Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Broadband topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bluegrass AD briefs Franklin County on BEAD timeline and what local officials can do
Summary
Shane New of the Bluegrass Area Development District told the fiscal court that BEAD scoring strongly favors serviceable locations and affordability while offering only 7 points for local coordination; he urged counties to prepare for ISP outreach and possible contractual assurances to secure service in hard‑to‑reach areas.
Shane New, deputy director at the Bluegrass Area Development District, told the Franklin County Fiscal Court on Oct. 16 that the federal‑state BEAD rollout is entering a phase where internet service providers (ISPs), not counties, will largely shape grant applications and project proposals. “There’s only 7 points set aside for local coordination,” New said, explaining that the state’s scoring card weights serviceable locations and affordability far higher than local cash contributions or promises of support.
New outlined the BEAD scorecard elements the court should expect to see during applications: 35 points tied to the number of serviceable locations and cost per pass, 30 points for affordability metrics, and a separate set of factors (including fair labor standards) that follow. Local engagement can earn up to 7 points if ISPs can document multiple coordinated meetings with county officials and utilities. “You’re gonna start getting knocks at the door” from providers seeking coordinated support, New said.
Local officials asked how Franklin County’s prior mapping work and socioeconomic indicators would affect competitiveness. New said mapping remains in flux and the state is still compiling disparate source data; once the state delivers a final map to NTIA, likely early next year, ISPs will know what is eligible and which block groups to target. “If I was an internet service provider, I would go with whatever data I had in hand and assume that’s going to be correct and then adjust from there,” he said.
Magistrates raised concerns about fragmented service if different providers pursue separate subsections of the county (across the river and on either side of population centers). New replied that the state and federal programs are attempting to divide work by census block groups and that competition among ISPs may help some areas, though harder‑to‑reach locations may still require county incentives or contracts. He recommended counties prepare coordinated utility meetings to help providers secure pole access and other attachments that influence cost per pass.
New reminded the court that BEAD and state BEAD‑related programs (including prior NTIA rounds) have long construction windows; typical state grant awards allow four years to complete work with a possible one‑year extension. He also flagged contract language and long‑term service considerations — counties should seek contracts or firm guarantees for maintenance and service commitments where local funds are invested.
The court agreed to stay engaged: members said Franklin County has previously budgeted local funds for connectivity and urged the judge to continue conversations with potential providers. New offered to share mapping links and scorecard materials with court staff so residents can verify whether addresses are counted as underserved while the state’s final maps are prepared.
The next procedural step New recommended is to expect provider outreach once the state delivers mapping and eligibility guidance to NTIA; counties will then be in a position to decide whether to provide matching funds or enter service agreements that secure coverage in higher‑cost areas.
