If these ideas have already been presented, my apologies'. I have been
following the stimulus topic as much as possible. Following are specific
topics in the stimulus package that could help us
Definition of unserved/underserved. Last I knew, RUS awarded based on zip
code only. With the addition of underserved, we quality. Would there be a
benefit to doing something like. zip code x has y land mass and z people.
Existing DSL/cable serves (town population). we are the only provider
trying to cover anyone outside of town.
Form 477 filers, initially I agree. prevents startups, should help insure
the money actually gets used for it's intended purpose. should there be an
exception for non-filers that can prove business solvency another way.
possibly by financials or something.
Fund things that couldn't otherwise happen. This points to startups, but
there is no guarantee the financials presented by a startup are based on
anything that will actually happen.
If a WISP is solvent, why can't they do on their own (over time) what
they are asking grant money for (not my opinion, might be governments
option). I have been wondering how to present this item in a proposal.
Goal of stimulus grants. Is it to make more high-speed available or improve
existing high speed.
Get rid of the community center, or provide a mechanism to show existing
resources are adequate for training (local community college or teen center,
etc)
I agree with allow funding of in-house labor (for construction). We can't
go to the local union hall and ask for two guys that can set-up a wireless
broadcast for us. by not doing it, aren't they encouraging a company to
setup a shell company that they pay for construction. by having a shell
company I would think that opens the door to fraud. Justification could be.
once the construction is done, the new staff will be transitioned to support
customers that come on because of the improvements. just less overtime.
Scott Piehn
----- Original Message -----
From: "Marlon K. Schafer" <[email protected]>
To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 10:20 AM
Subject: [WISPA] what to ask for at NTIA and RUS
> OK, I've been putting some thought into this bailout mess we find
> ourselves
> in.
>
> The agencies have almost no time to design a program, take applications,
> distribute money and audit the results.
>
> I'll be surprised if they aren't forced to accept a basic outline of a
> plan
> drawn on a Denny's napkin.
>
> What will the easiest and safest way to go as a government employee? Just
> shoot most of the money out to the people that you already know. Even
> though you've already sent 6 billion out the door to that same group (BTW,
> we should use that number as a big reason why they should radically change
> their models). No one will get in trouble for sticking with what's known,
> and there's not nearly enough time to study the issue, accept public input
> etc. etc. etc.
>
> I don't know if we'll ever get the chance to give our input to the
> agencies
> involved. (I know WISPA and many of us individually will sure be working
> on
> that though!!!) But if we do, what should we push for? The more of us
> push
> in the same direction the more we'll be able to move the agencies out of
> their historic ruts.
>
> Some of the things that I think would help a company like mine deal with
> the
> grants. Heck, even want the grants. (The last time I even considered one
> was in 2001, too many strings.)
>
> No strings attached. Accept the plan laid out, look at the goals of
> the
> plan and approve or disapprove based on that. (We need more and better
> broadband out here, but we do NOT need computer centers!)
>
> Allow basic plans. There isn't time for us to figure this out down to
> the last nut and bolt either. I have a plan to build new towers in many
> locations. Some will be near existing buildings that are used for towers
> now, others will have to be in totally new locations. It'll take time to
> buy/lease ground. I might have to move my locations by great distances.
>
> Allow labor to be paid. If I can grow/update my network I'll need to
> hire some help. I won't be able to do enough new installs or upgrades to
> get it all done quickly.
>
> Fund small businesses at 100%. If I had the ability to get more money
> (for matching funds) I'd have already used it to deploy more coverage to
> more users.
>
> Allow funding to purchase the tools needed to expand. If I get another
> installation crew running I'll need a rig for them. They'll need some
> training etc.
>
> Allow the specifics of a deployment to change if need be. As long as
> the original goal is still being met.
>
> Money will need to be sent out in advance. Lets say that a company
> gets
> a $1m grant. They need $100k to $200k in the bank at all times. This
> will
> allow is to get cash with order deals, adjust for changing opportunities
> etc. We'll also be able to move MUCH more quickly than we otherwise
> would.
>
> Tie grant funds to the 477. If a company can prove that it's already
> been in the broadband industry and has already been serving customers they
> should be empowered to do more of what they already do. They'd have the
> greatest chance of success over the long haul.
>
> Do NOT fund startups. The Muni Wireless industry's pitiful results
> should demonstrate that most of the "big thinkers" just don't get the
> market. Let those that are already successful expand on what they are
> already able to accomplish.
>
> Make sure that most of the money goes to small business. The goal here
> is to create jobs. 90%+ of America's economy revolves around small
> business. Many more jobs will be created and the money used more
> efficiently (as seen in the historical record) by small businesses.
>
> Fund operations for x (3 to 5?) years. We can build the networks
> today,
> but we can't create users today. It will take time to sign them up. It
> will take time for them to maximize their new efficiencies with the new
> technologies (or upgraded technologies) that we'll install.
>
> What does the borg think? How do we get in front of the agencies as they
> create their programs? What do we ask for? How do we justify it?
>
> After talking to Steve Coran on Friday he thinks that we won't know
> ANYTHING
> about what we'll be able to do for a week or two yet. Then who knows how
> long (or even if) we'll have to give our input and what input are they
> going
> to be willing to accept?
>
> Personally I am far more stressed out by sitting here doing nothing than I
> am with the idea that I'll waste some time building a position that will
> have to be modified or tossed completely out. I see more potential upside
> to have many of our wants, needs, and desires fleshed out ahead of time
> than
> I do in potential downside. I don't have a lot of time available, but I
> do
> have little snippets here and there. I don't have a problem doing some
> foundation work while I wait for my family to wake up on a Sat. morn.
>
> laters,
> marlon
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> WISPA Wants You! Join today!
> http://signup.wispa.org/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
>
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
>
> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
