Excerpt from "Fast Internet Service for the People" in the Washington Post today:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/1202-08.htm "For the millions of people who cannot afford high-speed Internet access, some local officials think they've hit on the answer: Build government-owned networks to provide service at rates below what big telecommunications companies charge. >From San Francisco to St. Cloud, Fla., an estimated 200 communities are toying with community-owned networks, sparking a battle with cable and telephone companies over how public, or private, access to the Internet should be. Philadelphia wants to expand its public Internet service. A state law, supported by Verizon Communications, may prevent other cities from doing likewise. (Joseph Kaczmarek -- AP) The companies are lobbying furiously to block such plans, fearful that their businesses would be hurt. Their efforts most recently paid off Tuesday night in Pennsylvania, where a new law bans local governments from creating their own networks without first giving the primary local phone company the chance to provide service. Consumer advocates denounce the new Pennsylvania law. They say it amounts to governments now needing a permission slip from entrenched monopolies to put a vital economic and educational tool within everyone's reach. In Illinois, meanwhile, SBC Communications Inc. and Comcast Corp. teamed up twice to defeat ballot measures that would have allowed three towns to create a fiber-optic network to provide telecommunications and cable television services. " This does not bode well for Minneapolis' recent decision to promote wireless city wide, though I don't think that there is currently a state law prohibiting MN municipalities from providing high speed infrastructure and service as Chaska recently implemented such a system. It's unclear from the decision the city council made recently whether the city would undertake the provision of wireless internet technology directly, or if it would work with the private sector to help make it happen. Perhaps the city should act quickly, before a law is introduced in the legislature that would prohibit the possibility. I see nothing wrong with the city providing the service directly, if it can afford the upfront cost (which it may not), and if it recuperates the capital and operating cost. I would much rather send a monthly payment to the city than to Qwest or Time Warner for wireless high speed access. Given, however, that the city may not have the cash to provide the service, my guess is that it is not moving forward in this direction. Is anyone on the list working with the city on this or does anyone know what the status of this effort is and how the city is approaching it? Jeanne Massey Kingfield REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
