MN Bill introduced HF5452: regulating social media for 15 and younger

Posted on by
Reply

The Introduction and First Reading of House Bills reports…

HF5452, A bill for an act relating to consumer protection; regulating the use of social media for minors ages 15 and younger; requiring anonymous age verification for websites harmful to minors; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 325F.

The bill was read for the first time and referred to the Committee on Commerce Finance and Policy.

Here’s the bill as introduced…

A bill for an act
relating to consumer protection; regulating the use of social media for minors ages
15 and younger; requiring anonymous age verification for websites harmful to
minors; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 325F.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1. 

[325F.6945] SOCIAL MEDIA; USE BY MINORS.

Subdivision 1. 

Definitions.

(a) The following terms have the meanings given.

(b) “Account holder” means a resident who opens an account or creates a profile or is
identified by the social media platform by a unique identifier while using or accessing a
social media platform when the social media platform knows or has reason to believe the
resident is located in this state.

(c) “Daily active users” means the number of unique users in the United States who used
the online forum, website, or application at least 80 percent of the days during the previous
12 months, or if the online forum, website, or application did not exist during the previous
12 months, the number of unique users in the United States who used the online forum,
website, or application at least 80 percent of the days during the previous month.

(d) “Resident” means a person who lives in this state for more than six months of the
year.

(e) “Social media platform” means an online forum, website, or application that satisfies
each of the following criteria:

(1) allows users to upload content or view the content or activity of other users;

(2) ten percent or more of the daily active users who are younger than 16 years of age
spend on average two hours per day or longer on the online forum, website, or application
on the days when using the online forum, website, or application during the previous 12
months, or if the online forum, website, or application did not exist during the previous 12
months, during the previous month;

(3) employs algorithms that analyze user data or information on users to select content
for users; and

(4) has any of the following addictive features:

(i) infinite scrolling, which means either continuously loading content or content that
loads as the user scrolls down the page without the need to open a separate page, or seamless
content or the use of pages with no visible or apparent end or page breaks;

(ii) push notifications or alerts sent by the online forum, website, or application to inform
a user about specific activities or events related to the user’s account;

(iii) displays personal interactive metrics that indicate the number of times other users
have clicked a button to indicate their reaction to content or have shared or reposted the
content;

(iv) autoplay video or video that begins to play without the user first clicking on the
video or on a play button for that video; or

(v) live-streaming or a function that allows a user or advertiser to broadcast live video
content in real-time.

The term “social media platform” does not include an online service, website, or application
where the exclusive function is email or direct messaging consisting of text, photographs,
pictures, images, or videos shared only between the sender and the recipients, without
displaying or posting publicly or to other users not specifically identified as the recipients
by the sender.

Subd. 2. 

Requirements; minors younger than 14 years of age and social media.

(a)
A social media platform shall prohibit a minor who is younger than 14 years of age from
entering into a contract with a social media platform to become an account holder. A social
media company must terminate any account held by an account holder younger than 14
years of age, including accounts that the social media platform treats or categorizes as
belonging to an account holder who is likely younger than 14 years of age for purposes of
targeting content or advertising, and provide 90 days for an account holder to dispute the
termination. Termination must be effective upon the expiration of the 90 days if the account
holder fails to effectively dispute the termination.

(b) A social media platform must allow an account holder younger than 14 years of age
to request to terminate the account, and termination must be effective within five business
days after the request. A social media company must also allow the confirmed parent or
guardian of an account holder younger than 14 years of age to request that the minor’s
account be terminated and termination must be effective within ten business days after the
request.

(c) The social media platform must permanently delete all personal information held by
the social media platform relating to the terminated account, unless there are legal
requirements to maintain the information.

Subd. 3. 

Requirements; minors 14 and 15 years of age.

(a) A social media platform
shall prohibit a minor who is 14 or 15 years of age from entering into a contract with a social
media platform to become an account holder, unless the minor’s parent or guardian provides
consent for the minor to become an account holder. A social media platform must terminate
any account held by an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age, including accounts that
the social media platform treats or categorizes as belonging to an account holder who is
likely 14 or 15 years of age for purposes of targeting content or advertising, if the account
holder’s parent or guardian has not provided consent for the minor to create or maintain the
account. The social media platform must provide 90 days for an account holder to dispute
the termination. Termination must be effective upon the expiration of the 90 days if the
account holder fails to effectively dispute the termination.

