When I search these websites for my county (Snohomish County, WA), I
come up with SEVERAL listings for CTURN Corporation out of Oregon
<http://broadbandsearch.sc.egov.usda.gov/SearchResult_Company.aspx?CompanyId=1f78822b-3a4c-43a7-af4a-461b44b65a51>.
They appear to have over 130 applications showing "approved" back in
2006.

Several of these apps are in areas that I service and have intimate
knowledge of. I have not seen ANYTHING toward broadband or this
company. So what gives? Who do I call? CTURN has since been bought by
<http://www.icoacorp.com/>.

Is this a company that was funded by RUS and then RUS got nothing out
of it or am I mistaken?

ryan

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Chuck Bartosch
<[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm including the 40% in the gerrymandering statement. In another
> response I pointed out that you have to "win" on every argument the
> applicant makes, not just on the arguments you want to make.
>
> Chuck
>
> On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:16 PM, Vickie Edwards wrote:
>
>> " They went out of their way to encourage "gerrymandering" in
>> the applications, which included the ability to include covered
>> territory as long as the total number of already covered households
>> was under 50% (which it is in this case as it's been explained to
>> us)."
>>
>> Or that there's a less than 40% subscribership rate - a lot of
>> people seem to be forgetting that. That's the only way that a lot of
>> applications will be able to remain in consideration for underserved
>> status, given how difficult it is in most areas to find anywhere
>> with less than 50% availability.
>>
>>
>> InLine>
>> vickie edwards, MPA | Grant Specialist
>> InLine> Solutions Through Technology
>> 600 Lakeshore Pkwy
>> Birmingham AL, 35209
>> 205-278-8106 [p]
>> 205-941-1934[f]
>> [email protected]
>> www.InLine.com
>> All Quotes from InLine are only valid for 30 days. This message and
>> any attached files may contain confidential information and are
>> intended solely for the message recipient. If you are not the
>> message recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
>> distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of
>> this information is strictly prohibited. E-mail transmission cannot
>> be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be
>> intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete,
>> or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept liability
>> for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message, which
>> arise as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is
>> required please request a hard-copy version.
>>
>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
>> On Behalf Of Chuck Bartosch
>> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 11:56 AM
>> To: WISPA General List
>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
>>
>> The problem is, it's a fair amount of effort to challenge since *you*
>> have to challenge it at the census block level, just as they had to
>> justify it at the census block level.
>>
>> And if the area is as the poster describes, it's impossible to
>> challenge. He might have a very good reason why he can't reach even
>> 50% of the residents (that's what he said, I'll remind you) in his
>> area. But, it is irrelevant. They don't care *why* you can't reach the
>> other households...they just care that you don't.
>>
>> If this is a big application then it's going to cover far more than
>> his territory anyway, and you will NOT be able to have a section cut
>> out of an otherwise qualifying target census set just because you do
>> cover it. They went out of their way to encourage "gerrymandering" in
>> the applications, which included the ability to include covered
>> territory as long as the total number of already covered households
>> was under 50% (which it is in this case as it's been explained to us).
>>
>> Chuck
>>
>> On Sep 15, 2009, at 12:16 PM, Tom DeReggi wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, It definateately IS appropriate to attempt to BLOCK bad
>>> applications.
>>> The NTIA/RUS has no way to know if an applcation is innapproriate or
>>> in
>>> conflict of interest if we dont tell them.
>>> Quite honestly, the applicant may not know it is in conflict of
>>> interest
>>> without telling them.
>>>
>>> I specifically hate applacation that just selected 1 HUGE contiguous
>>> area.
>>> The reason is, they did't take the time that they should ahve to
>>> look down
>>> to the census block level to determine what blocks really are and
