Loading...
06 - November 19, 2020 Connectivity Committee Agenda Package CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEEMEETING Thursday,, 2020 Table of Contents I.Agenda……………………………………………………………………………...2 II.November 5, 2020Minutes……………………………………………………….3 III.Action Plan Update ……………………….……………………………………….7 IV.Internet Service Provider Survey Results…………………………………….....15 V.MountainConnect Broadband DevelopmentConference Summary…………29 VI.Chatham-Kent TekSavvy Partnership………………………………….………..33 VII.Follow-up to Literature Review…………………………………...………………37 1 CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday,November19, 2020 1:00.m. Meeting to be held electronically. Agenda 1.Approval of Agenda 2.Adoption of November 5, 2020 Minutes 3.Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest and the General Nature Thereof 4.Action Plan Update – Councillor Marks, Chief Administrative Officer 5.Summary of Meetings with MP and MPP – Councillor Marks (Verbal) 6.Internet Service Provider SurveyResults – Supervisor of Legislative Services 7.Summary of Mountain Connect Virtual Conference, Legislative Services Coordinator 8.Chatham-KentTekSavvy PartnershipSupervisor of Legislative Services,Director of Financeand Manager of IT 9.Follow-up to LiteratureReviewSupervisor ofLegislative Services 10.Date of Next Meeting 11.Adjournment 2 Meeting:Connectivity Committee Date: November 5, 2020 Time: 1:00 p.m. Location:Webex Attendees: Tom Marks, Councillor andCommitteeChair Dominique Giguère, Councillor and Committee Vice Chair Dave Mennill, Warden Justin Pennings, Community Member Shawn Southern, Community Member Joshua Kiirya, Community Member Regrets:Mike Andrews, Community Member Staff:Julie Gonyou, Chief Administrative Officer Jim Bundschuh, Director of Financial Services Alan Smith, General Manager of Economic Development Al Reitsma, Manager of Information Technology Cecil Coxen, IT Manager – Township of Malahide Katherine Thompson, Supervisor of Legislative Services Carolyn Krahn, Legislative Services Coordinator DRAFT MINUTES 1.Call to Order th The Connectivity Committee met this 5day of November, 2020. The meeting was called to order at 1:00 p.m. 2.Approval of Agenda Moved by: Warden Mennill Seconded by:Councillor Giguère RESOLVED THAT the agenda beapproved as presented. 3 Recorded Vote YesNo CouncillorYes WardenMennillYes JustinPenningsYes CouncillorMarksYes 40 -Motion Carried. 3.Adoption of October 22, 2020 Minutes Moved by:Warden Mennill Seconded by:Justin Pennings Resolved that the minutes of the previous meeting be adopted. Recorded Vote YesNo CouncillorYes WardenMennillYes JustinPenningsYes CouncillorMarksYes 40 -Motion Carried. 4.Disclosure of Pecuniary Interest andthe General Nature Thereof None. 5.Independent Telecommunications Providers Association (ITPA) Presentation Jonathan Holmes, ITPA Executive Director; Grant Roughley, VP Northern Frontenac Telephone Company; andIan Stevens, CEO Execulink Telecom, presented an overview of the ITPAand provided suggestions about how Elgin can facilitateFibre-to-the-Home in the County. 4 6.Action Plan Update – Chief Administrative Officer The Chief Administrative Officer presented an update ontheCommittee’s Action Plan, noting completed actions, ongoing actions, and upcoming activities. 7.Conduit in Road Allowances – Director of Engineering Services The Director of Engineering Services presented an overview ofthe practices and costs associated with infrastructure opportunities, including thepotential implementation of strategic actions such as a “Dig Once” Policy and/or undertaking a review of various County policies and processes to support broadband network expansiontofurther facilitate increased connectivity throughout the County. 8.Summary of Discussion with Local Municipal Partners – Chief AdministrativeOfficer T he Chief Administrative Officer presented an update on the gathering of information from Elgin’s seven (7) Local Municipal Partners (Malahide and Aylmer) regarding connectivity in their respective municipalities. 9.Broadband Government Outreach – Director of Financial Services, General Manager of Economic Development. TheDirector of Financial Services and General Manager of Economic Development summarized the knowledge and resources available at other levels of government and business networks including Thames Valley District School Board; Ontario Ministry of Agriculture,Food and Rural Affairs; Infrastructure Ontario; Canada Infrastructure Bank; Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission;St. Thomas District Chamber of Commerce; Aylmer and Area Chamber of Commerce; Southwestern Public Health. 5 10.Summary of Municipal Broadband Masterclass with Jesse Hirsh Summary –Councillor Giguère(Vice Chair), Legislative Services Coordinator The Vice Chair and Legislative Services Coordinator provided a detailed summary of the Municipal Broadband Master Class led by Jesse Hirsh held on October 21, 2020. 11.Date of Next Meeting The Committee will meet again on November 19, 2020 at 10 a.m. 12.Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 2:47 p.m. 6 presented to – w seeking additional Executive Director of the Notes/Updates Literature Review completed by Community and Cultural Services Committee October 22, 2020 (attached). Staff have contacted communities in Literature Revieinformation as requested by the Committee. An update will be provided at meeting 6.Research to identify best practices will be ongoing. Mike Andrews facilitated connection. TheIndependent Telecommunications Providers Association will attend Connectivity Committee Meeting #5 (November 5, 2020). of the Services HOW?Utilize Reference Librarian Support from Community and Cultural Timeline: 2 weeks for preliminary research; 2 weeks for analysis.OngoingMike Andrews to facilitate connectionDelegation to committee Timeline: Meeting 4 or 5 subject to availability group 2020) 19, November ( worked well? 7 pdate What has worked well?What has not worked well?What has What has not worked well? U # WHAT DO WE WANT TO KNOW?Lessons learnedWho did they work with to make it happen?What made the business case work for building rural fibre?Lessons learnedWho did they work with to make it happen?What made the business case work for building rural fibre? Meeting – Plan Work – Actions Conduct a literature review to identify what other rural communities have done to address connectivity challenges and issues (i.e. best practices, emerging practices, lessons learned, etc.)Meet with the Independent Telecommunications Providers Association Committee Conduct an Environmental Scan Connectivity , th to at was provided It is anticipated that an update will be provided the Committee at Meetings #5 & 6. Collection of additional information as requested by the Committee is ongoing. It is anticipated that an update will be available at meeting #6.Update meeting #5 on November 52020. 6 weeks after - Following the literature review (communities to be identified in literature review).Timeline: 4literature review, dependent on community partner availability (COVID/resourcing concerns)HOW?Jim will connect with the TVDSB and report back to committee.Timeline: Meeting #5 2020) 19, November ( 8 pdate What has worked well?What has not worked well? U # How did they make the business case to internet service providers?What did they do to make the business case work?Lessons learned Who did they work with to make it happen?WHAT DO WE WANT TO KNOW?How many students do not have access to internet at home?Are there particular locations where students don’t have access to the internet? Meeting – Plan emented connectivity Work – existing data that can help to inform A. Thames Valley District School Board Talk to other communities who have successfully implsolutions SOURCE Gather the development of a connectivity strategy in Elgin. Contact the following organizations to access their data: Committee Gather Existing Data Connectivity sent to ISP provided at provided at provided at . was waswaswas 2020 SWIFT is available as a resource as needed. An ISP Survey as approved by the Committee on October 22,providers in Elgin with a letter from the Chair requesting participation. Results to be presented at meeting #6Update Meeting #5.Update Meeting #5. Update Meeting #5. – draft completed – Discussion with Barry FieldSurvey by the committeeTimeline: Meeting #4 distribution following meeting by email invitationJim will connect with OMAFRA and report back to committee.Timeline: Meeting #5Alan Smith will connect with the Chamber of Commerce (Aylmer and St. Thomas) and report back.Timeline: Meeting #5Katherine will connect with Public Health and report back. d? 2020) 19, underserved? gaps? November ( 9 connectivity currently look like in pdate U # What does Elgin?Where have you identified gaps?What does connectivity currently look like in Elgin?Where have you identified Would you be willing to have a one on one discussion with Committee Chair?Are you aware of any areas that are not being served? Where?Are you aware of any areas that are underserveWhere?Are you aware of any areas that are not being served? Where?Are you aware of any areas that are Where?Are you aware of any areas that are not being served? Where? Meeting – Plan Work – B. SWIFTC. Current ProvidersD. OMAFRAE. Chamber of CommerceF. Public Health Committee Connectivity . ibution th provided to the Survey completed October 15, 2020. Communications/DistrPlan attached for Committee Review (October 22, 2020).The Survey has closed and staff will provide a summary of the results at the meeting held on November 19Preliminary feedback has been gathered. A fulsome report wasCommittee at Meeting #5. partners online and paper, social media, – – Timeline: Meeting #5 How Survey distribution plan to include local municipal and Elgin’s librariesOnline County website, LMP websitesPress Release and paid advertisements in local media outlets.Timeline for survey: Week #4Virtual Input SessionLocal Administrators to discuss strategy. CAO will report back Week #4.County Councillors 2020) 19, November ( 10 pdate U # Are you aware of any areas that are underserved? Where?What we need to know Where do you live?What