HB1723 – Increasing the accessibility and affordability of telecommunications services, devices, and training through reduced rates, grants, and planning programs.
Prime Sponsor – Representative Gregerson (D; 33rd District; South King County) (Co-Sponsors Representative Taylor & Ryu – Ds)
Current status – House concurred in the Senate changes.
Next step would be – To the Governor.
Legislative tracking page for the bill.
In the House – Passed
Had a hearing in the House Committee on Community & Economic Development January 11th; replaced by a substitute and passed out of committee January 18th. The substitute no longer requires utilities to provide services to low-income persons at a reduced rate determined by the UTC; adds eight more types of anchor institutions, adds three sorts of people to the definition of underserved populations, and adds pre-kindergarten students to those that must be considered when awarding grants. Had a hearing in Appropriations January 27th. Replaced by a second substitute making the bill null and void if specific funding for weren’t appropriated and passed out of committee February 1st. Referred to Rules. Amended on the floor and passed by the House February 12th. (The floor amendments allowed the program to assist low-income people with the cost of services through other means in addition to rate reductions; would have telecommunications providers determine rates for eligible services rather than the UTC; would no longer allow the UTC to exclude a provider from the program because of excessive charges or poor customer service; and would make the program subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for it.)
In the Senate – Passed
Scheduled but not heard in the Senate Committee on Environment, Energy and Technology February 23rd. Replaced by a striker and passed out of committee February 24th. (The striker no longer requires telecommunications providers providing eligible voice and broadband, when enrolling new customers to inform new customers of these and other reduced rate options, and no longer requires them to submit specified information toverifying the eligibility of low-income customers. It no longer requires DSHS to verify low income eligibility or to reimburse providers for the difference between the reduced rates and regular prices, and it makes a couple of other small changes.) Referred to Ways and Means; had a hearing there February 26th. Replaced by a striker which eliminates the proposed Anchor Institution Digital Equity Program and the proposed Washington Broadband Assistance Program, requiring the Statewide Broadband Office to to develop and report on a state digital equity plan in consultation with the Digital Equity Forum, the UTC, and DSHS instead. Passed by the Senate March 4th.
Summary –
The bill would establish a Digital Equity Forum to develop recommendations to advance digital connectivity in the state and advise the State Broadband Office, and would create three new digital equity programs.
It would create a broadband assistance program, administered by the Department of Social and Health Services, to provide low-income persons with reduced rates for eligible voice and broadband services. The Utilities and Transportation Commission would determine eligible services and the amount of assistance, considering the number of customers expected to participate, the price of services, other available assistance programs, and other relevant facts. It would adopt guidelines to reduce barriers to enrollment in the program, which might include allowing providers with low-income internet offerings to automatically enroll customers who had already demonstrated eligibility through initial enrollment in another low-income internet offering without additional verification. Telecommunications providers would be required to provide those services to low-income persons at the reduced rate determined by the Commission, to inform customers that they may be eligible for reduced rates, and to provide information to the department for verifying the eligibility of those customers. The Department would reimburse companies for the discounts. (It would not be allowed to limit these customers to one line.) It would consult with the Office of Equity about methods for administering the program to reduce barriers to participation and a plan for outreach, eligibility determination assistance, and enrollment navigation assistance for populations that would be challenged to participate.
If funding were provided, the bill would establish a Digital Equity Forum to develop recommendations to advance digital connectivity in the state and advise the Broadband Office on the digital equity opportunity and digital equity planning grant programs. The directors of the Office and the Washington State Office of Equity would appoint members they agreed on to the Forum, prioritizing representatives from tribes; state agencies involved in digital equity; and underserved and unserved communities. Two State Representatives and two Senators, one from each party, would also be appointed as members by the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate.
The Statewide Broadband Office would create and manage an anchor institution digital equity program providing rates discounted by at least 50% for broadband services and 25% for basic telecommunications services to public schools, housing authorities, libraries, medical and health care providers, community colleges and other higher education institutions, and other nonprofit or governmental community support organizations. It could provide partial or full grants for the costs for building, rehabilitating, or maintaining telecommunications infrastructure, prioritizing applications by the extent to which they help expand access to state-of-the-art technologies for rural, inner city, low-income, and disabled residents, and the extent to which any broadband service provided is consistent with the office’s current established goals. (The bill would also slightly expand the purposes of the Statewide Broadband Office to include increasing the adoption of broadband as well as its accessibility, to cover underserved as well as unserved communities, and to allow it to work with public housing agencies. It would allow it to assist applicants for the assistance programs it creates in seeking grants for broadband services, and would have it coordinate an outreach effort providing information about available broadband assistance programs to hard-to-reach and low-income communities, or to contract for that outreach.)
If funding were provided, the bill would have the Department of Commerce establish a digital equity planning grant program for local governments, institutions of higher education, workforce development councils, or other entities to development digital equity plans for discrete regions of the state. Priority would be given to applications accompanied by express support from community or neighborhood-based nonprofit organizations, public development authorities, federally recognized Indian tribes in the state, or other community partners and partners using community-based participatory action research methods as a part of the proposed plan. The Digital Equity Forum would review them and provide input to the department about prioritizing awards. The Department would be required to evaluate and rank applications using objective criteria such as the number of underserved populations served and subjective criteria such as the degree of support and engagement evidenced by the community who will be served; to consider the input provided by the forum; and to consider the extent to which the mix of grants awarded would increase the number of K-12 students gaining access to greater levels of digital inclusion.
The bill would focus the the Department of Commerce’s current community technology opportunity program on advancing broadband adoption, digital equity and inclusion. It would have the Digital Equity Forum review applications for the program’s grants and provide input on prioritizing awards, as well as requiring Commerce to consider that input and the extent to which the mix of awards would increase the number of K-12 students gaining access to greater levels of digital inclusion. It would remove the requirement for matching funds for program grants, and would have the Department provide additional support for evaluating the impact and efficacy of activities supported by the grants; and for developing, cataloging, disseminating, and promoting the exchange of best practices to achieve digital equity. It would explicitly have the Department collaborate with broadband stakeholders in implementing the program, including broadband action teams across the state.
