aggregate number or whether we actually have the details of the specific families that need the service. I think we need to head into the next six to eight months, knowing what the goal is, who are those families, where are they so that we can circle back around with our constituents and say, did we make it better for you. Like the old Ronald Reagan is life better now like it's that simple. You know, come the fall, when we have another outbreak, is it better for your school and your family so how do we get to that, those measurable goals that we can all hold ourselves accountable for. So when it comes to what is in the continuity of learning plans. My strong recommendation would be that you have the Secretary of Education and to speak to those plans and what they did and did not tell you. I can tell you that we at the department moved as we did, because we have a sense of urgency. And we've done the outreach that we've done to get the data that you're describing, because we recognized early on I think it was one of the first things that clay testified to when Senate finance convened a meeting. That there is no good repository of data on the point that you're asking about. And so we set about to create that as best as we could through the survey process, and by reaching down into the school districts. So I can certainly sympathize with your objective of wanting to circle back and see who did we help who did we not. And I think that would be a wonderful check on the work that we're doing. I think it's the next several months. It has crossed my mind. I had my staff prepare an email that I was going to ask the Senate pro tem and the Speaker of the House to distribute through all of you to ask that all of you send it out to your constituents. So that we could try to do a data catch that way but I didn't want to overwhelm you with with the serving efforts that we've undertaken. That was a point where you get lots of data and then as Senator Campion pointed out, we've had a lot of demands I had a report prepared prepared today just to give you an idea of how many broadband complaints that we've handled over the last six weeks and a given year we might see 300 in March we saw 300 alone. So, and the complaints very for different fact patterns point being that you know we're trying to make good judgments about where to get our data, how much data to get and how to use it. So, I agree with you completely Senator Ballant that you've you've named what it is we need in order to target resources to get kids connectivity solutions. And I think we've made good progress in the last several weeks in developing a picture in the state that gives us an idea of where we need to target resources. But to the extent that you have questions about what the continuity of learning plans told us on the point, I would urge you to speak with Secretary French about that. Okay, thank you. Okay, representative just not Tagerman back to you. Thank you, Madam chair. Commissioner, there's, we've been throwing a lot of feedback at you. Although a lot of it is. It's not necessarily all in agreement. So, so we're again asking you to thread all sorts of needles and walk all sorts of tight ropes so I'm going to continue down that line. And, but build it touching on points that representative Sebelia and Sebelia and Senator Ballant raised. I guess I'm, you know, I'm seeing the plan, which I really appreciate as a, as you said, this is what we could do by 2024 with X amount of dollars. So that's one plan and, as I said before, the landscape has shifted so we now need to look at a six to eight month solution there. And I'm wondering if you are planning to not a, not a plan but a con a concept or multiple concepts of well within the next six months with COVID funding for education and medicine, perhaps. Whatever state funding we would choose to allocate. These are options to reach the greatest number of unsurribbed areas or with emphasis on schools and on what hospitals medical facilities need. So that there is a I have whoever is not muted to please mute if there's that we're getting voice feedback in here. I'll move. That's my music lesson remotely downstairs. Okay, the capacity that we have the broadband capacity that we can both be online at the same time. Not to glow. So I guess I'm, I'm seeing we have a plan that with a four year timeframe, or three years three and a half year timeframe but we're also need a plan that is possible within six to eight month timeframe and is that something that you are planning on providing to us or is that something you're looking for us to suggest to you. But that is work that is underway as we speak I thought this was a question that was asked earlier I think it was Senator Pearson, who asked a very similar question. The first part of the emergency broadband action plan was several steps that need to be taken in order to create the tools that could facilitate some of that work in the next six to eight months. And the mapping that we've been doing and the data gathering that we've been doing and the cross talk among agencies, principally the Agency of Education and Department of Health have been directed at exactly what you're talking about. That's why we came up with the map that shows for instance from our survey, where folks have inadequate connectivity, or, or perhaps it's available but they're not taking it because there's an affordability issue. And so what follows then as a coordination project to make sure that the resources that have been made available to the extent that they can be used within the next six months to get more connectivity out there are known to those agencies that they can pursue them. For instance, if there's an affordability issue for a student who's been identified through our survey. The next step is to make sure that the local education authority that has received COVID-19 funding is aware of that student situation and then they make a decision about whether to use it to give them an affordable subscription to broadband service. And that that work is very much underway and I certainly welcome any input that the legislature wants to give us have certainly gotten quite