(b) A social media platform must allow an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age
to request to terminate the account, and termination must be effective within five business
days after the request. A social media platform must allow the confirmed parent or guardian
of an account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age to request that the minor’s account be
terminated, and termination must be effective within ten business days after the request.

(c) A social media platform must permanently delete all personal information held by
the social media platform relating to the terminated account, unless there are legal
requirements to maintain the information.

Subd. 4. 

Enforcement; penalties.

(a) Any knowing or reckless violation of this section
is deemed an unfair and deceptive trade practice actionable under this chapter by the attorney
general and the attorney general may bring an action against a social media platform for an
unfair or deceptive act or practice. In addition to other remedies available under section
8.31, the attorney general may collect a civil penalty of up to $50,000 per violation and
reasonable attorney fees and court costs. When the social media platform’s failure to comply
with this section is a consistent pattern of knowing or reckless conduct, punitive damages
may be assessed against the social media platform consistent with section 549.20.

(b) If, by its own inquiry or as a result of complaints, the attorney general has reason to
believe that an entity or person has engaged in, or is engaging in, an act or practice that
violates this section, the attorney general my investigate using all available remedies under
the law.

Subd. 5. 

Enforcement; damages to minor account holder.

A social media platform
that knowingly or recklessly violates this section is liable to the minor account holder,
including court costs and reasonable attorney fees as ordered by the court. Claimants may
be awarded up to $10,000 in damages. A civil action for a claim under this subdivision must
be brought within one year from the date the complainant knew, or reasonably should have
known, of the alleged violation. An action brought under this subdivision may only be
brought on behalf of a minor account holder.

Subd. 6. 

Jurisdiction; social media platform contracts.

(a) For purposes of bringing
an action under this section, a social media platform that allows a minor account holder
younger than 14 years of age or a minor account holder who is 14 or 15 years of age to
create an account on the platform is considered to be both engaged in substantial activities
within this state and operating, conducting, engaging in, or carrying on a business and doing
business in this state, and is subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state.

(b) For the purposes of this section, when a social media platform allows an account
holder to use the social media platform, the account holder, regardless of age, and the social
media platform have entered into a contract.

Subd. 7. 

Other available remedies.

This section does not preclude any other available
remedy at law or equity.

EFFECTIVE DATE.

This section is effective August 1, 2024, and applies to causes
of action accruing on or after that date.

Sec. 2. 

[325F.6946] SOCIAL MEDIA; AGE VERIFICATION.

Subdivision 1. 

Definitions.

(a) The following terms have the meanings given.

(b) “Anonymous age verification” means a commercially reasonable method used by a
government agency or a business for the purpose of age verification which is conducted by
a nongovernmental, independent third party organization that is located in the United States,
and not controlled by a foreign country, the government of a foreign country, or any other
entity formed in a foreign country.

(c) “Commercial entity” includes a corporation, a limited liability company, a partnership,
a limited partnership, a sole proprietorship, and any other legally recognized entity.

(d) “Disseminates” has the meaning given in section 604.30 for dissemination.

(e) “Material harmful to minors” means any material that the average person applying
contemporary community standards would find, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient
interest and depicts or describes, in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct that when
taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.

(f) “News-gathering organization” means any newspaper, news publication, or news
source printed or published online or on a mobile platform that reports current news and
matters of public interest. News-gathering organization includes but is not limited to a radio
broadcast station, television broadcast station, and cable television operator.

(g) “Publish” means to communicate or make information available to another person
or entity on a publicly available website or application.

(h) “Resident” means a person who lives in this state for more than six months of the
year.

(i) “Substantial portion” means more than 33.3 percent of total material on a website or
application.

Subd. 2. 

Publishing material harmful to minors; age verification requirements.

(a)
A commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or disseminates material
harmful to minors on a website or application, if the website or application contains a
substantial portion of material harmful to minors, must use anonymous age verification to
verify that the age of a person attempting to access the material is 18 years of age or older
and prevent access to the material by a person younger than 18 years of age.

(b) A commercial entity must ensure that the requirements of subdivision 7 are met.

