I think it depends on the state. We have a sizeable BEAD grant in a state where they are doing disbursements of grant funds (based on milestones reached) and not reimbursements. We still have to keep all our invoices, etc. for audits, but bottom line is that we have flexibility to fit this sort of a thing into the build so long as we are reaching all the required locations.

In another state we won a BEAD grant, they are doing reimbursements and we'd have a more difficult time fitting this kind of a thing into the build while being honest about it.

It doesn't seem that states will, in general, be willing to renegotiate based on old location data. Considering NTIA has approved all applications, down to the penny, and all locations, become part of the contract, it doesn't seem like. I doubt the NTIA would have the bandwidth to re-review dozens, if not hundreds of applications, and I don't think the states of the latitude to do so without NTIA approval.

On 3/23/26 2:37 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:

So there’s a long dormant subdivision just outside of town with just 2 houses (originally model homes I think) where Lennar is now selling lots and building houses.  Looks like around 100 lots.  The 2 existing houses are slated to get BEAD funding, but not the remaining 98.

 

What do you think will happen?  It would be silly for the awardee to only build FTTH to the 2 locations.  I would guess 100 potential customers all together, not the typical rural one house ever half mile, would be a no-brainer even without the subsidy.  If BEAD is paying to build the main line and hook up 2 locations, it should be profitable to run duct, handholes and flowerpots to the rest of the lots using their own money.

 

Or do you think they would go back to the state and renegotiate to get all the locations subsidized?  Would BEAD have their finances stretched to the point where they don’t want to do anything organically?



-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to