Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dig Once Broadband topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee introduces Dig Once bill to expand broadband conduit installation in Ada County
Summary
A legislative committee introduced RS32051, a Dig Once policy sponsor says will extend Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) practices to Ada County and restrict shallow microtrenching to encourage deeper conduit installation and competition among providers.
Get email alerts on the Dig Once Broadband topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
A legislative committee voted to introduce RS32051, a bill intended to apply Dig Once policies to Ada County and limit shallow microtrenching that places conduit close to the surface. The motion to introduce the measure carried by voice vote.
Representative John Van der Rauchner (District 22), who also chairs the state's Broadband Advisory Board, told the committee the bill mirrors an existing Dig Once policy used by the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD) and would require construction projects in Ada County to provide opportunity for multiple broadband conduits to be installed while roads are opened.
Van der Rauchner said the bill would discourage shallow, along-the-road microtrenching and instead encourage deeper conduit placement that is safer and easier to share among providers. "One of the things we kept hearing about on broadband is I only have one provider, they're not very good and I don't have any competition," he said, and added the policy is intended to expand competition as broadband is expanded.
Committee members raised questions about how the policy would interact with multiple highway districts and countywide districts. Representative Clow asked whether districts that are not countywide could be subject to repeat digs; Van der Rauchner said the bill was initially tailored to apply to the single countywide highway district to avoid the added complexity of roads that cross multiple districts.
Representative Monks moved to introduce RS32051; the chair called the voice vote and members responded “aye,” and the motion carried. The bill was introduced for further committee consideration and potential public hearing.
The sponsor and committee did not provide a fiscal note or detailed implementation timeline at this meeting; those details may be addressed in subsequent hearings.
