Coming in at number 44, Montana ranks near the bottom of states delivering adequate broadband coverage, according to Broadband Now. In tackling the problem of reaching residents in this large, predominantly rural state, legislators say that attracting skilled workers at affordable wages has been a problem. As The Daily Montanan reports, Montana’s broadband commission voted on whether or not to tie the awarding of broadband contract funding to a prevailing wage requirement. A cache of $629 million in federal dollars is on the table, opening the debate on how best to spend it.
Various factions argued in favor of a higher wage to guarantee superior workmanship, versus stretching the available monies further by attracting low bidders.
“There are other states that have already required prevailing wage in their plans, making them much more competitive at recruiting the workers needed to complete these jobs. This includes Idaho, our most populous neighboring state,” stated President of Rocky Mountain Contractors, Michelle Harris. “The reality is, we are competing with Idaho for talent.”
“The market, I’m sure, will dictate some higher prices for those workers, that would be my assumption,” said Representative Ed Buttrey, who favored weighing compliance with labor standards above prevailing wage concerns. “I think that it’s about compliance with all sorts of workforce standards, training, how they’re treating the employees.”
Those speaking on behalf of labor unions supported prioritizing prevailing wage issues, while Jared Falk of Charter Communications, said that honoring prevailing wage as a chief concern would raise the cost of building a network. Ultimately, he said, the higher costs would mean fewer Montana residents would receive broadband coverage. “The basis for what they’re trying to accomplish through this [Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment] program is to get as many of these dollars out and build out to as many people as we probably can,” he concluded.
Legislators also discussed costs for residents who want to connect to an available network, once it is available. They were unable to agree on what “affordable” means to the average consumer. “If they build it and nobody hooks onto it, they don’t get paid for it,” cautioned Chairperson, Dan Salomon. “So it’s a chicken or egg thing, and it’s a tough one. But I think the way we’ve structured this, it’s a price point that makes sense. There’s no good answer, so you just have to do what you want to do.”
The agreed upon price point was $70, according to The Daily Montanan. This is the most an internet provider receiving these federal dollars can charge for a low-cost plan, they determined. The figure was reached by the Montana Broadband Office, under the Department of Administration, based on averages and medians from surveys of western states gleaned from FCC data.
Reader Interactions