HB 2016
In CommitteeHouse
Capital budget for broadband
Concerning an additive capital budget for state matching funds and federal expenditure authority for broadband.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill authorizes $1.5 billion in federal and state capital funding for broadband infrastructure over two years, primarily to match federal grants under the national BEAD Program. It adds new requirements for how the state awards grants—such as prioritizing open-access networks—and creates a new staff role to advise on technology trends. It also updates the state’s broadband fund rules and removes outdated laws.
- Creates an additive capital budget for broadband infrastructure projects from July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2027, with a total appropriation of $1.5 billion.
- Provides $280 million from the federal broadband account as state matching funds for the federal Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) Program, contingent on receiving federal grant funding.
- Adds secondary selection criteria for grant awards, prioritizing projects that provide open-access wholesale broadband service and have support from local or tribal governments.
- Establishes a new staff position ($300,000) in the Department of Commerce to advise on emerging broadband technologies.
- Amends RCW 43.330.400 to rename and expand the federal broadband account, clarifying it can hold and spend money for broadband activities authorized under federal law and for nonfederal match requirements.
- Repeals three prior uncodified sections (2023 c 474 ss 6082 and 7017, and 2024 c 375 s 1004) to remove outdated or redundant provisions.
Who is affected
- Public and tribal government entities — Public and tribal government entities that apply for broadband infrastructure grants; they may receive state matching funds only if they lead the project and meet priority criteria like affordability, fair labor practices, and local coordination.
- Private internet service providers — Private internet service providers may benefit from open-access networks built with grant funds, since the bill requires grantees to provide fair, equal, and neutral access to all retail providers.
- Residents in underserved or rural areas — Residents in underserved or rural areas who may gain access to high-speed internet through new infrastructure projects prioritized by the state.
- State broadband office staff — State staff in the Department of Commerce’s statewide broadband office, who will administer grant programs and receive a new staff position to advise on emerging broadband technologies.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Mandating open-access wholesale broadband with fair, equal, and neutral access terms ensures that all retail providers — including small local ISPs — can compete on equal footing, promoting long-term competition and preventing monopolistic pricing.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b) & Sec. 2(2)(a)Prioritizing affordability, local coordination, and digital navigation services in grant scoring directly supports low- and moderate-income households by lowering monthly internet costs and improving service reliability — especially in underserved neighborhoods.
HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b) & Sec. 2(2)(a)Expanding broadband access to underserved and rural areas enables more equitable access to remote learning, telehealth, and digital literacy tools — directly benefiting students, seniors, and families who rely on connectivity for essential services.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)By prioritizing projects that include digital navigation services and affordability, the bill helps reduce barriers to telehealth adoption — particularly for rural residents, elderly populations, and those with mobility or transportation challenges.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)Providing $280M in state matching funds and reappropriating unspent federal funds enables tribes and local governments to leverage federal dollars for broadband expansion, strengthening public infrastructure and regional economic development capacity.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(3) & Sec. 4
Potential Concerns (5)
Mandating open-access wholesale broadband models may reduce private ISP profitability and discourage investment in infrastructure by incumbent providers, potentially limiting competition in the long term if new entrants lack scale to compete on equal terms.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)Requiring local/tribal government support as a grant condition may create administrative burdens for smaller municipalities with limited bandwidth or technical staff, potentially delaying or blocking participation in the program.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(1)(b) & Sec. 2(2)(b)Expenditure of state matching funds is contingent on receipt of federal funding, introducing uncertainty about whether promised infrastructure will materialize — especially risky for rural communities that cannot easily absorb delays in critical services.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)Open-access network requirements may increase upfront capital costs and complexity, potentially reducing the number of qualified applicants — especially in rural areas — and slowing deployment timelines.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)Reappropriation of unspent federal funds without new legislative approval may limit oversight flexibility if priorities shift or project scopes change, potentially leading to inefficient or misaligned spending.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 4 (reappropriation language)
Who Is Most Affected
Residents in rural and underserved areas stand to gain dramatically — access to reliable, affordable broadband improves education, healthcare, employment, and civic participation. The bill's affordability and local coordination requirements directly target this group.
Public and tribal governments are primary grant recipients and benefit from state matching funds, but must meet stringent criteria (affordability, labor standards, local coordination). While this increases administrative burden, the funding opportunity is substantial and aligned with public infrastructure goals.
Private ISPs may face reduced pricing power under open-access models, but gain access to new infrastructure they can lease — potentially expanding their service area at lower capital cost. However, incumbent providers with existing infrastructure may see reduced ROI on new deployments.
State broadband office staff gain a new technology advisor role to support emerging tech evaluation, strengthening institutional capacity. However, this is a small addition ($300K) and does not significantly expand staffing overall.
Small and community-based ISPs benefit from open-access mandates that require equal, neutral access — leveling the playing field against larger incumbents. However, they may face increased demand for service offerings without corresponding investment in network build-out.