Subd. 3. 

Exceptions for news and Internet service providers.

(a) This section does
not apply to any bona fide news or public interest broadcast, website video, or report and
does not affect the rights of a news-gathering organization.

(b) An Internet service provider or its affiliates or subsidiaries, a search engine, or a
cloud service provider does not violate this section solely for providing access or connection
to or from a website or other information or content on the Internet or a facility, system, or
network not under the provider’s control, including transmission, downloading, intermediate
storage, or access software, to the extent the provider is not responsible for the creation of
the content of the communication which constitutes material harmful to minors.

Subd. 4. 

Remedies; attorney general enforcement.

(a) A violation of subdivision 2 is
deemed an unfair and deceptive trade practice actionable under this chapter, and an action
by the attorney general may be brought on behalf of a resident minor against a commercial
entity. If the attorney general has reason to believe that a commercial entity is in violation
of this section, the attorney general may bring an action against the commercial entity for
an unfair or deceptive act or practice. In addition to any other remedy available, the attorney
general may collect a civil penalty of up to $50,000 per violation and reasonable attorney
fees and court costs. When the commercial entity’s failure to comply with this section is a
consistent pattern of conduct of the commercial entity, punitive damages may be assessed
against the commercial entity consistent with section 549.20.

(b) A third party that performs age verification for a commercial entity in violation of
this section is deemed to have committed an unfair and deceptive trade practice actionable
under this chapter, and the attorney general as the enforcing authority, may bring an action
against the third party for an unfair or deceptive act or practice. In addition to other remedies
available, the attorney general may collect a civil penalty of up to $50,000 per violation and
reasonable attorney fees and court costs.

Subd. 5. 

Remedies for minors.

A commercial entity that violates subdivision 2 for
failing to prohibit access or prohibit a minor from future access to material harmful to minors
after a report of unauthorized or unlawful access is liable to the minor for the access,
including court costs and reasonable attorney fees as ordered by the court. Claimants may
be awarded up to $10,000 in damages. A civil action for a claim under this paragraph must
be brought within one year from the date the complainant knew, or reasonably should have
known, of the alleged violation. An action under this subdivision may only be brought on
behalf of or by a resident minor. For purposes of bringing an action under this subdivision,
a commercial entity that publishes or disseminates material harmful to minors on a website
or application, if the website or application contains a substantial portion of material harmful
to minors and the website or application is available to be accessed in this state, is considered
to be both engaged in substantial and not isolated activities within this state and operating,
conducting, engaging in, or carrying on a business and doing business in this state, and is
subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state.

Subd. 6. 

Other available remedies.

This section does not preclude any other available
remedy at law or equity.

Subd. 7. 

Anonymous age verification.

A third party conducting anonymous age
verification pursuant to this section:

(1) may not retain personal identifying information used to verify age once the age of
an account holder or a person seeking an account has been verified;

(2) may not use personal identifying information used to verify age for any other purpose;

(3) must keep anonymous any personal identifying information used to verify age, and
the information may not be shared or otherwise communicated to any person; and

(4) must protect personal identifying information used to verify age from unauthorized
or illegal access, destruction, use, modification, or disclosure through reasonable security
procedures and practices appropriate to the nature of the personal information.

EFFECTIVE DATE.

This section is effective August 1, 2024, and applies to causes
of action accruing on or after that date.

OPPORTUNITY: MN Association of Townships Scholarship Applications Open Essays on Broadband

Posted on by
Reply

From the MN Association of Townships…

The Minnesota Association of Townships (MAT) is proud to offer a township scholarship program for high school Juniors in the state of Minnesota. Up to Five $2,000 scholarships will be awarded.

The Minnesota Association of Townships is a nonprofit corporation representing Minnesota townships while promoting an understanding of the heritage, future and being a voice for its roughly 9,000 officers. It regularly conducts research and educational programs designed to foster efficient and economical town governmental services and acts as a liaison between township officers and other local government officials to encourage sustained cooperation.

The Minnesota Association of Townships Scholarship Program is designed to heighten awareness among young people about Minnesota’s Grassroots Township government. The program encourages every high school in the state of Minnesota to offer this opportunity for Juniors to participate in this scholarship program.

