A. AGR1082-24 Contract for General Services, Agreement No. AGR24-46a with Bonfire Engineering & Construction LLC in the Amount of $35,000,000, plus Applicable Gross Receipts Tax, for the Purpose of Designing and Building a County-Owned Fiber-to-the-Premise Open Access Network
Overall I am a proponent of this effort. Our community is underserved by our current internet providers - the exception being LANet which I believe provides excellent service given the lack of network infrastructure in our county. However, this project has been decades in the making and the attached proposal lacks a lot of details I would like to see. What are the absolute goals and deliverables? The agenda packet is 119 pages of mostly circuit and utility pole details.
I hope you will vote to move this forward. It's been years in the making. Let's not lose this chance to move our county's network connections into the 21st century.
Several people have expressed concern about taking revenues away from local businesses; but there are no local businesses that provide broadband (federally defined as 100+ Mbps) to homes throughout the county. In response to Es Daly, you can't choose a house based on available connection speed: that information isn't available.
Oppose, this is a major investment that needs to be well planned before implementation. Other communities have attempted to install local area broadband and it has negatively affected tax payers with increased taxes to support ongoing maintenance and operations once the install is complete. I would put forward if this is being done to fix a "digital divide" in Los Alamos, lets take a more nuanced approach with specific goals and objectives, focused on the areas that need the support.
What problem are we solving that would require $2000 per man,woman, and child based on a 20,000 population? This directly competes with existing businesses. Given that the infrastructure will be reused outages during wind events and tree cutting and removal will continue. For areas not served by cable remember people chose to live there and Starlink is an option for them. The county offers free internet in all its public buildings. Bury the infrastructure, not increase the internet speed.
Chair Derkacs and Councilors, I propose that we delay a decision on this contract by at least 6 months until we better understand what LANL funding will look like under our new government, and the consequential reduction in NMGRT from LANL to LAC. It seems there are possibilities that DOGE will reduce funding, plus there are thoughts that all non-pit work might be relocated from Los Alamos. Thank you.
I oppose approval without any serious attempt at engaging public discussion and input. I emailed the Council to explain my concerns and suggest the need for public engagement prior to taking action.
Overall I am a proponent of this effort. Our community is underserved by our current internet providers - the exception being LANet which I believe provides excellent service given the lack of network infrastructure in our county. However, this project has been decades in the making and the attached proposal lacks a lot of details I would like to see. What are the absolute goals and deliverables? The agenda packet is 119 pages of mostly circuit and utility pole details.
I hope you will vote to move this forward. It's been years in the making. Let's not lose this chance to move our county's network connections into the 21st century.
Several people have expressed concern about taking revenues away from local businesses; but there are no local businesses that provide broadband (federally defined as 100+ Mbps) to homes throughout the county. In response to Es Daly, you can't choose a house based on available connection speed: that information isn't available.
Oppose, this is a major investment that needs to be well planned before implementation. Other communities have attempted to install local area broadband and it has negatively affected tax payers with increased taxes to support ongoing maintenance and operations once the install is complete. I would put forward if this is being done to fix a "digital divide" in Los Alamos, lets take a more nuanced approach with specific goals and objectives, focused on the areas that need the support.
What problem are we solving that would require $2000 per man,woman, and child based on a 20,000 population? This directly competes with existing businesses. Given that the infrastructure will be reused outages during wind events and tree cutting and removal will continue. For areas not served by cable remember people chose to live there and Starlink is an option for them. The county offers free internet in all its public buildings. Bury the infrastructure, not increase the internet speed.
Chair Derkacs and Councilors, I propose that we delay a decision on this contract by at least 6 months until we better understand what LANL funding will look like under our new government, and the consequential reduction in NMGRT from LANL to LAC. It seems there are possibilities that DOGE will reduce funding, plus there are thoughts that all non-pit work might be relocated from Los Alamos. Thank you.
I oppose approval without any serious attempt at engaging public discussion and input. I emailed the Council to explain my concerns and suggest the need for public engagement prior to taking action.