State’s broadband plan could leave out one of its least connected communities: East Oakland
Digital equity advocates say California’s downsized internet infrastructure plan will disenfranchise historically redlined East Oakland and South Central Los Angeles.
SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
Danny Nguyen
Aug. 30, 2023
UPDATE: Gavin Newsom reverses broadband cuts advocates portrayed as digital redlining
California is expected to significantly scale down a multibillion-dollar plan to expand high-speed broadband networks soon. And the data the state is using to make the amendments is inaccurate, experts and advocates say, meaning lower-income areas with some of the lowest rates of internet access, like East Oakland, could lose out the most.
The importance of internet access was underscored by the COVID-19 pandemic. Work and schooling shifted online, to the detriment of those living in regions without reliable internet access.
In pockets of Alameda County, which includes East Oakland, up to 38% of residents don’t have internet access, nearly triple the 13% statewide average, according to Microsoft’s Digital Equity Data Dashboard. That adds up to nearly 94,000 Oakland residents who lack internet access. Parts of South Central Los Angeles have similar proportions of residents without broadband services, amounting to about 416,000 Los Angeles County residents.
Yet, it’s internet deserts in East Oakland and South Central Los Angeles, as well as those in Wasco (Kern County) and Stockton (San Joaquin County), that will be left behind if the state forgoes development of internet infrastructure — something it was planning since the COVID-19 pandemic.
In 2021, the state crafted a $6 billion plan for broadband infrastructure expansion through Senate Bill 156. Over half of these funds would be spent developing middle-mile networking — the midsection of broadband infrastructure that connects internet service providers to a community. Another $2 billion would be spent on last-mile networking, which connects the individual homes and businesses in a community.
Conventional wisdom and research suggest these needy markets are in low-income areas. Large internet service providers have traditionally invested in wealthier regions, where they can sell large internet packages and have a reliable return on investment. In turn, they neglected poorer regions, say digital equity advocates, leaving over a million Californians without reliable internet.
But the California Public Utilities Commission has conflicting data, and this is where things get complicated.
The commission’s data indicates some wealthier regions like Pleasanton and Livermore have a high need for internet connectivity, while East Oakland and South Central Los Angeles have comparatively modest needs.
It’s the commission’s data that has been the basis for network planning by the California Department of Technology following SB156. When the state cited inflation-elevated construction costs as the reason it began scaling back its broadband plan, it was the commission’s map that the state used to decide where to pull out.
Proposed spending cuts for middle-mile infrastructure in East Oakland and South Central Los Angeles will save the state about $28 million. Some wealthier regions like Half Moon Bay, where the median household income far exceeds the national average, were also negatively impacted by this restructuring, but poorer communities will be the most impacted, said Shayna Englin, Digital Equity Initiative director at the California Community Foundation, a Los Angeles-based advocacy group.
In total, the state is expected to save about $765 million by scaling down middle-mile development.
Patrick Messac, director for #OaklandUndivided, an internet advocacy nonprofit, is one of the digital equity advocates who is skeptical of commission data showing higher-income communities like Pleasanton need more investment than East Oakland.
“The median (household) income (in Pleasanton) is $171,000. Do we really think that this location would be unserved?” Messac said at a recent state hearing.
Messac told the Chronicle the state is pulling back in many of the same neighborhoods harmed by historic redlining, when financial services, among other resources, were withheld from lower-income, minority communities.
“The government (is) investing in upper-income communities, many of the same communities that private companies have prioritized for decades,” he said in an interview.
An unserved area is defined by the federal government as having no telecom infrastructure or download speeds of less than 25 megabits per second, the minimum speed required to meet the Federal Communications Commission’s definition of broadband.
To track statewide internet usage and speed, CPUC uses self-reported data from internet service providers.
But the state commission’s data is inconsistent with other surveys — most notably the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey, a study from the Public Policy Institute of California, and Microsoft’s Digital Equity Data Dashboard — which show greater demand in poorer neighborhoods than commission data indicates.
The commission’s data is even inconsistent with that of the internet service providers. Addresses marked as needy by the commission were identified as eligible for or subscribed to Xfinity’s high-speed internet on the company’s internet service lookup tool.
CPUC data is just a snapshot in time, said Terrie Prosper, a commission spokesperson. Some of this data is based on sometimes outdated broadband availability data from the Federal Communications Commission. If the FCC doesn’t update this data by the time grant applications are due, the state has no choice but to base decisions on the outdated data, Prosper said in an emailed statement.
“Both the state and federal government acknowledge that the (data is) flawed, and will require a multiyear process of continuous updates, improvements, and feedback to improve the accuracy” of the data, Prosper continued.
But CPUC isn’t taking any steps to fix its data, Englin said. The commission hasn’t sought community input or used more accurate data like the Census Bureau’s for the recent restructuring, she added.
While inflation is cooling, it is unlikely to drop to pre-pandemic levels soon and “construction costs are still elevated,” Bob Andosca, a spokesman for the California Department of Technology, said in an emailed statement.
Inflation may be a legitimate reason for scaling back, said Englin, “but also there are a bunch of ways to navigate that, that involves more closely working with the affected communities, rather than just cutting them off entirely.”
Advocates think there is still time to change the state’s restructuring plan. The Department of Technology will convene in October to discuss middle-mile networking, but Englin isn’t sure when the state will finalize its plans.
“Everything about how they’re going about this is opaque and leaves little (if any) room for accountability or feedback,” she told the Chronicle via email.
Portions of the gutted middle-mile networks have been postponed to a nebulous second phase, which will need a different funding package.
The state “has no viable path towards getting that money,” Messac said. “They need the Legislature to pass another bill.”
Given that the state is reducing spending, he’s doubtful it will happen anytime soon.
Danny Nguyen is a journalist based in Washington, D.C. Twitter: @dannyn516