do you have now? What is the speed? What do you pay for it? What do you need? What are you willing to contribute to the solution?What are you doing? Where are the underserved areas? Meeting – Plan (businesses/homeowners) Work – End Users Local Municipal Partners Stakeholder A.B. Committee Engage Stakeholders Connectivity - was . , 2020 (meeting #5) th Information from ChathamKent will be included in the follow up to the Literature Review to be presented at Meeting #6A report from the Director of Engineering Services included in the November 5agenda package. Manager ngineering Services to Warden to WardenIT Manager to IT Engineer to EngineerThis will be ongoing.Staff to connect with potential infrastructure partners and provide updates when available.Eprovide financial information regarding infrastructure opportunities (conduit). This will be ongoing. 2020) 19, November ( 11 pdate U # What are you willing to contribute to the solution? Are you undertaking any infrastructure projects/road work that we could leverage to install fibre?What have you done? What has worked well? What has not worked well?Are you undertaking any infrastructure projects/road work that we could leverage to install fibre?What are you willing to contribute to the solution? Meeting – Engineering Services Plan – Kent - Work – ChathamElgin County LMPsUtilities Neighbouring MunicipalitiesPotential Infrastructure Partners C.D. Committee Connectivity - presented , 2020 as a date rd Information wasat Meeting #5. The Committee selected December 3for the Internet Forum. A framework for the virtual event was approved by the Committee at the October 22, 2020 meeting. Planning for this event is ongoing. After the results were received from the ISP Survey, staff reached out to ISPs who indicated they would be willing to participate in the Internet Forum. following meeting – ested ISPs, following Gather existing data Timeline: Week #5If needed, consider survey. Internet Forum (Committee to set date in November 2020.)Survey #4One on one interviews with interthe survey and forum. 2020) 19, November ( 12 internet access? pdate U # How many students do not have access to internet at home?Are there particular locations where students don’t have access to the internet?What are the current costs of rural internet, and do they prevent access?What are you willing to contribute to the solution?What can you do to improve connectivity?What are you willing to contribute? What do you need to achieve the last mile?How can we work together to implement solutions? How can we make the business case work to build rural fibre?Can you share with us any user complaints regarding rural Have you conducted a cost benefit analysis for building rural fibre? If yes, can you share that information with us? Meeting – Plan Valley District School Board Work – ThamesCurrent Internet Providers and small providers E.F. Committee Connectivity as user feedback - The Chair will 30. reliminary information w Presentation from Barry Field received by Committee at Meeting #3. To be completed following analysis of endreceived through survey. Ppresented to the Committee at Meeting #5. A meeting has been arranged with Minister Yurek for October S Interview withBarry Field SOLUTION WirelessPoint to point access HOW Director of Finance to report back with options and opportunities.Warden, Chairman and CAO to meet with MPP Yurek. 2020) 19, November ( 13 pdate U # What are your current plans? What is your ultimate goal?Where are the gaps? What are the challenges? Where are you going, and how can we help?What are your timelines?HOW?End User Survey/Existing Data CONTACT Director of Financial ServicesMPP Meeting – Plan Infrastructure Ontario - Work Government – Loans SWIFT G.WHAT DO WE NEED TO KNOW?Where are the problem areas?What are the potential solutions?FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES CountyProvincial Committee Term - Identify ShortSolutionsExplore Funding Opportunities Connectivity waswas The Chair will OngoingOngoing reliminary information reliminary information provide a verbal update at meeting #6.A meeting has been arranged for with MP Vecchio for November 12.provide a verbal update at meeting #6. Ppresented to the Committee at Meeting #5. Ppresented to the Committee at Meeting #5. ) e funding Timeline: October 2020Warden, Chairman, and CAO to meet with MP Vecchio. Timeline: October 2020Staff to provide an overview of program and availablDirector of Finance to report back with options and opportunities. 