a bit from today's meeting but you know that that plan is an action. Finding the people finding the resources that are available that we can facilitate and trying to get those projects go into the best of our ability. So kingdom project for instance is one of them. So, it sounds to me like that that role is then your role is coordinating a piecemeal plan, as opposed to providing an over a Marshall plan and I don't mean that to be critical and I'm afraid it is different. We need to we need to pull together as a team, and that is very much what the department has done and putting something on the table, and I have very much welcomed the feedback that we're getting today. The Department of Public Service is punching well about its weight class in coordinating that work, but no I don't have a Marshall plan. I don't have resources for that. Okay. Thank you Commissioner. Commissioner, because I've come to the end of my list. I think there are two more hands raised. There are all there are two more hands raised. Okay, I've got represent Higley and representative Sherman in that order I'm going to ask mine. Um, I think what I'm hearing people ask is if we all got together and did one of those really quick we all agree and as we've done a couple times this year. We fixed all those little licensing and renewals we did a major amendment to 310 which is sitting on the calendar with the 248 a extension in it, we took care of all of those, and the legislature. And I understand the administration may have its own plans for the cares money. But if the legislature said no, we want to put some money to cares extension and the federal government sounds like it's something of a floating target as to what's allowed and what's not allowed. But if we decided we were going to put 20 million or $50 million into broadband expansion. And we have a plan to get that on the ground, built and spent by January 1. I think committee you can do a thumbs up thumbs down but I think that I can't read it Senator I think it's backwards. Can we, you know, is there a fallback. If, if the money became available, not enough to do a full statewide auction, but maybe enough to have some impact on those reading on how fast. If we took care of all the licensing and permitting and assuming somewhere we found a stock pilot cable. Is there a way we could get a plan up and running really quickly. I don't know discussing 25 three or 100 100 senator I think that may depend on what technology it's possible to get where. I don't think we can just hold cable on to everything. Or fiber on to everything but I don't know. So I think there are two different questions I don't know which one we're asking. Okay, I think we're asking how quickly we could get any I'm asking, since I'm asking how quickly we could get any project in and then tell us what the speed with that what's the trade off. If we go for 100 100 house and I'm not asking for now. So, I think that's what I hear the committee asking. I think there's a simple answer. I'm not sure it's an acceptable answer but here's the answer I would give and clay. You'll improve upon it. You have right now, an existing mechanism in statute, the connectivity initiative fund. This is a mechanism by which you can really short order conduct an RFP process, seeking bids to build certain amounts of last mile whatever the bid decides, and they name their price. And those bids then get evaluated in conjunction with the connectivity advisory board. Okay, those grants can be awarded. The explicit terms can be controlled by the state, for instance, one of the explicit terms can be you must propose a project that is symmetrical 100 up 100 down. As to how quickly they can be built, we can also impose, you know, limits, meaning you must have it built by December. I cannot speak to how realistic that is, but I think at some point ladies and gentlemen, we have to make a start. We have to try. And I think we can agree that we're trying to get as much connectivity out there by the end of the year, and that it makes sense to use established mechanisms to do so. Frankly, I think you've already done that planning, and you've put that planning in statute. And that's what the connectivity initiative is for. But if you're not comfortable with that, then I would urge you, please give us further direction. If I, if I may, I think what I'm hearing. Wait, I'm trying to figure out who's speaking. Because I can't see all of you. So just identify yourself. I'm sorry, this is a clay. Okay. Voice. Just to add on to what June has said, I think what I'm hearing from the committee is that in our plan, you or a plan you want to see a target a goal and a way to measure that progress toward that goal. How many addresses can we hit. How many students can we target within the next six months and I think that's something that we can certainly improve upon in our final plan. Yes, here to pull a couple counties, what, where would you go. Right. I think we can provide that to you. Okay. Yes, Senator ballot, you've got a couple representatives who've been waiting to dump in here. I do and I. Yes, I do. And they are on my list and next is representative Higley. And then representative Sherman. Here, as you can imagine being from the Northeast Kingdom, I'm all on board with flying 150 students up here at $130,000 with that moving little wireless and Velco combination. This is, you know, again, that's kind of off the cuff, but I mean, there is an example right there that that is a possibility of something that could work in the next eight months. And what I'm talking about now is it seems to me there's two different discussions here. One is cares money being used in the next eight months, and then other money that could possibly be used for this proposal that the department put together to go to balance questions and concerns around students out there that possibly need service. I contacted my schools in my area, as well as as a John Peters up at the North Country Supervisor Union, who put out a survey as well. His survey reached out and had 374 respondents at eight schools, but again there was a lot of schools that did their own surveys. And I'm looking