As originally submitted, AB 1409 made what amounted to an inconsequential typographic change to the law that rewrote the CASF program in 2017. The usual purpose of such bills is to get something into the hopper ahead of the legislature’s annual deadline for introducing new legislation, with the intent of maybe doing something with it later.
That something turned into subsidies for “homework gap projects”, which are defined as projects that provide “pupils in kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, with after school access to broadband, such as Wi-Fi enabled school buses or school or library Wi-Fi hot spot lending”. The money would come from the California Teleconnect Fund (CTF), which pays for broadband service for schools, libraries and some non-profit organisations, usually to help close the gap left by the federal e-rate program, which funds most, but not all, of the cost of such service.
It’s an incremental change. Both CTF and the federal e-rate program are already used to pay for free broadband access, via WiFi at schools and libraries, and some school districts have toyed with the idea of extending some kind of wireless service to students at home. Hotspot lending – allowing students to, say, take home an active 4G wireless router – and WiFi on school buses are already arguably eligible for CTF money, and some districts or libraries might already be doing it.
AB 1409 would clear up any doubt, and potentially create a whole new category of publicly subsidised broadband service. It could also open the door to boondoggles: there’s already an ecosystem of companies and organisations that push projects of dubious value to educators with little knowledge of technology and no experience as service providers. The bill scheduled for its first hearing in the telco-and-cable-friendly assembly communications and conveyances committee ton Wednesday. It’s worthing keeping an eye on.
More federal subsidies for fiber build outs and connections for schools in rural areas, as FCC chair Tom Wheeler has suggested in a recent speech is a fine idea as far as it goes. But unless the money is used to create infrastructure that’s available on a competitive basis to all users – residents, businesses and local governments, as well as schools – the net result could be more expensive and less capable access for people in rural areas.
The FCC’s E-rate program picks up part of the monthly Internet service bill – as much as 90% in some cases – for schools. That bandwidth can only be used by schools – it can’t be resold or even offered for free, for example, to low income families. Anyone else who also wants to take advantage of infrastructure that’s installed to provide that subsidised service has to do business with the company that built it, on that company’s terms.
In California, as in many other states, that company is usually AT&T, which doesn’t sell dark fiber or other broadband building blocks – it will only sell fully packaged and managed bandwidth at rates it sets and in a manner it chooses. And for consumers and businesses in many rural areas – indeed, anywhere that’s not a high potential area by its standards – AT&T has chosen to cap legacy DSL capacity and not upgrade to the higher speed VDSL-based Uverse service it offers in more affluent markets. Instead, it’s trying to sell rural customers higher priced, less reliable and capacity constrained wireless service using its mobile network.
Giving AT&T public money to build fiber to schools and, along the way, its cell sites without requiring some level of open access to that infrastructure will lock rural areas into a single provider that won’t invest in upgrading broadband service for the rest of the community. Except at extortionate mobile data prices.
By Jim Warner Network engineer, U.C. Santa Cruz Chair, Central Coast Broadband Consortium technical expert group
This is arguably a badly timed note about an FCC proposal due for decision on Friday, July 11. Any opportunity to comment – and have your comments count – ended months ago.
A year ago the commission put out a Notice of Proposed Rule Making that reviewed this history of changes to the E-rate program that provides about $2.3B/yr subsidies to educational uses of telecommunications services:
The big headline – when the rules come out – is that the FCC will be shifting the E-rate program to make Wi-Fi service ubiquitous in the nation’s schools. And press releases carrying that message have been put out starting on July 1. The reality is more complex than just funding a few cartons of 802.11 access points. Wi-Fi will be the user visible front face of the shiny new program. But under the hood, most of the money will go to provide back haul and switches to make the Wi-Fi do something useful.
President Obama proposed that schools should have 100 Mb/s for each increment of 1000 students. That should ratchet up to 1000 Mb/s in five years. Other proposers recommend 1000 Mb/s now with a 10 Gb/s target in 2017–8. Of course, this was a proposal a year ago. The recommendation could have shifted. The good news is that if the FCC makes any ruling on Friday, we will have K–12 and library standards for broadband services.
The E-rate program appears to be wildly successful. To be sure there have been isolated reports of fraud but in major part, the program is credited with propelling schools from dial-up to modern broadband. One thing that has not been proposed is to give the program more funding. The FCC believes that some reallocations and rule changes can provide a jolt both school and library broadband services. It is hard to believe in a zero sum world that the program can be adjusted to have major new impacts. In large part, E-rate support for libraries is an untouched project. There is lots of work to do. So, who are the losers?
The e-rate program of 1998 permitted schools to subscribe to pager service. And there is still $1M/yr being spend on them. A proposed change will reserve Priority E-rate funds for broadband services. So cell phones for staff will be on the out. Not clear how much is spent on this, but the rules still provide that schools can have subsidized subscriptions to e-mail services that most of us get now for free. Remember Compuserve? That will probably go away, too. There will also be rules changes that might have the effect of spreading the money more broadly than it is today. But that won’t, by itself, expand funding. Some tinkering with competitive bid rules have been proposed that could reduce paperwork burdens on small school districts. That could result in some real savings.
Other changes are in the wait til Friday category. The proposal last year asked whether it would be good to revise the rules to make it easier for school and library districts that want to build their own dark fiber networks to get more support. This would be excellent news for the recently funded Soledad fiber build in the Salinas Valley.