2020) 19, (communication) ublic procurement process etc. (p expectations November ( 14 (staff/COVID) pdate What is missing? Capacity U # MP Committee, public, and stakeholder The role of the County is to support the Committee (staff). Meeting – anaging M Plan Seek County Council support for a Made in Elgin solution for connectivity challenges. Required processes and Council consent may take time Work – Federal GovernmentCRTCCanada Infrastructure Bank Committee Identify the Role of the CountyRisks Connectivity 1 REPORT TO CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEE FROM:Katherine Thompson, Supervisor of Legislative Services DATE:November 12,2020 SUBJECT:Internet Service Provider Survey Results RECOMMENDATION: THAT theNovember 12, 2020,report titled, Internet Service Provider Survey Results, submitted by the Supervisor of Legislative Services, bereceived and filed for information. INTRODUCTION: On October 22, 2020 the Connectivity Committee approved a survey to be sent to all local Internet Service Providers (ISPs) seeking their feedback on a number of connectivity related issues. This survey was sent to ten (10) ISPs with a personalized letter from the Chair, utilizing a list provided by SWIFT. The County received six (6) responses from ISPs. The complete results of the survey are attached to this report. DISCUSSION: The County received responses from Bell Canada, EH!telNetworks Inc., North Frontenac Telephone Elgin Corp, Brooke Telecom Cooperative Ltd., Execulink Telecom, and Uplink Wireless. Of the six (6) responses that Elgin County received, four (4) of these companies are currently providing internet service in Elgin County. The two (2) companies that are not currently providing service cited limited resources requiring them to prioritize where they service as a reason for not currently servicing Elgin; however, neither ruled out future servicing in Elgin. The high cost of installing infrastructure, access to funding, and low population density were the most significant barriers facing ISPs in regards to providing internet service in Elgin County. Access to Hydro poles and accurate mapping were also indicated. 15 2 ISPs indicated that in order to overcome barriers and achieve the last mile they would need access to funding, facilitated municipal consent and permitting processes, and assistance in gaining access to Hydro poles. The most common complaints received by theseISPs from customers were in relation to slow internet service and unavailable service. All ISP respondents indicated that they would be willing to participate in an upcoming Internet Forum and would be willing to engage in further discussion with the Committee Chair. ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: Serving ElginGrowing ElginInvesting in Elgin Ensuring alignment of Planning for and Ensuring we have the current programs and facilitating commercial, necessary tools, services with community industrial, residential, resources, and need.and agricultural growth. infrastructure to deliver programs and services now and in the future. Exploring different Fostering a healthy ways of addressing environment. Delivering mandated community need. programs and services Enhancing quality of efficiently and Engaging with our place. effectively. community and other stakeholders. Additional Comments: LOCAL MUNICIPAL PARTNER IMPACT: None. COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS: None. 16 3 CONCLUSION: Elgin County received responses from six (6) local ISPs regarding internet connectivity issues in Elgin County. The full results of this survey are attached for Committee reference. All of which is Respectfully Submitted Approved for Submission Julie Gonyou Katherine Thompson Chief Administrative Officer Supervisor of Legislative Services 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 REPORT TO THE CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEE FROM:Carolyn Krahn, Legislative Services Coordinator DATE:November 13, 2020 SUBJECT:Mountain Connect, Broadband Development Conference – Summary RECOMMENDATION: th THAT the November 13report titled, Mountain Connect, Broadband Development Conference Visionary Solutions for the West – Summary,submitted by the Legislative ServicesCoordinator, be received and filed for information. INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this report is to providea summary ofthe Mountain Connect Conference held on October 26-27, 2020. The Mountain Connect Conference included more than forty (40) sessions focusing on three distinct tracks: Community Development, Emergency Technologies, and Wireless. This first report from the Mountain Connect Conference will focus on two (2) sessions from the Community Development track. DISCUSSION: Session: Lessons Learned from Government Owned Broadband Networks (GONs) and Implications for Solving “Digital Divide” Problems Presenter: Ron Rizzuto, Professor of Finance at the University of Denver In his presentation, Ron Rizzuto reviewed the performance of Government Owned Broadband Networks based on the insights gained in his twenty years of studying GONs. His research finds that most GONs are not sustainable, have a negative cash flow, and must borrowfrom their sister utilities. Eventually, the GONs are either sold, continue to borrow from sister utilities, or achieve sustainable cash flow. A few GONs 29 2 (Cedar Falls, Iowa; Chattanooga, Tennessee; Longmont, Colorado) have become sustainable entities, butremaining sustainable is an ongoing challenge because of changes in technology, the competitive landscape, and changing consumer demands. However, Rizzuto acknowledged that measuring the