at very specific information from my schools. I'd like to just take for an example J Westfield, seven families and two staff members with internet issues. And it sounds like they're basically around satellite and cell service. Troy school 180 students, five students with no access and about 20 families and staff intermittent service and again that looks like cell service only. So the list goes on it's pretty specific and I'm sure they know who these families are. My point here is, if we're talking about reaching these people that don't have it that needed for school work. It looks to me as though a lot of it could be upgraded cell service as well. Now I'm not a techie guy. But again, if this is a possibility and, and one of the recommendations that came down as well was, you know, to make sure that s 301 gets passed. That's the 248 a provision around getting this, these cell towers cited quickly. So again, there's another example of something we can do as a legislature get, you know s 301 over to us, get it passed out and move on with that. So I don't, I don't think we should be looking at duplicating services in a sense, when it comes to schools because it appears to me that a lot of that information at least in my area is already been pretty specific. So, just just my input but yeah I think there's two separate issues here, and we need to be working on both of them in a sense separate. And I think our sense is that there are those things have been asked, asked for that the individual schools are doing them but there doesn't seem to be a central repository, so that it can be mapped and put in part of a plan and I've asked the Department of Education for that I looks like we may need to re ask. We can get some movement. Okay, I have represent Sherman and then I see a senator raising his hand, not his blue hand, but I will represent take Senator Pearson after representative Sherman. Thank you Madam Chair. I'm Commissioner Tierney I just, first of all I do want to thank you for this work you and your staff for this work on this action plan. I think it is an excellent start and brings us to a place where we need to be to consider where where we go from here so I do want to recognize that that work and, and thank you for it. First, my question actually goes back to schools as well. Students and families in schools, and so we're precisely I notice on a, and I'm looking here. There's, there's the interactive broadband map, the survey available that you have and I'm, I'm just wondering is that the only place I wasn't clear when you were talking to Senator balance. Is that the only place that you were are getting the information for the connectivity for families and students. No, we play just to just to basically I'm wondering because I know that schools in my district for example and I'm sure schools all over the state have done their own. Analysis of who precisely needs service so are you, are you in fact getting reaching out to the individual schools, I don't mean the Secretary of Education, I mean to the end of individual schools to get that information. That is that is something that we have from a few school districts will be working to get more school districts on. We've already reached out to every supervisory union to collect that data. Sorry, we're getting a staff. Yeah, every supervisory union to collect that data so a lot of that data is coming in and I do want to stress that this is not the final map this is right as of May 12. So as we get new information will be populating that map. The survey is one area and we do have duplicates so we are meeting those out as well. So Clay, I'll just ask, how can we, especially in smaller communities, again like mine and like several of the folks here on this meeting. We actually have those exact addresses. We have them. I have them at my fingertips where where they're not recognized at all for example on a map it might say 103 Park Street, I might put in 103 Park Street and it's not recognized at all for Is there, how can we help you, or can we maybe connect if there's a list that the school district that that we have of those addresses should we just how can we help is if or is there. Get if you can give them to us certainly that's helpful you identified a problem, a technical problem that we have to work through which is the, the address you think you live at is not the address that the 911 database thinks you live. So there's called geocoding the address trying to place the address with an actual physical location and that's time consuming and tedious so that's a lot of the kind of work that my staff is going through literally address by address. So, so just to just to finish up, if we get, maybe I'll just, for example, for my school district in my, in my district I maybe I'll just get the information of locations and maybe just send that to you and you can do with what you guys do. I guess that would be helpful and we'll follow up with the school district to make sure that it's accurate. And again, I just want to thank you. I want to thank you clay and you commissioner for all this work. I think it's a great start and we can do it. Thank you, Madam chair. Okay, thank you. I've got Senator Pearson and then I'm going to start wrapping this up we are about a half hour more than a half hour over time. The House is staying with us but the Senate has at least one other witness we're going to get an update on the CUD so Senator Pearson. Just a quick point of information and representative Higley. I understand it the bill to extend the sunset of 248 is moving towards the floor so so it's among a bunch of bills that have been requested that you know we have now going through rules committee, given that we're working remotely but I saw that on a list this morning so hopefully you guys will get that before too long to begin. It has been on my must pass list since the beginning and we're finally starting to take things off the calendar we did get it out by crossover. Thank you. So it's coming. Okay committee unless there is something else horribly urgent. I think we're going to wrap up this section. I don't know representative Bricklin are your folks going