Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Broadband topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arlington TV Co‑op leaders tell county their nonprofit broadband operation is under financial strain as federal funds arrive
Summary
Arlington TV Co‑op officials told Gilliam County commissioners that long-standing loans, rising interest and an aging operations team leave the nonprofit vulnerable even as federal and county broadband funds arrive; the court agreed to follow up and explore options.
Mark Mitchell, chairman of the Arlington TV Co‑op, told the Gilliam County Court on July 15 that the nonprofit has been providing local Internet and phone service for decades but is now facing serious financial pressure just as new broadband funding reaches the region. "We received a loan from Community Bank for $572,000 and a loan from Gilliam County for $250,000," Mitchell said, and added that the coop also received about $800,000 in county grant funding when the Internet build-out began.
Mitchell said the coop currently serves about 208 home customers and 18 businesses and provides voice service to about 32 customers, including local public agencies. He told commissioners the Community Bank loan accrued roughly $317,000 in interest between 2016 and July 2026 and that the coop’s monthly loan payment is $4,424 — "which equates to 69 customers a month," Mitchell said — an amount that constrains the nonprofit’s operating budget and its ability to hire or retain replacement technical staff.
John Nies, who manages operations for ATV, described a small paid staff and long volunteer contributions that have kept the system running. Nies and Mitchell said the coop must increase wages to replace aging technical staff who perform specialized work. "He's been willing to work for half of what he should be paid," Mitchell said of a long-serving technician whose future retirement could leave the coop without skilled in‑house capacity.
Commissioners acknowledged ATV’s community value — noting the coop supplies service for court operations, the sheriff’s office and other local institutions — and urged more detailed financial information to evaluate county support. "I would hate to see you guys go away," one commissioner said, and another asked ATV to prepare a plan showing how losing the county loan or changing loan terms would affect operations.
The court identified several possible next steps: staff follow-up meetings to clarify how upcoming federal and county broadband grants will affect ATV’s finances, discussion of eligibility for county operational or capital grants, and a request that ATV provide a short business plan and cash‑flow projection showing the effect of loan relief or repayment changes. Commissioners did not make any commitment to change loan terms at the July 15 meeting.