economic viability is not straightforward because it is difficult tomeasure things like the impact of broadband on the community and the community’s economic development. The presentation also provided an overview of lessons learned from mistakes made by GONs. Some of these mistakes include that municipal business plans can be unrealistic and do not focus on cash flow; pricing decisions are made from a political perspective rather than from a business perspective; and GONs often rely on loans from other utilities to cover operation deficits. Additionally, municipal leadersneed to consider the special circumstances around the creation of today’s successful GONs. For example, the GON in Chattanooga received a special $110 million government subsidy to help build their network. Rizzuto concluded his presentation by discussingthe need for public/private partnerships and industry collaboration to solve the digital divide problem. The community sees the greatest benefit of increased connectivity. As a result, there is an underinvestment in the community by private business, and communities will need to subsidize both the cost of building networksas well as the cost to the consumer. Session: Canada's Intertwined Regulatory and Funding Regimes for Rural Broadband Panel: Amedeo Bernardi, CEO, Amedeo Bernardi Consulting Amber Crawford, Policy Advisor, Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) Dr. Rob McMahon, AssociateProfessor, University of Alberta, First Mile Consortium Alyssa Moore, SeniorPolicy & Advocacy Advisor, Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) Greg O'Brien, Editor and Publisher, Cartt.ca The panel provided an overview of current and contemplated public funding programs available to address the rural divide in Canada. The panel agreed that the regulatory and funding regimes for rural broadband in Canada is complex and often “messy.” There is funding available from the federal government, regulators (in the form of a subsidy pool of levies to the industry itself), provincial governments, and occasionally municipal governments. The funding is often dedicated to building different parts of the network (middle mile versus last mile), and these sources of funding are intertwined, but quite often uncoordinated. This environment is difficult for smaller ISPs to navigate and decide where they should be applying for funding. The panel emphasized that the 30 3 regulatory and funding models need to reflect the challenges of providing broadband to small, geographically dispersed communities. Another challenge with the current funding model was that programs often target the areas that are easiest to connect (small rural towns and villages), but leave behind the far north and farm houses, where residences are often few and far between. Although the panel identified that the current state of broadband funding in Canada needs work, they also acknowledged that there have been some successes. Greg O’Brien noted the community of Belle River (located between Windsor and Chatham) for their success in partnering with Gosfield North Communications to get the entire community of Belle River connected. This example, he argued, shows the importance of local Councils working together with ISPs to come up with creative solutions. The panel concluded by highlighting that in order to successfully address broadband challenges in rural areas, local municipalities need to be aware of what their assets are and what their challenges are; they need to partner with ISPs and other community organizations; and they must champion rural broadband when meeting with their MPs and MPPs. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None. ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: Serving ElginGrowing ElginInvesting in Elgin Ensuring alignment of Planning for and Ensuring we have the current programs and facilitating commercial, necessary tools, services with community industrial, residential, resources, and need.and agricultural growth. infrastructure to deliver programs and services now and in the future. Exploring different Fostering a healthy ways of addressing environment. Delivering mandated community need. programs and services Enhancing quality of efficiently and Engaging with our place. effectively. community and other stakeholders. 31 4 LOCAL MUNICIPAL PARTNER IMPACT: None. COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS: Follow up reports highlighting sessions from the Emergency Technologies and Wireless tracks will be presented at subsequent Connectivity Committee Meetings. CONCLUSION: TheMountain Connect Community Development stream highlighted thevital importance of connectivityto rural communitiesand theircontinued economic developmentand the need for local municipalities to work with ISPs, community organizations, and the different levels of government to develop creative solutions to rural broadband challenges. All of which is Respectfully Submitted Approved for Submission Julie Gonyou Carolyn Krahn Chief Administrative Officer Legislative Services Coordinator 32 1 REPORT TO CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEE FROM:Katherine Thompson, Supervisor of Legislative Services Al Reitsma, Manager of IT Jim Bundshuh, Director of Financial Services DATE:November 12,2020 SUBJECT:Chatham-Kent TekSavvy Partnership RECOMMENDATION: THAT theNovember 12, 2020,report titled, Chatham-Kent TekSavvy Partnership, submitted by the Supervisor of Legislative Servicesand the Manager of IT, bereceived and filed for information. INTRODUCTION: As partof itsAction Plan, the Connectivity Committee directed staff to collect informationfrom ruralmunicipalities who have implemented connectivity solutions within their own communities. The Committee directed staff to reach out tothe Municipality of Chatham-Kentto gather additional information about the Municipality’s partnership with Internet Service Provider (ISP)TekSavvy. Initial information was provided througha Literature Review presented by Elgin County Library staff. In response toadditional questionsfromthe Committee, the Supervisor of Legislative Services, the Director of Financial Services, and the Manager of ITmet with staff from the Municipality of Chatham-Kent to discussthe project. The resultsof thisinformation gathermeeting are presented below. DISCUSSION: Chatham-Kent Council became frustrated at the slow pace at which high-speed internet connectivity was being made available to its residents.Even with the existence of Provincial and Federal grant programs, Council did not believe enough incentive existed 33 2 for ISPs to connect the Municipality’s rural residents to high-speed internet. As a result, the Municipality entered into a partnership with TekSavvy, an ISP based in Chatham, to install fibre backbonelinesfrom Chatham to other major population centres in the Municipality. These include Bothwell, Blenheim, Ridgetown etc. This project consists of approximately 100km of fibre. Once installed, TekSavvy or other ISPs will be able to provide internet access to the communities located at theend of each backbone line. Chatham-Kent anticipates that once thesecommunitieshave been serviced, 80%of the Municipality’spopulation will haveaccess tohigh-speed internet. It is importanttonote that the construction of these backbone lines will not service0% of residents–future ISP projects facilitated by thisinfrastructure are anticipated to achieve this result. Properties along the backbone lines willbe connected;however, this does not includea significantportion of the population. TekSavvy will own the backbone infrastructure and will retain the right to negotiate with other ISPs for access rights. This is not an open access project. The cost of the project is approximately $6.5M which will be funded entirely by the Municipality using existing reserve funds. There is an additional annual cost of $450,000 that the Municipality will be incurring to hire additional Public Works staff to handle permitting related to ISPs who are interested in installing fibre to the communities at the end of the backbone lines. The Municipality will also be providing free permitting to ISPs. The agreement with TekSavvy was finalized in September of 2020 and construction of backbone infrastructure is anticipated to be completed in the spring of 2021, keeping in mind delays that may occur as a result of COVID-19. Success of the project will be determined in approximately three (3) years and will be based on whether ISPs utilize this infrastructure to connect communities. The Municipality believes that this infrastructure will make it more attractive for ISPs to provide services to rural communities and believe that this investment will speed up the process of achieving significant connection percentages by five (5) to ten (10) years. The Municipality worked closely with its Economic Development department on this project and all departments were included to ensure that policies and procedures were updated to make this project happen. 34 3 ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: Serving ElginGrowing ElginInvesting in Elgin Ensuring alignment of Planning for and Ensuring we have the current programs and facilitating commercial, necessary tools, services with community industrial, residential, resources, and need.and agricultural growth. infrastructure to deliver programs and services now and in the future. Exploring different Fostering a healthy ways of addressing environment. Delivering mandated community need. programs and services Enhancing quality of efficiently and Engaging with our place. effectively. community and other stakeholders. Additional Comments: LOCAL MUNICIPAL PARTNER IMPACT: None. COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS: None. CONCLUSION: The Municipality of Chatham-Kent has entered into a partnership with TekSavvy to install approximately 100km of fibre backbone to its major populationcentres. This project is scheduled to be completed in the spring of 2021 and is designed to make it more attractive to ISPs to provide services to these communities. 