to stay with us. I don't know if they are but I can think of nothing better to do so I'm going to hang in there with me. So we live such exciting lives these days. Okay, Commissioner thank you. So I'm going to go to work and I think eventually we will get through this and be able to see where we go. Okay, it's been a real pleasure to be here. I'm going to stay for Mr vicious testimony. And so I just want to offer to the extent that any of you think the department can be helpful in orienting those folks, please let us know. We're happy to do that. Okay, I think that's fine. I think what we've seen as we've started to work through this is that we don't have in-house expertise to help us that's independent. Like we have joint fiscal and we have attorneys, but we don't. And we don't even seem to have a ledge council who's a real expert in technology. So we're trying to help us understand. That makes perfect sense. Your work and maybe we'll ask better questions. I think you folks, sincerely, I really think the questions today have been very good. And it's been very helpful to me. It has laid bare the fact that we don't all agree. And so the work that you folks can do to come to consensus yourselves and let us know that would be so very helpful. But we're definitely here to support you in your work. I think we have gotten our discussions, which is all the suggestions that you have made about licensing and permitting to help move this along to 48 being the prime one. And then there's the speeds and under what conditions we might settle for what. I think individual committees can have their own knock down drag out discussions and then we'll get together and we'll probably do it all over again, but that's what we normally do. It's a little different when you're not sitting at a table, but I think that definitely gives us some marching orders of what you need from us so see we can get this back on the agenda and go working with it. Mr. Mr fish is here and just so the members know. The plan itself is attracting national attention from other states they're actually looking to Vermont to see how we handle this. So I think we have a chance to help a lot of other people. And I just really welcome your input. I will now be quiet and give Mr fish who I think you're really going to enjoy. Okay, well, I'm going to say welcome to Mr fish, because I don't know that as a committee, I'm sure as a committee finance has not heard from him. I know we authorized hiring him to help these with the same technical issues that we have. Understanding as community members, all the intricacies of technology so Mr fish, the floor is yours. I'm not seeing you on my screen. There you are. I have found you and welcome and the floor is yours. I think the Senate especially was looking you're you're getting the calls from the You know the communications union districts, the CUDs and just what's your impression. How are they doing. What do they need to continue. Are they ready to play a role in any of this build out in the next six to eight months. You know, how do we, how do we work, how do we work well with them because I think we see them as somewhat of the future, especially in the harder to serve rural areas so floor is yours. And yes, this is the first time Senate finance is hearing from me or any legislative committee and I knew it this so be kind. Thank you for. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the committees. I came on board last November, and I sum up my mission as lighting a fire under the grassroots effort to create communication union districts and expand broadband around the state. This is created by act 79, and I'm working closely with other units of government nonprofits cooperatives for profits, you name it. My key tasks were convening and connecting different groups. I've spoken to many of the different regional planning commissions. I am speaking to many of the different CUDs on at this point almost a daily basis. I've worked with various providers and brought various providers through the public service department to, to make their case and express their needs. I've been working on identifying the needs of the CUDs and other providers and working to leverage resources and I think most importantly, I've been trying to prevent people from recreating the wheel. There is expertise out there with the various CUDs, and I want to make sure that is shared among all the CUDs and that is something I'll get to later I think there's a real opportunity to further increase cooperation between the communication union districts. So give a little background on the timeline to show the progress we made and where we might be going. I have it in my testimony I have a timeline and clay if you would put up the map of the communication union districts. Please. I'll be there in a minute. To get started the first communication union district was started in 2011 it wasn't officially a communication union district at that point and that is EC fiber in 2018 CV fiber was created in 2020. We now have the Northeast Kingdom broadband dear field Valley communications district is southern Vermont communication union districts. There was 41 or 44 towns that voted that town meeting in March to create these methods of assisting their communities in deploying broadband. I cannot. I can't say enough how inspired I am by the efforts of the CUDs of what they've been able to accomplish in such little time. And I, I was shocked when I came on came on board for the first meeting of believe it was the dear field Valley CUD, or it was southern Vermont, and just of how organized and how far they've come already. You can see on the screen right now the map of where we stand right now with the various CUDs. If in the Northeast Kingdom if clay scrolls up a little bit, you'll see the NEC broadband, and you'll see going down you'll see CV fiber, EC fiber, and then in the southern part of the state you have the dear field Valley CUD and southern Vermont communication union district. I've seen a version of this map before, but almost every day over the past two weeks it's been changing the dear field Valley CUD just yesterday added Jamaica as a