Here is video of ACLU directly asking Chris Vein how he will support Free
Speech and address Privacy concerns on the SF TechConnect WiFi Project on
May 30th in San Jose.
 
http://youtube.com/watch?v=8EAMKQMLnRQ (5 mins)
 
As was the case at the May 19th and previous city hearings, DTIS continues
to refuse to agree to any baselines or engage in a public discussion of
these issues - instead shrouding the discussion in the need to keep the
negotiation secret and to get the Best Deal for the city - yet they will not
say what the best deal is.  He also advocate that the private firm must make
money on the initiative - We are giving the company free access to all the
city property like light poles and building tops.  The company
Earthlink/Google need to figure out how to make money with the conditions
the city puts on the initiative - not the other way around.  Plus 5 other
vendors bid the project - if Earthlink/Google can't meet the demands then
the city can go to these vendors.  Nicky Ozer of ACLUNC then points out that
there are other costs besides money here.  There was no discussion of
getting digital inclusion funding as has been the case in the Philly deal.
It is funny that Chris mentions the 62 criteria used to judge the vendors
because they refuse to released the detailed scoring of the proposals - only
summary scores, and they refuse to provide the answers to the 15 oral
interview questions.  One of the reviewers was later quoted 
 
Also why can't we see a significant pilot of the technology before the
contract is signed?  We want to see real world how privacy, capacity,
coverage, work before the city commits to this WiFi Franchise Monopoly.
 
This is looking more and more like the ComCast deal - signed sealed
delivered contract that the Supervisors are forced to approve without the
public playing a part in the criteria of the deal.
 

--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/
Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/

Reply via email to