35 4 All of which is Respectfully Submitted Approved for Submission Julie Gonyou Katherine Thompson Chief Administrative Officer Supervisor of Legislative Services Al Reitsma Manager of IT Jim Bundshuh Director of Financial Services 36 1 REPORT TO CONNECTIVITY COMMITTEE FROM:Katherine Thompson, Supervisor of Legislative Services DATE:November 12,2020 SUBJECT:Follow-up to Literature Review RECOMMENDATION: THAT theNovember 12, 2020,report titled, Follow-up to Literature Review,submitted by the Supervisor of Legislative Services, bereceived and filed for information. INTRODUCTION: At its fourth meeting, the Connectivity Committee received a Literature Review from Elgin County Library staff that provided a brief summary of five (5) different rural communities who had/were implementing connectivity solutions within their communities. The Connectivity Committee directed staff to provide further feedback. DISCUSSION: The County reached out to all communities profiled within the literature review to obtain furtherinformation as directed by the Committee. To date staff have been able to discuss this additional information with the Municipality of Chatham-Kent (as detailed in a previous report) and Chapleau First Nation regarding the Northeast Superior Regional Broadband Network. Staff continue to reach out to the remaining communities and will provide the Committee with additional information once it is received. 37 2 ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: Serving ElginGrowing ElginInvesting in Elgin Ensuring alignment of Planning for and Ensuring we have the current programs and facilitating commercial, necessary tools, services with community industrial, residential, resources, and need.andagricultural growth. infrastructure to deliver programs and services now and in the future. Exploring different Fostering a healthy ways of addressing environment. Delivering mandated community need. programs and services Enhancing quality of efficiently and Engaging with our place. effectively. community and other stakeholders. Additional Comments: LOCAL MUNICIPAL PARTNER IMPACT: None. COMMUNICATION REQUIREMENTS: None. CONCLUSION: Elgin County has received additional information from two (2) of the communities profiled in the Literature Review previously presented to the Committee. Staff continue to reach out to the remaining communities. 38 3 All of which is Respectfully Submitted Approved for Submission Julie Gonyou Katherine Thompson Chief Administrative Officer Supervisor of Legislative Services 39 - EB nd a multi O usually t 18 oject was have been . 20 s no i will have This is a the e ate ot rved. r n tachment at osts as burying fibre c ole (secure Vendor Partners) t is important to p i NSRBN received complementary funding roject ydro p Chapleau First Nations h n anadian Shield. o owever, he C t h ; e Phase three (3) (Secure Funding) is underway. hik The Northeast Superior Region Broadband Network prdeveloped after a failed Connect to Innovate (CTI) application; Several member communities still left unsephase project of which only phase one (1) (research and analysis) and phase two (2) completed. FibreMember communities include: Brunswick House FN, Chapleau, Chapleaau Cree FN, Dubreuilville, Hornepayne, Michipicoten FN, Missanabie FN, Pic Mobert FN, Wawa & White RiverUndetermineddecision tosignificant impactan option in theThe project was broken up into one phase starting in 2017 to service Debreuilville and Brunswick House First Nation with the remaining regions beginning in 2019. Bell Canada applied areceived funding from the Connect to Innovate fund in 2019 for the first phase and the from the Connect to Innovate Fund to cover the Regional Phase. Unavailable. First Phase will include approximately 46km of fibre. Remaining regional communities unknown. Phase Four (4) (Implementation) is expected to be underway and completed by the end of 2021. 40 y the e Kent - Kent is partnering - speed internet. e Municipality of - not be known until the project is nd TekSavvy Municipality of Chatham Kent aKent and will be taken from existing - - bre will be installed. The Municipality of Chathamwith TekSavvy to install fibre backbone lines to its main population centres with the hope of attracting ISPs to service these communities. Once thespopulation centres are serviced 80% of the Municipality will have highFibre ChathamProjected cost is $6.5MActual costs willcompleted in 2021.All funds will come from thChathamreserves.45/square kilometre however this is skewed bCity of Chatham. 10/square kilometre is more accurate for rural areas.It is not known how many properties along the backbone will be serviced but approximately 100km of fiThe partnership was approved in September and although fibre installation has not begun, the Municipality anticipates completion in spring of 2021 Elgin County Connectivity Committee Literature Review: Follow Up time? Project Partners by project applicable Actual Cost KM of Fibre if it completed on Served/Number of Projected Cost and Population Density Type of Technology Funding BreakdownBusiness/Properties Synopsis/Percentage of Community served Status of Project/Was