Here’s the topic…

2024 Essay Topic:

Throughout its history the United States has adopted policies which took advantage of major technological advances that led to prosperity as a nation. In the 19th century it was the development of canals and a national railroad system. In the 20th century it was rural electrification and the national highway system. Today, high speed broadband Internet access is as vital as phones, electricity, and roads. Those without this access, particularly people in rural areas, are left stranded on the wrong side of the digital divide.

Describe ways in which broadband Internet access improves the lives of rural residents. What challenges exist in providing broadband Internet in rural areas? And what policies should governments at all levels, (federal, state, and local) adopt to ensure that regardless of geographic location all Americans have equal access to broad band Internet?

Check the next tab, “Eligibility & Requirements,” for how to enter.

2024 Application Form

Carver County CarverLink expansion plan will provide (almost) ubiquitous broadband by 2025

Posted on by
Reply

The Patriot reports…

Carver County remains on track to become the first Minnesota county of more than 10,000 residents and the first Twin Cities metro county to have 100 percent high-speed broadband service availability.

When that occurs by the end of 2024, ironically some rural areas will have higher internet speed service than at least a couple cities in the county.

Randy Lehs, CarverLink fiber manager, shared that information in an April 16 update to county commissioners on the Connect Up Carver initiative. That effort was established in June 2022 to make fiber connectivity available to every location in the county that wants it, with service of no less than 100 megabytes of upload/download speeds. It involved a $10.5 million fiber buildout to 2,200 county locations with $6.5 million provided by the county. It also involved planned build agreements in the following cities: Waconia, Chaska, Cologne, Carver, Watertown, Norwood Young America, Mayer, Hamburg and New Germany.

About 95 percent of 360 miles of fiber network is now ready for service, Lehs said, with the remainder to be accomplished by Dec. 31, 2024 – except for maybe some areas affected by the current Highway 212 expansion.

And up update on plans…

The expansion, approved last Tuesday by the county board as an amendment to Connect Up Carver construction contracts, involves the build of some 80-plus miles of additional fiber to 440-plus underserved locations in those areas. The $14.3 million rural/urban expansion will utilize an additional $2.5 million of county money authorized from its budget stabilization account created earlier from federal COVID-19 funding.

“There’s lot of fiber in the ground already,” Lehs said, and CarverLink staff will continue to act as a facilitator and partner to develop and manage agreements to extend high-speed broadband.

The expansion is based on extensive negotiations with Metronet leadership and intensive fiber network design, Lehs added. He noted that Carver County has high “take rates” or signups for internet expansion, on order of 80-90 percent versus an industry standard of 30-40 percent, which was an incentive for service provider Jaguar Communications, now Metronet to enter the market here.

More info on Willmar community broadband project

Posted on by
Reply

West Central Tribune reports further on the Willmar community broadband project…

For more than a year, Willmar city staff, company representatives from Hometown Fiber, experts and consultants have been working together to create the plans and contracts that will mitigate the risk to taxpayers for a city-owned, citywide open-access fiber network — the Connect Willmar Initiative.

The Willmar City Council will be asked during its Monday, May 6, regular meeting to consider approving $9.2 million in funding for the first phase of the construction of the broadband network and an additional $64,000 for Hometown Fiber to continue a community outreach and education campaign. It will also be asked to consider approving an operations agreement between the city and Hometown Fiber.

More info on the project…

Hometown Fiber has completed the architecture plans for phase one and city engineers from Bolton & Menk are preparing construction documents. The details of the operations agreement have been worked through with the city attorney, and a letter of intent has been signed with Hutchinson, Minnesota-based Broadband Corp . to provide service on the network.

The operations agreement solidifies the legalities behind the relationship between Hometown Fiber and the city of Willmar. According to the April 29 presentation, Hometown Fiber will charge a fee to the city to manage and maintain the network for the city, signing up internet service providers to lease the network to provide service to residents. It will not collect a fee from the city until the network has its first customer.

The lease fee paid by internet service providers will be 35% of whatever they are charging the customer for service. For example, if someone’s bill is $100, the city would get $35 of it.

OPPORTUNITY: Survey on Human Infrastructure of Broadband

Posted on by
Reply

An opportunity from Benton Institute for Broadband & Society...

