Electric Co-ops Raise Concerns With Colorado Broadband Easements Bill

It would authorize an electric utility or supplier “to install and maintain above-ground broadband internet service infrastructure for internal use, for external use in providing broadband internet service, or for lease of any excess capacity to a broadband internet service provider,” said an SB-107 summary. It would allow a provider to enter into contract with a landowner to access the utility’s existing easement to provide broadband if it doesn’t violate an exclusivity term in the utility’s contract and wouldn’t interfere with the utility’s construction, maintenance or use of any infrastructure on the property, it said.

The Senate panel voted 5-0 for the broadband bill, sending it to the Local Government Committee. Donovan is “trying to address one of the final hurdles that we have identified in the deployment of rural broadband, and that is the use of existing easements and facilities,” the state senator said at the livestreamed hearing. The bill will extend broadband into new areas and add redundancy in others, she said.

Electric co-ops raised red flags about an amendment to the bill supported by telecom providers. Co-ops want to expand rural broadband but the bill is turning into a measure to regulate cooperatives, their pole attachments and business affiliations, protested Colorado Rural Electric Association Director-Government Relations Geoff Hier. The Southeast Colorado Power Association and Delta-Montrose Electric Association hope to support the bill but have concerns about details including pole attachment rates and cross-subsidization rules, said Ireland Stapleton attorney Jeffrey Hurd. Legislators should remember “it’s because of consumers” and lack of incumbent telecom service that co-ops want to be in the broadband business, he said. “It’s extremely important that we not pass a bill that impairs that economic development given the market forces that are at play in the rural space for broadband.”

Colorado’s bill would help spread broadband and is part of a 2019 trend of state legislatures moving electric co-op bills, Institute for Local Self-Reliance's Director-Community Broadband Networks Initiative Chris Mitchell emailed before the hearing. “We are seeing several states clarify language in statute that allows electric cooperatives to perfect their easements to deliver this service without having to worry about unnecessary delays.” Such bills have appeared in multiple states with rural areas (see 1903200032), including Georgia, Maryland, Mississippi, Texas and Oklahoma. Alabama’s House Urban and Rural Development Committee plans a Wednesday hearing on its HB-400.

Donovan is “taking steps to address the very real barriers to rural broadband … that have stood between our members and new broadband deployments in the state,” Colorado Cable Telecommunications Association President Jeff Weist emailed. CenturyLink is “still reviewing” the Colorado bill, “but we believe there needs to be parity in the pole attachment fees paid by different broadband providers that attach to electric co-op poles,” said a spokesperson.

Rural telecom carriers support the bill with restrictions requiring nondiscriminatory access to poles and prohibiting cross-subsidization of electric and broadband businesses, Colorado Telecom Association Executive Vice President Pete Kirchhof said at the hearing. It would provide a “level playing field for all telecom providers,” he said. Weist agreed strong safeguards on cross-subsidization are important.

Local governments are watching. The broadband bill doesn’t directly help or harm municipalities, though clearing the way for rural electric co-ops broadband could benefit rural constituents, said Colorado Municipal League Legislative and Policy Advocate Brandy DeLange told us. Colorado follows several other states moving bills to empower electric co-op broadband; such a policy could do “a lot of good from an economic development standpoint,” said Eric Bergman, policy director for Colorado Counties Inc.

The measure “advances the ball,” but its success depends on utilities' interest in providing broadband under the bill’s pole-attachment and other requirements, said Colorado Communications and Utility Alliance attorney Ken Fellman in an interview. Big utilities got legislators to carve them out of an earlier more comprehensive proposal, and Fellman so far hasn’t seen great excitement from co-ops, he said. Meanwhile, some state legislators voiced interest in repealing the state’s ban on municipal broadband but the issue didn’t gain enough momentum for action this year, he said.