Texas broadband expansion faces hurdles

Subscribe to The Y’all — a weekly dispatch about the people, places and policies defining Texas, produced by Texas Tribune journalists living in communities across the state.

LUBBOCK — The goal of expanding broadband availability in Texas has been a long time coming.

Depending on the day, the finish line either looks closer than ever or so very far away.

Late last month, Texas won final approval to use billions of federal money to help connect every corner of the sprawling state. The news came about 17 months after the $3.3 billion was first pledged for Texas — part of the bipartisan infrastructure deal signed by President Joe Biden.

Yet two days after federal regulators OK’d the state’s plan to spend the money, Texas’ own junior U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz suggested in a letter that money might be delayed amid a presidential transition and Republicans taking control of Congress.

The most recent back and forth is emblematic of the last several years as Texas has tried to catch up with the nation in deploying reliable high-speed internet. And supporters of the effort worry it may also foreshadow hectic days ahead.

“I don’t think anyone believes there’s going to be more billions of dollars poured into this moving forward,” said Lonnie Hunt, director of Deep East Texas Council of Governments. “We’ve got one chance to get it right, we have to make wise decisions.”

The sums to expand broadband in the Lone Star state are staggering: First, there is $461.7 million from the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021, part of Biden’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Then in 2023, Texas voters approved $1.5 billion of state tax dollars to help the effort.

The largest chunk, however, is the $3.3 billion in federal dollars from the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment, or BEAD, program that is part of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that Biden signed into law in 2021.

For all the efforts by local government, advocacy groups and lawmakers alike, the rollout of this money has been complicated at best. It has served as a reminder of how complicated and time-consuming building infrastructure can be for the general public — even when local, state and federal governments are working together with advocacy groups and the private sector.

The foundation of the national effort to connect everyone to broadband is establishing what parts of Texas — and the rest of the country — need internet access. Maps made by the federal government identifying the places in most need have been called inaccurate by advocates.

There have also been concerns over federal regulations that limit rural internet providers from applying for project funds. And multiple rounds of funding have created a “hurry up and wait” timeline for internet service providers and the communities they serve.

All these hurdles and more have delayed the longtime goal of connecting the entire state and opening up the possibilities of telehealth, remote work, and quality broadband service to a growing population. Hunt, who carries around a paper with black spots like a Dalmatian to visualize broadband availability in Deep East Texas, worries the dark spots around the state will still exist when all is said and done.

“If we’re not careful, we run the risk of spending all this money and improving,” Hunt said, “but not really eliminating these spots.”

Texas has only just begun to spend billions 

Texas has long played catch-up in broadband development.

Most other states created broadband offices in the 2010s. Texas established its broadband office in 2021. The office is run by the state comptroller, Glenn Hagar’s office. This opened the window for Texas to receive a major injection of cash for broadband amid the COVID-19 pandemic from the American Rescue Plan Act: $461.7 million.

Local officials knew money was coming for broadband, but not when. After a long wait, the first round of funding from the program trickled out earlier this year. According to the state broadband office, 20 projects were awarded $12 million. Those projects are expected to reach 1,729 homes and businesses across Texas.

One of the winners was Poka Lambro Telecom.

For more than 75 years, Poka Lambro Telecom has served 24 small towns in and around the South Plains near Lubbock. The company has grown from providing telephone and dial-up internet services through copper phone lines to constructing fiber optic lines for up-to-date broadband needs. They have hooked up farms and oil fields in the middle of nowhere, along with solar plants.

Then in July, the state combined the remaining pandemic funds with $303 million from the state dollars approved by voters, creating a pool of $730 million to be allocated among another 24 counties chosen for the second round.

The selection came down to two factors: Location and need. To “ensure geographic distribution,” the broadband office decided that two counties would be funded in each of the 12 pre-defined economic regions used by the comptroller’s office, according to Greg Conte, the state’s broadband director.

The need was based on the percentage of homes, businesses and other locations without access to reliable broadband. Conte said in an email to the Tribune that the office relied on the most recent availability data from the federal government.

Lynn County, where Poka Lambro is headquartered, and the rest of the lower half of the region were completely passed over during the second round. Carson and Roberts, neighboring counties in the northern Panhandle, were the only two chosen from the 41-county High Plains.

“It’s good for those two counties, but that was disappointing when it came out,” said Patrick Sherrill, CEO of Poka Lambro. “I don’t know what criteria they used, but they did what they did.”

Sherrill hopes to win additional funding to help connect more of the counties he serves. He has noticed inaccuracies on the federal broadband map and has challenged them. Funding depends on where the maps show there is a need. If an area shows it is served, when it’s not, it could get passed over for federal dollars.

“It’s a huge amount of money,” Sherrill said. “It would be so sad to see our communities get passed over and not get a shot at being funded because of an inaccurate map. But I think it will happen in some cases.”

Sherrill says his challenges were accepted. He’s worried about the ones that failed. The maps produced by the federal and state governments have been an ongoing source of contention by service providers, residents, and local governments alike. After being completely bypassed for earlier funding, Rio Grande Valley leaders are urging the state not to rely on the federal maps for future grant decisions, fearing the region will be overlooked again.

Internet service providers, local governments and other officials have one more chance to challenge the maps before the $3.3 billion is allocated. That process begins Dec. 3.

Rio Grande Valley officials hope a united force will strengthen their efforts to expand broadband into the region. So they formed the Rio Grande Valley Broadband Coalition.

They argue that continued reliance on the federal maps would be a failure by the state to fulfill the requirements under the infrastructure law to support areas with high poverty rates, said Jordana Barton-Garcia, director of the broadband coalition.