The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society (in partnership with the American Library Association, METRO’s Digital Equity Research Center, and the National Digital Inclusion Alliance) is researching the work of people who help connect others to broadband.  Whether they are called librarians, digital stewards, or digital navigators, they perform a wide range of activities like helping people enroll in low-cost broadband plans, making low-cost computers available, providing digital skills training, or helping people use digital services like telehealth. 

If your organization works on these or related issues, please take our survey!  The data you provide will help us better understand what you do and will contribute to a report that will recommend strategies to sustain this work beyond the current Digital Equity Act investment.  

The survey is available here. Deadline: May 24, 2024. For questions, please email: research@benton.org.

MN Attorney General recommends PUC consider LTD Broadband’s Petition to Relinquish ETC

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission has been looking at revoking LTD Broadband’s ETC status, a status they need to receive federal (RDOF) funding. (The PUC recently posted a fairly condensed reminder of all the twists and turns in this story.) Earlier this week, LTD sent a note saying they’d like to relinquish their ETC status for RDOF but retain ETC status for other funding opportunities (CAF2). Today the PUC posted a notice from the Attorney General recommending that MN PUC consider LTD Broadband’s Petition to Relinquish ETC…

In the Matter of Petition to Initiate a Proceeding to Revoke the Expanded Eligible Telecommunications Carrier Designation of LTD Broadband, LLC & Deny LTD’s Funding Certification for 2023

In the Matter of the Petition of LTD Broadband, LLC to Expand its Designation as an Eligible Telecommunications Carrier

NOTICE OF INFORMAL DISPOSITION AND JOINT MOTION FOR REFERRAL

The parties, by and through their undersigned counsel or representative, stipulate that the above-captioned matters be resolved without resorting to further litigation.

As and for such resolution, LTD Broadband, LLC, shall continue to seek—and may not withdraw—its pending Petition to Relinquish that seeks Minnesota Public Utilities Commission approval to voluntarily relinquish its eligible telecommunications carrier status in the census block groups identified in Exhibit 1.1 The Minnesota Department of Commerce, Office of the Attorney General-Residential Utilities Division, Minnesota Telecom Alliance and Minnesota Rural Electric Association, and Institute for Local Self Reliance shall not oppose LTD Broadband’s Petition to Relinquish.

Because this stipulation resolves the dispute in the above-captioned matters, the parties respectfully move the Administrative Law Judge to close this file and refer the matter back to the Commission for consideration of LTD Broadband’s Petition to Relinquish pursuant to Minn. R. 1400.5900, .6600 (2023).

President Biden talks about rural investment on his visit to Southern MN

Posted on by
Reply

MSN reports…

President Joe Biden was in southern Minnesota yesterday to highlight federal investments for rural America.

Biden visited a farm near Northfield to discuss funding from recent packages such as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act, with the latter focusing on climate projects and health care assistance.

For agriculture, the administration said there is new funding for farmers to take advantage of climate-friendly practices, such as nutrient management, with other provisions designed to create market fairness.

Investment is being made in rural broadband…

Meanwhile, $65 billion has been set aside within the infrastructure law to boost access to high-speed internet, with the hopes of enhancing efforts to close broadband gaps in rural areas.

More on MN House Transportation, housing and labor package

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Session Daily reports…

Proponents of the transportation, labor and housing supplemental budget bill say it will result in a safer, cleaner, more affordable state with provisions that would mitigate the effects of greenhouse gas emissions, provide more protection to workers and expand opportunities for home ownership.

Sponsored by Rep. Frank Hornstein (DFL-Mpls) HF5242, as amended, was passed 69-60 late Wednesday and sent to the Senate.

The bill contains the supplemental budget bills for transportation, labor and housing that were merged in the House Ways and Means Committee last week.

It also has a controversial employment provision that would discourage misclassification of employees as independent contractors.

Opponents, however, say the bill offers only misguided budget priorities and regulations that would distort the market, restrict options and cause unnecessary delays and expense to critical housing, transportation and broadband projects.

Worth noting…

Rep. Isaac Schultz (R-Elmdale Township) unsuccessfully offered an amendment that would only allot $1.7 million to cover the project’s broadband implementation.