as as a member. And I expect to see a continuation of that expansion throughout all of Wyndham County scroll down there a little bit to see the one of my favorite parts of the state there clay. As you can see it's it's expanded from when it first started. The next map that clay will bring up is showing where we're going. We've already, we run the broadband innovation grant program. And as a result of that program we've already received letters of interest from groups around the state. We also recently awarded three new grants in a early decision round. And I'll talk briefly about those when we get to the next slide. Well I'll talk about those we we awarded last week grants to. Here we go here we go it's very colorful I apologize for any lack of clarity, but what I attempted to do in this map is to give a snapshot of, of what's happening around the state. And first to disclaimer, I'm trying to know everything that's happening around the state. I'm only one person so I apologize especially for the independent efforts, if I've missed anybody and these are the are active efforts that I'm showing. But as you'll see on this map if you see in the purple, where you have Eden Johnson Cambridge Belvedere Hyde Park will get that is a new cut that is ready to go they're waiting to get started. And I'll talk a little bit about that in the needs, but they were just awarded a feasibility grant. There's also, if you look over to Rutland County, we know they've submitted a letter of intent for it to serve part of their county as a communication union district. And we just heard from Addison County. So, things are happening all across the state and I said my mission was to light a fire and to support those trying to light a fire. And I continue plugging along with that and I thank you for your support and the support of all the different actors around the state that are working on this to all hours of the night based on the emails I receive. So, the next thing I wanted to, to touch base on unless you have question we can stop and take questions on those maps if it would be helpful. On the maps. I have represented Brighlin. Thanks. This is traffic work and I just wanted to one pass along that, you know, the CUDs that we've talked to around the state and our committee we've heard great feedback on the work you're doing Rob so it's really helpful that we can clone you in the coming coming months and years because I think your work is incredibly valuable. A question I have that comes out of the maps is, are you finding that there's an optimal size for a CUD as you get more towns involved in a CUD. There's more hurdles to overcome to roll out connectivity. I do so many towns at a time so you have a larger CUD and challenges there, but I'm presuming there's also account economies of scale as you bring more towns together to, you know, overlay the cost for what the CUD has done are you finding from all these CUDs you're working with that there's an optimal size. Some of these are quite small. The Northeast Kingdom CUD looks like it potentially is going to get much larger. I think it's a balancing act. There's various factors you have to weigh you have to weigh the number of addresses left to be served, versus the number of people you want sitting at a table or on a conference call or zoom meeting, attempting to make these decisions. You also have to weigh, if you're going to be operating this network, how far is it economical for a service truck to travel. You want to be sure that any of these networks that are created through these communication union districts really support and benefit their community, and do so in a way that has excellent customer service. So I don't think there's any set size. I think we're still in a phase right now where we're experimenting the various communication union districts are working with each other and discussing there may be mergers for all we know. There's a lot of possibilities of where this is going to go. There's also the various communication union districts that are looking to expand. Even on this map I don't have the next towns in line for EC fiber, or for CV fiber. Well, a lot of things are in flux at this point, and all these CVs CDs are performing feasibility studies and business planning, and much of that will be flushed out in that process. And just related. In terms of the, the service that you supply and the help that you supply for these CDs around the state. And maybe this isn't as answerable at this point but I'm curious if there is ultimately a statewide resource statewide office that helps with CUD work around the state whether it's grant writing legal work fundraising things that all CDs do that maybe are not the most economical way for individual CDs to be spending their time. I would agree that there's an opportunity and it's an opportunity that we're doing our best to fulfill. For instance with northern borders, the northern borders regional Commission grants that are coming up. There has been discussion among all the CUDs, and most of the CDs don't feel that they're in a place to apply for an infrastructure for construction grant. And so the CUD is taking that on as a way of potentially assisting pre vetted groups expand broadband in their community. There's also I was going to get to this a little bit later on. There's talk right now between the communication union districts of creating some sort of consortium to work with either partnering amongst themselves or maybe with the utilities and a provider. There's a lot of different questions, but to make the CUD is more competitive and frankly able to participate at all in the upcoming FCC of World Development Opportunity Fund auction. So there is a room for, there's certainly room for more coordination and we're moving in that direction, like one of my goals from the beginning was to make sure that these groups that are scattered around the state are talking to each other. Thank you and thanks for all your great work. Okay. Any other questions at this point. Okay, don't see any. So, fish it's back to you. Back to me. So, like as I've said a lot of my work is soliciting feedback from the communication union