Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Broadband topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Amelia County supervisors press River Street on slow broadband rollout as company outlines 2026 build plan
Summary
River Street told the Board of Supervisors it has completed high‑level design and secured four remote sites from a TDS acquisition, and aims to pass 3,200 locations in 2026; residents and supervisors challenged the company on delays, customer service and looming ARPA spending deadlines.
River Street representatives updated the Amelia County Board of Supervisors on the company’s fiber‑to‑the‑premises build and faced intense criticism from supervisors and residents over slow progress and customer service problems.
Greg Coltrane, vice president of business development for River Street, said the project’s high‑level design is done, low‑level (construction) design is partially complete, and field walkouts and 3‑D imaging are finished for initial build zones. He said the company’s acquisition of TDS preserved four of five remote sites — including the Amelia Courthouse, Pine Grove and Deatonville remotes — which should shorten the time needed to bring those locations online. “We already acquired those sites, so the low level design work is already underway,” Coltrane said.
The company reported 378 locations currently have access to fiber and said the countywide goal is about 5,027 serviceable locations. Coltrane told the board River Street plans to pass 3,200 locations in 2026 and an additional 1,400 in 2027. He also flagged permitting timelines: VDOT requires permits be submitted in five‑mile sections, increasing applications and review time, and Amelia County’s VDOT residency bond requirement appeared higher than nearby residencies, forcing River Street to secure a second, larger bond to maintain submissions.
Residents and several supervisors pushed back. One audience member described the project as “a joke,” saying trenches and hookups the county had been shown months earlier still looked inactive. Board members reported repeated promised timelines and maps without material customer hookups and questioned whether ARPA deadlines for appropriating and spending funds could be met. Several residents credited spotty billing, long hold times and perceived rate increases to the transition from TDS to River Street.
Coltrane acknowledged operational growing pains after the acquisition and cited a synchronization issue between the legacy billing and River Street’s billing company that led to one incorrect bill cycle. He said River Street has added staff and is monitoring call volume and trouble tickets. “We’ve also staffed up,” Coltrane said. “We get reports on a daily and weekly basis showing the call volume to be pretty normal.”
A representative of the regional planning district commission (PDC) said the PDC will request an extension for contract deadlines tied to ARPA spending and will work with River Street and the county to try to meet an adjusted timeline. The PDC representative told the board, “We are working for you all on this project…the project is gonna move forward.”
The board did not take a formal vote on the broadband contracts at the meeting. Several supervisors requested one‑on‑one follow‑ups and an in‑person update and asked staff and River Street to provide more specific timeline evidence of trenching, hookups and permit approvals before the county releases additional funds or authorizes major next steps.
What’s next: River Street said construction would begin after the first of the year and the company will continue permitting and construction‑drawing work; the PDC will pursue an extension of ARPA‑related deadlines and offered to brief the board in more detail offline.
