Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Broadband Franchise topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bonney Lake moves two fiber franchise agreements to consent agenda; EZ Fiber promises 2‑Gbps plan
Summary
Council discussion moved franchise agreements for EZ Fiber (B26‑19) and AT&T/Forged Fiber (B26‑15) to next week's consent agenda. EZ Fiber representative Austin said the company will build fiber to the premise, offers a 2‑Gbps intro plan at $80/month, and expects a 10–12 month build once work begins.
Bonney Lake City Council discussed two franchise agreements Jan. 20 that would allow private providers to place fiber‑optic networks in city rights‑of‑way and moved both items to the consent agenda for a formal vote next week.
Staff introduced agenda bill 26‑19 for EZ Fiber, which would permit the company to install fiber‑optic cable throughout the city's rights‑of‑way. Staff noted the Community Development Committee recommended a due‑pass. An EZ Fiber representative introduced to the council described the service as fiber‑to‑the‑premises and said the company’s business model includes lifetime pricing that covers equipment, taxes and fees. “Our intro plan is 2 gigabits of speed…that includes equipment tax and fees…for $80 a month,” the EZ Fiber representative said, adding the company estimates 10 to 12 months to complete network buildout once construction starts.
Council members asked about right‑of‑way practices and competition. Staff and the presenter clarified the build would occur in the public right‑of‑way and activation to a household would occur when a subscriber signs up and requests installation. The council did not vote to approve the franchise at the workshop; instead members agreed to place the item on the consent agenda for next week’s meeting.
Staff also presented agenda bill B26‑15, a franchise for AT&T doing business as Forged Fiber, which is acquiring part of Lumen’s existing network in the city and seeks a franchise covering rights‑of‑way. Council members confirmed that granting a franchise to one provider would not prevent other companies from building in the right‑of‑way; staff noted the state owns right‑of‑way access rules and local franchises do not automatically confer exclusivity. That item was likewise moved to the consent agenda.
No final franchise approvals were recorded during the workshop; both items appear on the consent calendar for consideration at the council’s next regular meeting.
