Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Communications Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee tightens communications section; notes limits of phone, internet and cell service and explores radio broadcasting

5096067 · June 24, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Members revised the communications portion of the mitigation plan to standardize terminology, note that VoIP and DSL services are not available in all locations, flag battery backup limits for some modems, and discuss exploring radio broadcast options for emergency messaging.

The Castle Valley Hazard Mitigation Committee reorganized and clarified the draft communications section at its June 24 meeting, with members standardizing technical language and flagging service‑availability limitations across telephone, internet and cell networks.

Committee edits included consistent use of “voice over Internet protocol (VoIP),” clearer descriptions that Frontier Communications provides DSL over telephone lines in areas it serves, and an explicit note that some services “have for the most part been reliable, but not available in all locations.” Members said line‑of‑sight microwave links (referred to in the draft as RCW) remain limited by terrain and repeating sites. A committee participant noted that Emery (an ISP referenced in the draft) reported a technician’s estimate of roughly eight hours of battery backup for a customer‑side power supply in some cases; the committee recorded that backup durations vary by provider and site.

On mobile service, members agreed the town should state that cell coverage is “spotty” and that some residents rely on boosters, repeaters or satellite options such as Starlink. Committee members discussed but did not require carrier‑level detail; instead they favored a general sentence that phone and data services are reliable in some locations and limited in others.

The committee also discussed radio as a supplemental emergency channel. Members suggested adding “potential radio broadcast” to emergency messaging mitigation actions (citing both external stations and the possibility of a local transmitter), and noted tradeoffs including staffing, antenna requirements and the potential regional reach of some broadcast partners. The committee agreed to include radio broadcast as a possible mitigation action under the emergency messaging strategy rather than as a discrete project.