districts I want to know and understand their needs. I want to offer advice where I can I want to connect them to resources where I can and as part of that process over the past. In the past few days I've been starting to solicit feedback on the emergency broadband action plan, and just in general like what do the, what do these communication union districts need to get started and succeed and move from the organizational stage to the deployment stage. So, I compiled that feedback. I'm first the disclaimer it's not exhaustive. There's also some differences between the various communication districts, and I encourage the committee to invite those communication union districts into to have their own say to share about their projects to share their passion and to share what they need to be successful. So I'm going to provide a little bit of an overview, not an exhaustive list of the feedback I've heard from them to be clear this is from them this is not from the department. So the first thing that was identified and this came out of efforts in Lamoille County, as well as several the other cuts the Lamoille County issue came out of those groups that want to get started right now. And current law requires in order for communication union district to to get started to become official to at least two towns have to hold votes at town meeting. In normal times they could hold a special town meeting. We're not in normal times right now. And you all imagine as trying to do a zoom call with 150 members of your community. No. So, there's been a call for seeking a change in the legislation change in the law I apologize to come up with some sort of temporary measure that allows communication union districts to be created without going through the town meeting so probably created by the select there's a lot of details to work out but that's a concern in Lamoille County. And I know with the new efforts that are underway and Rutland and Addison it may be a concern there as well. So that is one thing that they think the legislature could do as a way of moving things forward even during these emergency times. Okay, the other the other issue I'm hearing from several communication union districts is there and they're in a strange place. So they're a municipal organization, but they're also operating in a competitive landscape. So, figuring out how to make those work together with having enough transparency, but also not having a situation where a potential competitor can take your feasibility study and your engineering study and all of your plans because it's a public record and beat you to it. So figuring out how to bounce the public interest and the building it, the business interest is a challenge that many of them are facing, and are looking for direction and clarification in terms of what is public what is protected, and how to move forward. So, the, the second issue and this is this issue is shared by all of the cuts is capacity building. These are all volunteer run volunteers can only do so much and can only wear so many hats. It's a challenge. So, actually, I, is there some questions right now I see a giant question mark Senator McDonald. Oh, Senator McDonald raise your hand. I'll get to you. I've got representatives to be earlier first. I'm taking notes so I'm not watching as closely as I should okay. And then I'll get to Senator McDonald. Just really briefly back to Rob's discussion about the problem with organizing right now during the CUD. We Maria is working with the box on a bill right now to address that on the house. I think if you can send us this list or email it to faith. That would be helpful because I am taking copious notes here thinking that we may put together some kind of committee bill or bills. So, I'm going to start with the ground work, all the licensing and permitting and other things that might be necessary, so that when we find the money, we're ready to go and go quickly so Senator McDonald, I have somebody else. I believe the witness is speaking about CUDs and the and about how that it's difficult to operate in a competitive environment. When one of the things that helped EC fiber get started was that they didn't have a lot of cable in that district they had pretty much nothing. Easy fiber was, you could predict that it would have a good take up rate, and it could pay its bills. Today, we're discussing. On one hand, sending money to cable companies to build out. 25 three. And every time someone purchases or signs up for 25 three. It makes it more difficult and less likely for the neighbors farther down the road to ever have a modern business friendly broadband system where in weeks like this. People don't have to leave home because there are three kids. And two people trying to work online with 25 three that's inadequate. My apologies for the long, long thing. As someone who's working with CUDs. How do you advise us. Not to endorse short term policies. To obstruct our goals to make this state a competitive state for broadband. How do we resist putting in 25 three, if it means it's going to be more expensive to serve the rest of the areas. Thank you. Okay, any suggestions there and I can I can touch on that it's a it's a one of my later points and also madam chair this document was provided to faith and is up on the site so okay don't worry too much about the note taking. Great. I can watch the blue hands. I'll skip ahead I want to make sure I go back to my points two and three but points for was the CUDs are concerned, they're concerned about 25 three versus 100 100, but they also understand the challenge of that we're in an emergency situation and need to serve as many people as their advice is to figure out a way to do it in a way that doesn't doesn't prohibit future solutions so that any build out that's less than 100 100 has to have a very visible very clear plan of how it is going to be 100 100. They're very concerned about bonded DSL which is usually to DSL lines put together to achieve 25 three, and that's where it max is out. They do share the concern that as if cable lines continue to be extended that it's reducing the number of potential people that would subscribe to their