Willmar to decide on $9.2 million investment in city owned broadband network

Posted on by
Reply

The West Central Tribune reports…

The Willmar City Counsil on Monday May 6, 2024, will consider approval of $9.2 million in funding for phase one the Connect Willmar Initiative, a project to construct a city-owned broadband network throughout the city.

More on the project from the Connect Willmar Initiative project…

This initiative that will bring directly connected fiber lines to each residence and business in the city of Willmar. The infrastructure will be built and owned by the city of Willmar. This infrastructure will allow and provide multiple ISPS the ability to offer services on this fiber infrastructure, adopting an “open access” system.

If you live in the area, they are asking folks to take a broadband survey.

HF5242: Transportation supplemental budget bill is referred to Rules and Administration

Posted on by
Reply

HF5242: Transportation supplemental budget bill is Rules and Administration for comparison with SF5284. I noticed the move today because there was a section added that would impact broadband workers…

Page 2, line 10, after “disabilities” insert “. In no case shall the workforce on a grant-funded broadband project include an illegal or undocumented worker. If an illegal or undocumented worker is found to be working on a project without employment authorization, the employer, general contractor, or foreman on the project shall be subject to the misclassification fines and penalties under section 181.723, subdivision 7, and section 326B.082, subdivisions 6, 7, 10, 11, and 13, as applicable”

Reports on incident rates of underground digging and utility installation

Posted on by
Reply

Public News Service reports on some background supporting HF4659, a bill that sets safety standards for broadband industry installers…

Government leaders are acting with urgency to get underserved communities connected with high speed internet but in Minnesota, underground digging for broadband installation is emerging as a safety concern.
This spring, the think tank North Star Policy Action issued a report noting over the past three years, such installations were the leading cause of damage to buried infrastructure in the state.
Aaron Rosenthal, research director for the North Star Policy Action, said telecommunications crews are coming in contact with a maze of electric lines and natural gas pipes, with the drilling averaging more than 1.25 strikes a day.
“That’s a level of damage that we think is very concerning,” Rosenthal asserted. “It stands out from other industries and we believe needs to be addressed. Minnesotans should not have to choose between high speed internet and their own safety.”
The data is from a trade organization and Rosenthal warned because it is provided voluntarily, the full scope of damage is unclear. The authors contended workers receive inadequate training and a bill in the Legislature would beef up standards. Skeptics worry about effects such as derailing progress on broadband goals with a wave of federal funding spurring projects.
But the researchers and labor leaders predicted the accelerated pace of installations will result in more incidents.
Octavio Chung Bustamante, Minnesota and North Dakota field organizer and marketing representative for the Laborers’ International Union of North America, said the workers, many of whom are immigrants, are putting their lives at risk without getting a prevailing wage.
“When you talk about underground work — electric, or gas, or water and sewers — a lot of those workers, you know, they earn a good living,” Bustamante observed. “But it’s a different game for broadband work.”

The legislative push also includes provisions to set fair wages for broadband installation workers. As for the data, a key state agency notes overall damage from utility excavation has trended downward. The researchers said it is a symptom of reporting requirement issues, underscoring their argument the information is incomplete.

NTIA addresses common BEAD misconceptions for non-traditional broadband providers

Posted on by
Reply

In response to my post on Common complaints about BEAD in Broadband Breakfast the other day, someone sent me a similar page from the NTIA website. I thought I’d share it too…

Established through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, BEAD is a grants program like no other—differing from prior federal broadband funding programs in a number of material ways. Most notably, it is the first program to require that awardees (i.e., states and territories) ensure universal availability of high-speed Internet access, including to those locations that have not been addressed by prior programs because they have proven to be the most difficult and expensive to serve. This unprecedented effort will require that each awardee maximize incentives for provider participation.

NTIA has produced Common Misconceptions: Non-Traditional Broadband Providers (ntia.gov) guidance to address common concerns non-traditional broadband providers might have regarding applying for BEAD or other federal grants and provides tips and resources to support applications.

