4. Adopted Goals, Objectives, and Role of Regional Consortia
As a basis for establishing the procedures and protocols for administering the Consortia grant program, we must first identify what are the relevant goals, objectives and roles of the program and its participants. We shall adopt appropriate goals, objectives, and membership of the Consortia grant program consistent with the statutory mandate specified in Pub. Util. Code § 281 which states:
Moneys in the Rural and Urban Regional Broadband Consortia Grant Account (Consortia program) shall be available for grants to eligible Consortia to fund the cost of broadband deployment activities other than the capital cost of facilities, as specified by the Commission. An eligible Consortium may include, as specified by the commission, representatives of organizations, including, but not limited to, local and regional government, public safety, K-12 education, health care, libraries, higher education, community-based organizations, tourism, parks and recreation, agricultural, and business, and is not required to have as its lead fiscal agent an entity with a certificate of public convenience and necessity.
Consistent with this statutory language, the membership of Consortia can be quite broad, encompassing the range of community interests that share the common purpose of promoting greater deployment and adoption of broadband. SB 1040 specifies eligibility criteria for a Consortium, but authorizes the Commission to provide further guidance in regards to administration of funds, delegation of authorities, and objectives of the Consortia. The procedures we adopt herein provide the requisite guidance. We are further guided by the broad purposes for which the CASF program has been administered to date.
We will not adopt a rigid definition of a "geographic region" prescribing minimum or maximum sizes of individual consortia. Similarly, we will not predetermine or mandate the precise number of consortia to receive CASF grants. Given the range of variations in demographics and broadband needs among diverse regions within California, we recognize that a one-size-fits-all policy for establishing regional consortia is not practical or desirable. While we adopt general standards and guidelines in this decision to govern the formation and membership of eligible consortia, the details regarding the size and membership of each consortium should be worked out within each local region. In this regard, the regional consortia previously formed through the CETF may offer a useful point of reference to local entities contemplating formation of a CASF consortia. In any event, we anticipate awarding grants to multiple consortia of varying sizes and demographic characteristics consistent with the general standards and principles adopted in this decision.
We recognize the primary role of the CASF Consortia Grant Account program as helping to bridge the "digital divide."6 Funding designated to regional Consortia activities shall be designed to promote regionally appropriate and cost-effective broadband deployment, access, and adoption within a given region. A regional Consortium will serve as the umbrella organization, coordinating efforts across public, private, and community-based parties as set forth in SB 1040, to close gaps and leverage opportunities aimed at increasing broadband deployment, access, and adoption. Grant funds will be used to promote ubiquitous broadband deployment and to advance broadband adoption in unserved and underserved areas by:
o Increasing sustainability of broadband infrastructure and projects
o Promoting broadband deployment (availability) for residences in California
o Promoting broadband access and adoption (knowledge of service options and ability to utilize services as well as subscription of services) for residences in California
o Increasing the rate of broadband adoption by facilitating the impact of consumer education, outreach, and training
o Supporting those community-based parties, especially anchor institutions, that are working to increase deployment, access, and adoption
The CETF partners or any other external Consortia grantees will have no formal role in the Commission's review of CASF applications for infrastructure loans or grants. The CASF review and approval function must remain exclusively under Commission authority. While Consortia may certainly work with grant recipients and may offer input on proposed CASF infrastructure grant projects, a Consortium grant shall not be used for construction of infrastructure facilities.7
As noted by TURN, most of the Consortia members will consist of entities that are not licensed carriers, and thus are not otherwise subject to Commission jurisdiction. Such entities may not necessarily be familiar with Commission processes and rules. Accordingly, it is important that all Consortia receiving CASF grant funds recognize and acknowledge that by receiving a CASF grant from the Commission, the Consortia members agree to comply with the terms, conditions, and requirements of the grant and thus submit to the jurisdiction of the Commission with regard to disbursement and administration of the grants. CASF funds are collected from California telecommunications ratepayers, and thus ratepayers are entitled to consumer protections ensuring that CASF funds are administered in a responsible and cost-effective manner. We have included appropriate controls in our adopted processes to ensure that the Commission retains oversight and enforcement tools necessary to carry out its responsibilities in administering this program.
We conclude that Consortia funding should not be limited only to existing Consortia, but should be open both to existing and newly formed Consortia. We recognize, however, that the expertise offered by the CETF Consortia partners may offer valuable advantages in terms of meeting the goals of the CASF consortia program. Our intention is also to avoid duplication with respect to funding sources and program activities, however. Thus, we shall limit CASF grants only to one Consortium per geographic region. Such a limitation is fully consistent with the statute establishing funding for "Regional Broadband Consortia."8 We shall also likewise require that any CASF grants be limited and apply only to activities and programs that are not already covered by funding from any other public or private sources.
We agree with TURN's proposal that the Consortia's processes, meetings, etc., should be widely noticed and open to public scrutiny. We believe, however, that participation by members of the public should be separate and distinct from the formal membership of the Consortia, itself. Thus, we disagree with TURN that the Consortia should unilaterally be free to add or subtract members from its official membership list submitted to the Commission as part of its application process. The Commission will review and approve Consortia applications, in part, based upon consideration of the membership making up the Consortia. In order to maintain appropriate oversight of the Consortia funding, therefore, any change in the official Consortia membership must be subject to Commission pre-approval as discussed in Section 10.
6 As set forth by the Legislature in Public Utilities Code Section 709.
7 Since this decision focuses only on the Consortium program, we make no prejudgement concerning whether or how individual consortium members may separately qualify for CASF infrastructure grants or revolving loans. Those issues will be addressed in a subsequent decision to be issued in this proceeding.
8 The use of "regional" in P.U. Code 281(d) indicates legislative intent to limit the Consortia by georgraphy. See, Webster's Third New International Dictionary.