service at least initially or require additional overbuilding later on. But I must say that is the concern of the communication union districts. So, I do want to, I do want to go back. I had one more question from representative Pat, before we go on. Thank you. I mean I on on on the same subject. I just wonder whether what the, and they may be thinking differently but depending on their territory, whether. Thank you DS and I asked this question in our committee when we were still meeting in our room, whether they are thinking that they is their intent to try to serve everybody in a town even if there is one or two or maybe three other providers that provide some level of service to different parts of the town, or whether they're really just going for the unserved there, and further maybe different approaches. I think the longer term goal is to provide universal service availability for their entire town but they understand that initially they are going to be building out to areas that are not served at. They're not going to be building out to the unserved areas first. They're not going to be overbuilding cable. Okay. Okay, I've represented to be earlier has a question. Actually, Madam chair comment. I heard reference to bonded DSL at 25 three speeds and that's not accurate, I believe that max that bonded DSL can do is 25 to and I've been told that from the telephone provider. Okay, thank you, thank you Laura for the correction there. Yeah, yeah, I think it's just really important to be very clear about that we have a lot of DSL. And so bonded DSL, you know, that's not going to get us to 25. Okay. That's not on the good list. Add to clarifications my question, Madam chair. Yes, thank you. It is, it is very profitable in this country today to be a cable company and we use the term sell beads and trinkets to the indigenous people. You can make a lot of money. You can. How do we move beyond beads and trinkets to provide people with a future broadband without when when it when the federal government encourages us to pay the expenses for the people who sell beads and trinkets. And so that they can sell that stuff. How do we step in in in their way and say no, our future is, is not in this is going in this direction. Maybe we'll get to that from the witness we were done. Thank you. Okay, Bob back to you back to me I apologize you do not have an answer to that question center McDonald's. So I want to I want to go back a little bit. The second key thing that the communication union districts asked me to discuss was the need for capacity building as I said that they're all volunteers. And they're starting in many cases with zero funding, where they don't have funding for postage. Never mind funding for the legal expenses that are necessary in negotiating a public private partnership, or some of the mapping needs that they have or the general management type things. So there's a need for capacity building. And that is one thing that we've included in the emergency broadband plan that I'd, I'd asked that you that you would consider. It is probably the number one request from the communication union districts. And that comes for like incidentals expertise and for infrastructure. It's without assets to start it's hard to leverage those assets to get additional funding from the private market. The Vita loans the Vita broadband expansion loans require at least a 10% match at this early stage with the communication union districts. That is a challenge. And the third point I want to talk on and this goes back to the collaboration effort is preparing the communication union districts to be able to participate in the FCC art off fund within the broadband emergency plan. There is the requesting having the state provide a letter of credit. And that is one obstacle there is no other way that I can see that the communication union districts are going to overcome that requirement. The other requirement is a track record. The track record many of the communication union districts are discussing creating a consortium among all of the communication districts, potentially in partnership with various utilities, or another provider. They are looking for expertise to help guide that process. We are assisting with convening some of that, but having someone that is that is outside and experienced with art off to pull that together and make sure the interest of the community is represented is a key ask. We already talked on the 25 three versus 100 100. They, the another concern is backhaul and middle mile. They are incredibly excited and thankful for our commissioner here for pulling together Velco and the utilities to start the discussion on whether they could be used for backhaul to assist these efforts. At this point, there's a lot of details to still be worked out and in many ways it's a, it's a chicken and an egg type issue, where various people want an actual price on the fiber what's available when it may be situational to whatever a communication union district proposes. This is something that's being worked out I know there's an important phone call tomorrow on that but they're very thankful for that and would love any legislative support that's required to make it available for utilities to partner with cuts if any additional is necessary. They're also interested in additional data on on backhaul of where the fiber is. So there's a few other additional concerns I want to get to really quick I know it's been a long day. One thing that is in the in the emergency broadband plan is loosening the restriction on the ability of municipalities to the ability of cuts to use the required revenue. The feedback I've received on that is almost a resounding no that the timing is not right for that and that is part of their promise to the communication districts, and especially now with all the other added expenses that communities are facing. That's something that they don't feel at the time is right it's still a wait and see is what they recommend. I've heard from several cuts though is there's one situation that they that doesn't make sense to them and they see could be an opportunity. Currently a town can contract with a