The BEAD NOFO Section IV.B.9.b.10 requires the following in each Eligible Entity’s Final Proposal:

“A description of efforts undertaken by the Eligible Entity to ensure the participation of non-traditional broadband providers (such as municipalities or political subdivisions, cooperatives, non-profits, Tribal Governments, and utilities), including an explanation for awards to traditional broadband providers when one or more non-traditional providers submitted competing proposals to serve an area consistent with the requirements of SectionIV.C.1.a”

Section I.C.p defines non-traditional broadband provider:

“Non-Traditional Broadband Provider—The term “non-traditional broadband provider” means

an electric cooperative, nonprofit organization, public-private partnership, public or private

utility, public utility district, Tribal entity, or local government (including any unit, subdivision,

authority, or consortium of local governments) that provides or will provide broadband services.”

CAPACITY | I am concerned that I will not score high enough on the operational or technical capability criteria to win a bid.

Scoring a potential subgrantee’s operational and technical capabilities will account for the size of the project at issue. If the project is appropriately scoped so that your organization has the operational and technical capabilities to complete it, you should apply.

CYBERSECURITY AND SCRM | We operate with a limited number of staff and fear we are too small to hire the specialized personnel needed to meet BEAD cybersecurity requirements.

The BEAD Program does not require subgrantees to maintain a certain number of full-time personnel or teams staffed with experts on specific operational matters such as cybersecurity. States and territories must require prospective subgrantees to attest to having cybersecurity and supply chain risk management plans in place that reflect recent guidance issued by the federal government and to submit these plans before receiving award funding. Prospective subgrantees should employ the staff and contractors they deem necessary to meet this and other BEAD requirements.

WORKFORCE | I don’t believe I can apply for a BEAD grant because my workforce is not unionized, and I may not be able to abide by federal prevailing wage requirements.

BEAD does not require a unionized workforce or compliance with prevailing wage laws. For BEAD projects that will exceed $5 million, subgrantees that will not be using a unionized workforce or complying with prevailing wage laws must file reports that include information such as the size, job titles, and wages and benefits of the proposed project’s workforce and certification and licensure requirements for each position.

For more information: Prevailing Wage Overview & Resources

NEW ENTRANT | As a new entrant to the broadband industry, I can’t provide historical evidence of meeting state and federal fair labor laws.

New entrants without a record of labor and employment law compliance must be permitted to mitigate this fact by making specific, forward-looking commitments to strong labor and employment standards and protections with respect to BEAD-funded projects. This requirement is described in further detail in Section IV.C.1.e of the BEAD NOFO.

For more information: BEAD NOFO

BUILD AMERICA BUY AMERICA | We can’t meet the buildout timeline or submit a competitive project budget due to BABA requirements.

NTIA released a BABA waiver for the BEAD Program in February 2024. Because of the Buy America preference, the majority of fiber broadband equipment used to complete BEAD projects will be made in the United States, but BABA does not require that all goods purchased with BEAD funds are domestically manufactured.

For more information: BEAD BABA Waiver

LETTER OF CREDIT | I cannot meet the letter of credit obligations outlined in the BEAD NOFO so I shouldn’t even apply.

NTIA approved a programmatic waiver for the BEAD letter of credit requirement. This waiver allows subgrantees to use banks or credit unions to secure letters of credit or performance bonds and to reduce the letter of credit (or bond) amount upon completion of project milestones. The waiver also allows states and territories to permit subgrantees to maintain a letter of credit or performance bond valued at 10% of the subaward amount under certain circumstances.

For more information: Letter of Credit Waiver

MATCH | I can’t provide more than a 25% match, and because the state I bid in scores additional points for a higher match, I feel discouraged from applying.

NTIA will consider individual match waiver requests from states and territories as needed. Subgrantees can also pursue match support from other local organizations or governments. Finally, projects in BEAD high-cost areas have no match requirement.

LOW-COST BROADBAND SERVICE OPTION | I will not be able to make money on a project if I can only charge subscribers $30 per month.

ISPs that receive BEAD subgrants must provide a low-cost broadband service option to eligible subscribers, which includes households with income at or below 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines. States define their own BEAD low-cost service option, and many may permit subgrantees to charge more than $30 per month, plus some may allow potential subgrantees to seek waivers to charge more than the ceiling for low-cost plans set by the state.

