>From the Business Week article forwarded by Bill Dooley www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_36/b3949053_mz011.htm):
"Now, Addison's 100,000 residents can buy fast wireless Web access from startup RedMoon Inc. for just $16.95 a month -- a far better deal than most phone or cable broadband offerings". Faster and cheaper - that's the crux of it. Wireless internet access (primarly Wi-Fi at present) comes with the promise of fast and inexpensive (at least half of current cable modem rates) internet access. A city-wide wireless network can be built and provided alone, or as part of a bigger, more costly fiber optic network, which is the plan for the City of Minneapolis. Kudos to the City for taking the lead in spurring the development of the city's broadband network and speeding up the delivery of this promise. Incumbent cable and phone companies have not only resisted to take the lead in creating city-wide broadband capacity, they have fought it in the courts, filing legal challenges in several states to restrict municipal ownership and operation of broadband networks. It is in part this threat that has shaped the way in which Minneapolis has approached becoming a broadband city. While several cities are creating or considering some public role in the ownership and construction of a city-wide fiber optic and/or wi-fi network, the City of Minneapolis is moving in the direction of private build out and ownership. As the Business Week article highlights, Minneapolis is currently reviewing proposals from vendors for the construction and operation of a city-wide broadband network. The article specifies "EchoStar Communications Corp. and Sprint Nextel Corp., among others, to build and run a $15 million to $35 million citywide network". Under the citywide network plan, one or more of the bidding companies will build, own and manage a citywide broadband network, which is expected to include both a fiber-optic cable network and a wireless-data technology, or Wi-Fi. The city would serve as an "anchor tenant" on the network, guaranteeing a major customer for the network owner. The City's RFP also requests plans for the provision of broadband access (fiber optic and wireless) to residential and commercial users. See www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/procurement/wirelessrfp.asp for the full RFP. As Becca Vargo Dagget from the Institute for Local Self Reliance (ILSR) in an earlier post described, the City would enter into a long-term broadband services agreement with the network owner and expect to get a percentage of revenues from sales to residents and businesses. ILSR has brought the raging debate on private versus public ownership of the broadband network to the fore in Minneapolis. Council Member Schiff focused one of his summer breakfast meetings on the subject. Regardless of whether you agree with ILSR's supportive position on public ownership of the city's broadband network, the organization has prepared a very solid review of the broadband trend, issues at hand, what's at stake for broadband consumers (current and future) and what's happening around the country. (The report is titled "Who Will Own Minnesota's Information Highway" and can be found at www.newrules.org/info/minnesota.html. I don't know if it's in the City's institutional and the public's best interest (short and long term) to own the broadband network. The problem is the city council may not be able to make this determination either because it hasn't yet done the homework to know. It hasn't studied the cost-benefit of public versus private ownership of the broadband network. Seattle and other cities have or are in the process of studying ownership options before deciding the best route, and Minneapolis would benefit from doing the same. Keep in mind that owning the network doesn't mean managing the operations, or even building it directly. As network owner, it could contract out as much or as little as it wants. While Chaska, MN, for example, both owns its wireless network and provides internet services, Philadelphia plans to outsource the design, construction and management of the network to private companies and to form public-private partnerships with ISPs, smaller cable operators and wireless providers, making access available at low wholesale rates to any private provider that will then sell or bundle access for its subscribers. Key questions are: 1) what are the costs, risks and benefits of private versus public ownership, and 2) how can the broadband network be created and maintained on behalf of the public's best interest? Before the City Council rushes to a decision to franchise or contract with a vendor(s) for the ownership and operation of the broadband network it ought to take time to study these questions. The need for careful and thoughtful review of this process cannot be overstated given the importance of the city's broadband network. It will be the backbone of city's economic and technological competitiveness well into the foreseeable future. What must be safeguarded is the ability of the City (on behalf of the public) to ensure ongoing competition, new services and affordable access on the broadband network, and avoid contract negotiations for ownership that could in any way lead to high-priced monopoly or duopoly of services. While the City may fear legal battles over public ownership of the broadband network, agreements with private entities also come with their legal risks and costs, as illustrated by the City's legal battle with cable provider Time Warner over unpaid franchise fees on cable internet access. Private ownership of the network may be the best route for the City to take, but let's make sure this decision is not made prematurely and that flawed arguments against public ownership of the broadband network or legal threats don't put the public at risk of making incorrect policy decisions and having to live with the consequences. Let's start with all the facts in hand and develop policies that encourage the development of a broadband fiber optic and wireless networks in the best interests of Minneapolis residents and business owners - no matter who deploys a broadband network - municipality or private provider. Some sampled reading on the broadband network ownership debate: http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/1204.cfm http://www.freepress.net/docs/mb_white_paper.pdf www.commondreams.org/views05/0821-22.htm http://news.zdnet.com/2100-1035_22-5653856.html http://news.com.com/Cities+brace+for+broadband+war/2009-1034_3-5680305.html? tag=nl http://news.com.com/Should+cities+be+ISPs/2100-1034_3-5758262.html http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0415-20.htm http://www.muniwireless.com/archives/municipal/687 Jeanne Massey Kingfield REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact 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 Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