private company to build out fiber in their community. So it'll be the town paying a company to build out fiber that they won't own the other company will continue to own it. The town can do that with the cable company, or with any other private company, they cannot do that with a communication union district. So it's one place that they are at a disadvantage. There wasn't universal agreement on that that's something I encourage you to ask the individual communication union districts for more information on that. Another feedback was the just the the administrative and the complexity of a reverse auction, and their preference is to maintain the ability to say what happens in their territory since they are the closest to their, their towns and represent the interest of their towns, but perhaps doing it in terms of terms of block grants that would be distributed by the communication union districts are used by the communication districts. They thought that that could be a quicker way of moving forward. One other thing I want to mention is the communication union districts are looking at this is an emergency situation and figuring out in between steps to providing the universal fiber I had a great conversation with with CV fiber about how they're trying to find a place to map out their network where instead of bringing fiber at this point to the farmer that's two miles up the road that they bring fiber to the beginning of the road and then use a wireless situation, a wireless solution, and then build that later. So they are thinking in those terms and attempting to be as creative as possible. And that's what I have there are plenty of other concerns and interest I encourage you to talk to them. I hope I did them justice and sharing their interests and now I welcome questions. Okay, any questions at this point. I just send her to camp in here for. Yes, okay send a camp in. Robert thanks. It's not well trained when it comes to the use of blue hands. No, it's true. Even though Senator Cummings has been trying to train me on a number of things. I have been trying to train the entire committee, but I all new to all of us. Right, Rob. Again, thanks. Would you just reiterate what you said some of the top priorities are for the CUDs at this point, you said it, you know, Sure, so the top Q to the top priorities are one creating an emergency way to create a communication union district and addressing some of the, some of the concerns over what is protected information. So they can remain competitive. The second one is capacity building, which is a need for funding for incidentals for expertise, and to get started to have the seed funding to be able to make the matches to build infrastructure. The third one is to preparing the communication union districts to participate in the FCC art off program. This is of building that consortium of having the technical technical assistance more than I can provide and very specialized about art off and representing the interests of the communication union district. The fourth priority was the concern, but a realization that it might be necessary at times, the 25 three versus the 100 by 100, in terms of speed, and wanting to make sure that any funds that go to anything that's less than less than 100 by 100 that a requirement be that the provider whoever is doing that project has a plan and accountability to achieving 100 100. So the final thing was the backhaul in middle mile of supporting the efforts with that with the CUDs working with the utilities to access various middle mile and to partner with utilities to solve the statewide problem. It's going to take all hands on deck to make this work. Okay. One other thing I want to mention to the committee that would be of interest is some of my other work has led me to be working with working with the telehealth working group. I guess I said this is all hands on deck and providing them with information on various grants available. And I'm happy to report that at least one grant from the FCC telehealth program is going to be coming to Vermont. I don't know if it's been publicly announced yet. So I'm not going to say who it is, but we have had some success and that's part of the convening role and part of the sharing resources that we as the department are doing. Well, considering the health and welfare has been taking testimony and telemedicine and we haven't heard I'm going to assume that it hasn't been made public yet, because we've done several days of testimony on that. So any other questions at this point. All right, I'm going to scan for senators. I'm not seeing any blue or any other color hands. So I think that's it. Committee committees representative Brigham Thank you for joining us. Thank you for having us today Madam chair. We probably need to keep working at least in tandem. If we're going to get any of this done in the timeframes we've got left, but we'll see where that goes. Tomorrow, not tomorrow, we may committee have to start meeting more often than once up. Yeah, once a week. We have to start taking up a bunch of bills on Thursday we're going to do the interstate nurse licensure compact. We're going to hear from the providers who asked to talk to us on the emergency broadband plan. And we're going to at least do our first walkthrough of the banking and insurance bill. And we're going to hear from the providers who asked to talk to us on the emergency broadband plan. And then the commission has come over. So that's it. We're as by traditions skipping all around all kinds of topics. Next week we've got a couple of other bills we need to take up the two we heard from health and welfare last week. We're going to hear from the administration. I think we're trying to set that up Tuesday, if not Thursday, but I think it's Tuesday. So we can start taking a look at some of these bills and deciding what we want to do with them. I think that's it unless somebody else has questions. So chair, I just wonder if you will stay on a couple of minutes after we adjourn regarding a separate issue. Okay, no problem. Just tell faith don't shut us out. Okay. Okay, well thank you all we will see you Thursday. Thank you. Thank you.