Don’t be too quick to judge New Hampshire harshly for signing deal with Rivada

“New Hampshire is limiting its options by cutting this deal with Rivada Networks”—Part 1. I’ve heard this from quite a few sources, including people whose opinions I respect immensely. However, in this case, I don’t agree with the logic.

Some have argued that New Hampshire and other states should wait until FirstNet and its partner present the FirstNet state plan, decide whether they like the FirstNet proposal, and then start the request-for-proposals (RFP) process.

That makes sense in theory, but it is much more difficult to do in reality, because Congress stipulated in the law that states would get 90 days to make an opt-decision and 180 days to complete an RFP process. Even FirstNet officials have acknowledged that this is a challenging timeline, but it is the law.

In New Hampshire, meeting this RFP timeline was not practical, according to John Stevens, the statewide interoperability coordinator who works with the New Hampshire department of safety.

“We recognized early on that … we would not be able to accomplish that in 180 days,” Stevens said.

Indeed, Stevens noted that it has taken New Hampshire more than a year to get to this agreement with Rivada Networks. In addition, it should be noted that the state’s deal with Rivada Networks is a 20-page document, which means that there is still weeks—or months—of legal work and approval processes that must be done to enter into a deal involving a 25-year commitment to build and maintain a statewide public-safety LTE network.

By completing the RFP process early, New Hampshire has a legitimate chance to consider whether it wants to pursue the opt-out alternative, something Stevens said would not have been an option otherwise.

“New Hampshire is limiting its options by cutting this deal with Rivada Networks”—Part 2. Some contend that New Hampshire should not have cut a deal with Rivada Networks at this time, because it is possible that it would get better, more-informed proposals by waiting until after the state plans are distributed in the spring.

There certainly is a case to be made that the bids in the spring could benefit from better information, because more will be known about the FirstNet system with which a New Hampshire RAN would have to interoperate. But would it offset the difficulties associated with trying to complete an RFP and contractual process under a tight deadline? I don’t think so.

This is especially the case for New Hampshire, which is a middle-of-the-pack state without a huge metropolitan area that a potential partner would value highly when looking at things from a national perspective.