LTD Broadband tells MN PUC they don’t want ETC designation for RDOF

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission posted a letter received from LTD

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) posted a letter from LTD Broadband president related to the revocation of their ETC designation…

Dear Mr. Seuffert,

I am writing on behalf of LTD Broadband, LLC (“LTD Broadband”) regarding the ETC expansion granted to us by the Minnesota Public Utilities Commision on June 3, 2021. We are requesting to relinquish this expansion as it pertains to the ETC designation for RDOF only as it was obtained as a requirement for our successful bids in the Federal Communications Commission’s (“FCC”) Rural Digital Opportunity Fund (“RDOF”).

Our application for Authorization as it pertains to RDOF was specifically tied to the census blocks in which we were slated to receive RDOF support. However, subsequent developments have led to a change in circumstances. The Wireline Communications Bureau (“Bureau”) denied our RDOF “Long Form” application, which we then appealed to the FCC. Unfortunately, the FCC upheld the Bureau’s decision, resulting in LTD Broadband not receiving any RDOF support to provide service in the state.

This outcome has left us disappointed and puzzled, as the FCC’s decision seems to contradict the very purpose of RDOF: to connect unserved and underserved Americans. Given these developments, and in accordance with 47 U.S.C. § 214(e)(4) as well as Minnesota 7811.1400 ETC Designation in regards to relinquishment of universal service, which allows an ETC to relinquish authorization under certain conditions, we respectfully request to relinquish the authorization of ETC as it pertains to RDOF.

Please be aware that while this request pertains to our ETC Authorization designation for RDOF only, our CAF2 ETC designation remains in place. Also the unregulated broadband service provided under LTD Broadband remains available in the state, and this request for relinquishment of RDOF ETC designation will have no impact on those subscribers.

MN House passes HF3488: protections for minors appearing in online media

Posted on by
Reply

The MN Session Daily reports...

Hollywood is full of stories about childhood actors reaching stardom and then falling hard, often with tragic endings.

That same sad pattern is being replayed on social media platforms, says Rep. Zack Stephenson (DFL-Coon Rapids), where some parents or managers are exploiting young children for profit without any concern for their social or mental well-being.

“This can be big money,” he said before the House passed HF3488, a bill he sponsors that aims to stop this financial exploitation. Following Wednesday’s 103-26 vote, the bill is headed to the Senate.

Stephenson cited a case where Kyle Fisher, father of twin girls Taytum and Oakley, earns between $10,000 and $20,000 for just one post of them on an Instagram account with more than 2 million followers.

If parents are making money off the work their children do to create lucrative online content, they deserve fair compensation, Stephenson said.

To that end, the bill would require a trust account and payment for the content created using images and videos of a minor in online social media, and for the trust to be maintained until the minor reaches age 18. …

The bill would require that records be kept on minors who appear in at least 30% of the content creator’s videos, when such videos generate income, including the minor’s name, compensation generated, and how much was paid to the minor’s trust account.

Further, the bill would require that records be readily accessible to the minor and it would allow the minor to request to delete the content with their likeness at any time after they turn 13.

The minor, or an adult previously depicted as a minor, could sue for damages if any bill provisions are violated.

Despite efforts from many the Affordable Connectivity Program was not continued

Posted on by
Reply

Wired reports…

TODAY MARKS THE end of the Affordable Connectivity Program, a landmark piece of US government legislation that aimed to make it easier for people to afford an internet connection in their homes. The program’s end marks a big shift, with the cessation of benefits set to affect millions of Americans who might need them most.

In a Q and A format Wired goes through the basics, starting with what was it…

In 2021, the US Congress passed the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal. It was a massive, ambitious piece of legislation that aimed to shore up a variety of floundering industries, including transit networks, energy systems, and public utilities. The ACP was part of that deal. It set aside $14.2 billion to fund credits that could help low-income households afford high-speed internet. If a family’s household income was below 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Guideline per year, they were eligible for a $30 monthly credit on their broadband bill. People living on Tribal lands were eligible to receive up to $75.

To what’s happens next…

Unfortunately, any of the families who have been getting the ACP benefit will have to start paying full price for their internet connections—provided they’re able to afford it. If a household’s income is below 200 percent of the federal poverty line, or if the household claims other government benefits like SNAP, Medicaid, or Social Security, there’s a way to get a similar reduction in internet cost, albeit a much smaller one. The Universal Service Administrative Company offers a service called Lifeline, which can pay up to $9.25 per month for a connection (and up to $34.25 per month for anyone living on qualifying Tribal lands).