One of the aspects of the $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program that many communities might have overlooked is that communities can request grants to bring fast broadband or improve existing broadband to anchor institutions. The BEAD Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) defines a community anchor institution as "an entity such as a school, library, health clinic, health center, hospital or other medical provider, public safety entity, institution of higher education, public housing organization, or community support organization that facilitates greater use of broadband service by vulnerable populations, including, but not limited to, low-income individuals, unemployed individuals, children, the incarcerated, and aged individuals. An Eligible Entity (the State Broadband Office) may propose to NTIA that additional types of institutions should qualify as CAIs within the entity’s territory." The first thing to note is that this expands the definition of anchor institution beyond the traditional list by adding organizations that facilitate the use of broadband by vulnerable populations. This means that the grants can be used to bring better broadband to organizations that want to help low-income individuals or others who need better broadband. This is an interesting concept that makes it possible to build broadband facilities to the offices of non-profits or perhaps a computer training center. My interpretation of the BEAD rules is that the grant funding could also be used to construct a training center and buy the needed computers.

[Doug Dawson is president of CCG Consulting.]

After Bruce Patterson’s success designing a network to serve the residents of Ammon (ID), he decided to depart and work to help other cities build similar open-access networks. Perhaps the most significant taker is the city of Detroit (MI) which is planning to use $10 million in funding from the American Rescue Plan Act to build a pilot open-access fiber network that will serve a neighborhood of about 3,200 households. And while Detroit city officials have done lots of their own innovation to build a network suited to local needs, they’ve kept their eyes on the system built in the Idaho town of 16,000. “The city we’re getting the most inspiration from, bar none, is Ammon,” said Joshua Edmonds, Detroit’s director of digital inclusion. ”Bruce Patterson’s service has been invaluable. That experience there has made him a national asset.” Edmonds said the open-access model offers additional benefits for residents of Detroit. Roughly 30 percent of city residents live in poverty, and that is the biggest obstacle to broadband access. The affordability problem isn’t unique to Detroit. It’s now the most common obstacle to Internet access around the country.

A recent telecommunications outage left millions of Canadians without access to internet and cell services for hours. It was a stunning reminder that Canada must revolutionize the industry and dismantle the oligopoly that runs it. On July 8, more than 10 million customers of Rogers Communications were left without internet and cell services when a maintenance update went sideways. At least two days later, some customers were still without service, while others had unreliable access. It was the second time in 15 months the Rogers service failed. The system breakdown was more than a mere disruption to streaming services or texting friends. The country’s social, political and economic infrastructure was compromised. Canada’s telecommunications industry is critical to the country, an essential component to the systems through which we live our lives. The Rogers outage demonstrated once more that leaving the operation and security of telecommunications to a handful of corporations — which are more than happy to use the constrained market to bilk customers — is unwise and dangerous. As disconcerting as the Rogers failure was, some good might come of it yet. Maybe people have finally had enough of being used and abused by a handful of unaccountable companies in an industry everyone relies upon. Maybe we’ll see a shift in how we think about telecom services — and what we do to make them work for us.

[David Moscrop is a contributing columnist for The Washington Post.]