Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Broadband Policy topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Local ISP presses Box Elder County on who owns Beehive Fiber and who can connect

Box Elder County Commissioners · November 6, 2024
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

Quick Link Internet representative asked county officials whether the fiber installed with grant funds is county-owned and whether small ISPs may access 'dark' or installed fiber; commissioners said ownership appears to be with Beehive or the state and directed the vendor to state broadband contacts for details.

At a Nov. 6 commission meeting, Matt Tingue of Quick Link Internet asked commissioners and staff who owns fiber recently installed in parts of Box Elder County and whether independent internet providers can interconnect. Tingue said he had been told earlier by a commissioner that the county owned the fiber; commissioners and staff responded that the county does not own the fiber and that ownership likely lies with the installing company (Beehive) or the state.

"So Box Elder County does not own the fiber?" Tingue asked. County officials replied, "No. That's my understanding." Staff explained the project was funded through a mix of federal and state sources — including community development block grants (CDBG) and ARPA funds used to match other money — and that where ownership was not described in the grant agreement, the installing company typically retains ownership or the state holds it.

Tingue said he was concerned that public dollars enabled a private company to install fiber while some local ISPs could not obtain access. "We The People are putting in a private company in the county to compete against county individuals providing Internet to our county people," he said. Commissioners replied that companies competed for the contract, that other bidders had participated, and that staff would refer questions about contract terms and ownership to Bragg (the county’s contracting agent) and to the state broadband specialist, Rebecca Dilge.

The transcript records additional technical questions: whether municipal pole attachment rates apply to the county, whether a 'dark' unused fiber that dates to the 1990s exists in the ground, and whether commercial or residential restrictions had prevented interconnection. County staff suggested that Tingue contact Sean Milnes (county contracting agent) and Rebecca Dilge (state broadband specialist) for definitive answers and agreed to follow up after the meeting.

What was not resolved: the transcript records competing assertions about who may legally or contractually access specific fiber assets and an allegation from Tingue that Beehive would not permit his company to connect to certain lines. Commissioners recommended formal follow-up with state and contract administrators to confirm ownership, matching amounts and pole-attachment arrangements.