High-speed internet in Rhode Island is synonymous with one company: Cox Communications Inc.
Since the advent of broadband technology more than 20 years ago, Cox has staked its claim in the Ocean State, with its cables connecting to more than 98% of the state.
And some say its market monopoly has let Cox get away with charging too much for unreliable or outdated internet connections.
“In our state, broadband is Cox,” said David Marble, CEO and president of OSHEAN Inc., a North Kingstown nonprofit that runs its own broadband network for public institutions such as libraries, schools and governments. “They drive the prices for homes and businesses.”
But a windfall of federal funding for state broadband projects stands to dismantle Cox’s local empire, creating much-needed competition from other private companies, and potentially even public groups such as municipal governments.
Cox isn’t ready to give up its dominance without a fight.
The company recently announced plans to spend $120 million on state broadband upgrades over the next three years, including $20 million worth of fiber-optic cables on Aquidneck Island, which has been plagued by slow, unreliable internet service for years.
While lawmakers have pressured Cox to improve on its internet service in Portsmouth, Middletown and Newport, the company’s announcement drew criticism from a trio of Aquidneck Island representatives who dubbed it too little, too late.
Rhode Island’s East Bay has been the primary battleground in broadband wars, where complaints about the internet service have grown in recent years. And while residents and businesses elsewhere can choose other broadband providers – albeit usually at higher prices and with still-limited availability – Cox is the only service on Aquidneck Island.
“There are eight communities served by one incumbent provider,” said Rep. Deborah Ruggiero, D-Jamestown, whose district includes Middletown. “What happens if there’s a problem? Their only option is to call some customer service line in Atlanta.”
Ruggiero chairs the House Innovation, Internet, and Technology Committee and has long pushed for the state to intervene in improving broadband access on Aquidneck Island. Specifically, she wants Rhode Island to hire a broadband administrator and appoint an advisory council to hold private companies such as Cox accountable.
Her efforts have fallen flat in the past but are now receiving attention because of the federal broadband funding coming to Rhode Island through the American Rescue Plan and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs acts – up to $200 million.
Gov. Daniel J. McKee’s fiscal 2023 budget proposal includes a broadband advisory council and a new state broadband officer role within R.I. Commerce Corp.
While R.I. Commerce has informally filled these duties, consecrating the role with a designated job title and supplemental group of advisers allows the state to make the best use of its federal funding, said Daniela Fairchild, R.I. Commerce’s operations and special projects director.
Ruggiero put it more bluntly.
“The internet is as important to the 21st-century economy as electricity was in the 20th century,” she said. “For us to access this money, we need this advisory council.”
Jeffrey Lavery, a spokesman for Cox, said in an email that the company was not opposed to the budget proposal for an advisory council or coordinator nor did it reject “fair competition.”
However, the threat of a government-run broadband system has the private industry on edge. Neither Ruggiero’s bill nor McKee’s budget specifically call for a government-run broadband system.
But federal guidance on a $10 billion chunk of ARPA money puts emphasis in funding broadband networks “owned, operated by or affiliated with local governments, nonprofits, and cooperatives.”
McKee’s budget also includes $25 million of the state’s ARPA share to offer matching grants on “last-mile” broadband projects that connect existing cable networks to homes.
A government-owned broadband network is a “waste of taxpayer dollars,” given that Rhode Island already has a strong infrastructure of privately run networks, according to William Mesinger, a spokesman for the New England Cable and Telecommunications Association, an industry group that advocates for cable companies. And keeping a government-run network afloat after the federal funds dry up would cost taxpayers “tens of millions of dollars for ongoing maintenance and upgrades to try and compete with private broadband providers,” Mesinger said in an emailed statement.
Marble sees a self-serving undercurrent to that opposition. It’s not a coincidence that Cox announced its own spending plans on broadband on the heels of the federal funding.
“They’re trying to say, ‘We’ve got this, nothing to see here,’ because they may be facing some new competition,” Marble said.
But in this case, what’s bad for Cox is good for consumers.
“Our small businesses and residents should have a choice for affordable, fast and reliable broadband,” Ruggiero said.
Nancy Lavin is a PBN staff writer. Contact her at Lavin@PBN.com.
