Lakeland Internet pitches fiber build for Woodburn, asks town for $50,000 contribution

Representatives of Lakeland Internet presented a fiber-to-the-premises proposal to the Woodburn City Council and asked the town for a $50,000 contribution to help ensure full‑town coverage.

Nancy Townsen, identifying herself as a Lakeland Internet representative and part of Surak Enterprises, told the council the company had identified Woodburn as underserved and moved from a feasibility stage into design and construction planning after an earlier company manager left abruptly. “I absolutely apologize,” Townsen said, acknowledging that Lakeland had not consistently reached out to council offices during the prior work.

Operations manager Josh Gar described the company's construction design and service plans and estimated the full project would serve about 980 “passings” (potential customers). Based on construction drawings, Lakeland said the full 980‑pass build would cost roughly $1.3 million, and that a southern‑only option of about 525 passings would cost roughly $700,000. Gar said a typical full‑town build timeline would be “about a six‑month project,” but Lakeland sought to accelerate the schedule because Frontier has begun construction on Woodburn’s north side.

Lakeland told the council it would not be asking the town to cover construction costs and that its $50,000 request was intended to help secure full coverage and avoid leaving neighborhoods out of the build. “We will provide free or discounted services for municipal buildings and institutions,” Gar said, listing potential public‑Wi‑Fi, camera deployments and discounted connections for town facilities as examples of municipal benefits.

Council members pressed Lakeland about why the company continued work beyond the feasibility scope without broader council contact; Lakeland said the previous general manager left suddenly, internal priorities shifted, and competitive pressures from other providers prompted the firm to advance design work so it would be ready to build. Council members also noted that ARPA funds originally intended for a feasibility study may be restricted if the scope has changed.

Lakeland asked the council to place a contract on an upcoming meeting agenda and said it would forward a written contract and a detailed construction timeline for the clerk‑treasurer’s review. Council members said Treasurer Kevin would need time to vet any financial request and that the earliest a vote could be scheduled would be at the council’s February meeting, with a possible fallback two weeks later.

One council member said they would remove themselves from decision‑making because earlier advocacy for the company had caused internal concern; the speaker did not participate in further discussion. Council members generally requested a clear written contract, a funding clarification from Treasurer Kevin and time to review before taking a vote.

The council did not vote on funding at the meeting. Lakeland representatives said they would provide the requested contract and supporting documents before the next meeting so the council and clerk‑treasurer could review them.