“Congress directs the (government) to target persistent poverty of regions with the funding,” Barton-Garcia said. “And so if they use a faulty map, that means they will not cover this region, because it falsely shows that there is not a problem of the digital divide.”

In their requests that the state not rely on federal maps, the county judges of Hidalgo and Cameron counties noted that U.S. Census data shows only 55% of Hidalgo County residents and 43% of Cameron County residents were connected to broadband. Earlier versions of maps suggested the Valley was 100% covered.

In coordination with the RGV Broadband Coalition, the counties have moved forward with their own plans to expand broadband. They each conducted feasibility studies to determine the need for the areas and formed public-private partnerships with a local internet service provider. But these efforts were done in hopes of applying for the next round of federal funds and other equity-focused grant programs that will not rely on the maps.

In Alpine, Rusty Moore similarly spent years challenging federal maps and preparing to apply for money. Moore, the general manager of Big Bend Telephone, serves customers within 18,000 square miles of the Big Bend region.

He said the company had spent four years and more than $400,000 to ensure that the federal maps are correct. Over the same period, the company filed tens of thousands of challenges. He applied for 12 of the grants and received 5, which will amount to $5.5 million.

“That’s just been a huge frustration for the industry as a whole. We’re making huge decisions with public money based on flawed data,” Moore said.

Charles Meisch, director for the National Telecommunications and Information Administration’s Office of Public Affairs, said the federal map is updated every six months with feedback from those challenges. He said the data will be the most accurate and up-to-date when the challenge process begins in Texas.

“What we’ve seen nationwide is there are local and national nonprofits who are working with individuals to submit batches of challenges for locations,” Meisch said. “To make sure everyone’s voices are heard.”

Conte, the Texas broadband director, said money from federal programs has to be distributed to eligible locations that are underserved or unserved according to the federal data, not the state’s broadband map.

“No matter how great we made our state map, it didn’t matter in the eyes of the federal government,” Conte said at a July state Senate hearing. “Because we had to tie all the federal dollars back to their map.”

Rural local governments unprepared for expansion 

Local governments play a critical role in advocating for major infrastructure projects such as broadband expansion. And yet, the private sector is ultimately responsible for the projects.

For two decades, Jim O’Bryan has presided over a county that employs just over 100 people. He was a commissioner for 25 years before becoming county judge in 2019. Most of his job entails steering the frenzy of the oil fields surrounding every boundary of Reagan County and its roughly 3,100 residents.

Oil and gas, he gets. Broadband remains a mystery to him. And yet, his county is one of the 24 counties chosen for broadband funding.

“It’s just way too great of an expense of responsibility and expense for each county to handle it individually,” O’Bryan said.

O’Bryan is working with Nexlink, a Texas-based internet service provider, to provide the infrastructure his constituents desperately need.

He and the Concho Valley Council of Governments say the counties are woefully unprepared to handle that kind of money. They are not the only local government that feels overwhelmed by the firehose of broadband dollars.

“Everyone’s very interested and very eager to receive these programs, but are also very under prepared to receive them,” said Connor Sadro, regional broadband director for the Deep East Texas Council of Governments.

Building broadband on their own would be an expensive lift for most local governments to oversee, requiring projects and a workforce the counties could not afford.

It opens the door to soliciting from big companies. Hunt, with the Deep East Texas Council of Governments, said local officials are being inundated with advice from commercial internet providers, and it’s a problem. Hunt credits these companies for the broadband infrastructure that’s standing today but says national providers may not be what is needed for rural Texas.

“Our local officials are trying to wade through all these opportunities and determine what’s best for their communities,” Hunt said. “It’s a challenge for them to figure out, not just the best provider, but how to ensure the maximum coverage and most affordable rates.”

Rural counties may spend an inordinate amount of time and resources preparing just to apply for broadband money. It can be a complex process for local leaders who may not have experience in managing such a large amount of funding.

In Reagan and Irion, four internet service providers are set to receive money to build infrastructure under the Council of Governments’ jurisdiction. They had spent years preparing for the opportunity, said John Austin Stokes, executive director of the Council of Governments. Had they not, the counties would not have been prepared to spend the money.

The state broadband office created the Technical Assistance Program, which provides resources to communities that need help with broadband planning. Thirty-two counties are enrolled in the program.

Amid presidential transition, fresh criticism and questions 

Any hope that Texas could move forward with spending its $3 billion in federal money uninterrupted after winning final federal approval was dashed — quickly.

Cruz, the U.S. senator who easily won reelection in November, is expected to lead the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which has oversight of the telecommunications agency, has promised to review the federal broadband program. Cruz voted against the law that created the funds.

“As President-elect Trump has already signaled, substantial changes are on the horizon for this program,” Cruz said.

In his letter, Cruz blamed the Biden administration for the delay by imposing “extraneous” requirements on states and said he will review the program next year. He points to mandates such as “DEI labor requirements” and climate change assessments. However, an earlier letter from Bennett Butler, director of congressional affairs for the NTIA, said many of the requirements are in line with Congress’ directions in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passed in 2021. This includes enforcing “Build America, Buy America,” which requires all materials used in infrastructure projects must be produced in the U.S.

Butler’s letter also says that states and territories must have programs that will promote equitable training, development and deployment of a qualified workforce. He says the funding announcement lists certain criteria that the federal government urges states to think through, but is not a list of requirements. There is a requirement that states demonstrate they have sufficiently accounted for current and future climate-related risks. Butler said this was to “ensure taxpayers get long-lasting value for their investment and to strengthen the longevity of broadband projects.”

The state is now preparing for the challenge process, where nonprofit organizations, tribal and local governments, and service providers can dispute the accuracy of the map. The challenge process starts Dec. 3, and the state has several resources available for people including online webinars, hosting weekly office hours, and opening a helpline.