Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners approve Lumen internet upgrade, citing monthly savings and redundancy option

Banner County Board of Commissioners / Board of Equalization · July 22, 2026
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

Banner County approved a contract to upgrade to a 1-gig internet connection with a one-time fee and lower ongoing monthly cost; staff said the upgrade will provide faster service and optional wireless failover for resilience.

Banner County commissioners approved a contract to upgrade the county’s internet service to a 1-gig connection after staff outlined pricing and redundancy options.

IT/administrative staff described two pricing options: a lower-cost plan described in the packet at $5.88 per month with a one-time activation fee of $7.75, and an alternative package at $6.67 per month with additional hourly bump options for temporary higher bandwidth. Staff said the upgrade would improve speed, provide an optional secondary wireless connection for failover and reduce the county’s monthly bill by roughly $200 compared with current costs.

Commissioners asked about equipment compatibility and overage behavior. Staff reported they checked with BYTEZ and confirmed existing equipment can handle a 1-gig port; Lumen said it could retain IP addresses to avoid involving the state in network changes. Commissioners discussed the practical need for the higher-tier plan (which would increase monthly cost substantially) and whether occasional bandwidth increases could be handled by temporary hourly boosts rather than a permanent higher-tier package.

A motion to approve the Lumen contract for the lower-cost 1-gig package (with the one-time fee) was moved, seconded and passed on a roll-call vote. Staff were asked to incorporate the final numbers into the upcoming budget workshop.

The motion as recorded in the minutes specifies the contract terms discussed in the meeting packet; the meeting record shows the motion passed by roll call but individual board member vote attributions are not consistently transcribed in the record.