Columbia County commissioners and staff met June 4 for a work session to review design, cost and financing options for a proposed countywide fiber network and to request more detailed cost breaks and updated BEAD/BEED eligibility analysis.

The county’s information-technology director, Holly Miller, and consultants from RSG/Arcadis presented four options: do nothing; build only to federally eligible BEAD (referred to in the meeting as “BEED/BEAD”) premises; a BEAD-plus plan that connects many additional premises; and a smaller community-anchor-institution (CAI) ring that would provide backbone connectivity to schools, health and other public facilities.

The BEAD-only scenario was estimated in the presentation at roughly $51,000,000 with a federal request of $38,000,000; consultants said that option would pass about 22,533 premises but only 2,939 of those were BEAD-eligible, and under the nominal take-rate assumptions the project would take many years (presenters said about 17 years) to reach positive cash flow and about 19 years to break even. By contrast, the BEAD-plus scenario expands to pass many more premises; consultants presented a model showing a $66,000,000 build with the same $38,000,000 federal request and said that scenario would be cash-flow positive in year one under the team’s nominal subscription assumptions because it captures significantly more paying subscribers across the county.

Consultants also proposed a smaller CAI ring (described in the presentation as a 3–5 mile build radius around selected POPs) that would create a resilient county backbone and immediately lower broadband costs for institutions that now pay high commercial rates for point-to-point connectivity. The presenters identified a “minimum build” for the CAI ring that would pass about 71 community anchor facilities and estimated the cost in the $6.1 million–$6.4 million range, depending on exact scope and commitments. The ring would also be designed to provide redundancy (the presenters described the ring as preventing large-scale outages by allowing traffic to route the other way if a cut occurs).

Holly Miller summarized the policy tradeoffs: “we already have some significant investment in this broadband project,” and doing nothing would forgo the opportunity to keep subscription dollars in county-controlled infrastructure and to reduce recurring connectivity costs for schools, public safety and health providers. Presenters said the county already has letters of support from other Columbia County municipalities and that some local electric utilities have signaled intent to participate; Portland General Electric (PGE) was explicitly noted as not included in those replies.

Presenters walked commissioners through revenue projections for the larger builds. Under a nominal subscription scenario the BEAD-plus model showed projected countywide revenues of about $14.6 million by year seven, producing roughly $5.2 million in net earnings in year seven and about $6.4 million by year 10 in the firm’s pro forma. Consultants said the model assumes an initial take-rate pattern similar to successful municipal builds elsewhere (35% initially rising to mid-50s within two years and higher over time) and that open-access architecture typically yields higher long-term take rates because multiple retail providers compete on the same infrastructure.

Commissioners and staff discussed BEAD/BEED program rule uncertainty and how forthcoming federal/state rule changes could change which premises qualify and the average allowable per‑premise subsidy. Consultants said the state of Oregon had signaled it would calculate high-cost thresholds after receiving applications, creating near-term uncertainty; presenters said their model uses the program rules that existed prior to the rules being placed on hold and that all inputs are variable and will be rerun once final rules are issued.

On timing and next steps, staff and consultants recommended additional targeted market outreach and commitment-gathering for any CAI ring leg before physical build. The consultants said they could refine costs and scope for the CAI ring quickly if the board authorized work to obtain commitments from anchor institutions and identify POP locations (examples named in the presentation included the John Gump Building, Rainier Transit Station and a road shop near Vernonia).

The board did not take a final vote to adopt any build option at the work session. Commissioners asked staff to return in a few days with additional detail on: (1) a refined budget and cash-carry estimate for pursuing the CAI ring now as an interim step; (2) an updated construction-cost and revenue model that incorporates potential changes to BEAD/BEED thresholds; and (3) an estimate of the non-grant costs to stand up any nonprofit or financing vehicle (see separate article on financing models). Miller and the consulting team agreed to supply the additional breakdowns and to pursue outreach to anchor institutions for pre‑commitments.

Votes at a glance: the only formal action recorded in the transcript was approval of the meeting agenda at the start of the session. The motion to approve the agenda passed by voice vote (two “Aye” responses recorded); no mover or second was identified in the transcript.

The meeting moved to announce an upcoming executive session under ORS 192.660(2)(f) to consider information exempt from public inspection; no deliberative decisions were made publicly at that time, and the board said it would return to open session afterward.