>>> aren't
>>> underserved areas. If anything it is the LARGE AREA applicants that
>>> are
>>> attempting to scam the system, to get grant money for served areas,
>>> with the
>>> hope no one will protest it.
>>>
>>> There is nothing wrong with competition. But this grant is NOT
>>> creating
>>> competition. It is giving the applicant a SUPER HUGE advantage over
>>> any
>>> other pre-existing provider in the area, and that is anti-
>>> American,and
>>> anti-fair-competition in my mind.
>>>
>>> To give a new provider a free network, and the existing provider no
>>> funds,
>>> is a disaster plan to put pre-existing businesses out of business,
>>> and to
>>> risk throwing away the much investment made by those original
>>> entreprenures.
>>>
>>> What I recommend is that people diligently protest, but with fact,
>>> and
>>> suggested resolution. The goal should NOT to prevent the party from
>>> gaining
>>> a grant to serve truely underserved/unserved areas, but to instead
>>> incourage
>>> NTIA/RUS to force the applicant to revise its applicant to remedy the
>>> conflict of Interest.  Also note that once an area gets a grant, it
>>> very
>>> possible that NTIA/RUS may never give another grant to that same
>>> area.  When
>>> this is done at the Census Block level it is no problem, because
>>> applicants
>>> can narrow down to each area that they serve and dont serve. But when
>>> someone lists an ENTIRE County, it risks that future legitimate
>>> application
>>> for needy census blocks will be denied because of the area being
>>> recorded as
>>> already served by a grant applicant.  Is it right for an Entire
>>> county to be
>>> given to a new provider? Remember applicants are required to serve
>>> ALL
>>> customer in an area.  That means they will be getting grant money to
>>> put you
>>> out of business.
>>>
>>> I also think there is a misconception that the protestor must prove
>>> the data
>>> that shows its not underserved. I do not believe that is 100% true.
>>> I think
>>> ther eis a clear valid arguement that if an applicant cant afford to
>>> gather
>>> the mapping data to file for their own grant, they surely should not
>>> be
>>> required to spent lots of money to map the errors in other people's
>>> application.
>>> I believe aprotestor should only have to protest to the level that
>>> creates a
>>> reasonable amount of doubt about the applicant.  The burden to prove
>>> coverage is on the applicant's original submission. So if you
>>> protest an
>>> applicant by saying it is a served area by cable and fios, the
>>> applicant's
>>> original data should have to prove it FIOS and Cable does not
>>> overlap it,
>>> not you.
>>> If they submitted incomplete documetnation, that is there problem,
>>> and
>>> should lead to the disqualification of their application.
>>>
>>> You being a provider in the area with a small market share, will not
>>> likely
>>> be enough to protest an application on its own, but it should still
>>> be
>>> possible to build a case.
>>> For example, lets say there are three applicants, and two were
>>> careful not
>>> tto overlap your coverage, but one applicant did overlap you. Simple
>>> state
>>> that the applicant that overlapped you clearly did not do his
>>> homework to
>>> isolate which areas are served or not, and that you support the
>>> other two
>>> applicants that properly identified and avoided conflciting areas.
>>>
>>> The idea is to develop support for the applications that won't harm
>>> you. And
>>> give the NTIA/RUS an option to award grants that will create
>>> possitive press
>>> and not negative press.
>>> I beleive the overnment wants this program to besuccessful, and
>>> nobody wants
>>> an aftermath press stating things like "grant money puts local
>>> businesses
>>> out of business".
>>>
>>>
>>> Tom DeReggi
>>> RapidDSL & Wireless, Inc
>>> IntAirNet- Fixed Wireless Broadband
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "L. Aaron Kaplan" <[email protected]>
>>> To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 8:49 AM
>>> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Searchable Map of Stimulus projects
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sep 15, 2009, at 2:20 PM, Steve Barnes wrote:
>>>
>>>> Digital Bridge has asked for money for Underserved for the county
>>>> that I service, the whole county.
>>>> Questions:
>>>> 1. Since I am the only WISP in the Rural areas of my county and my
>>>> standard is 1024/256 with 2.4 and there is 50% of the clients that I
>>>> cant get due to trees. I assume that that will be seen as
>>>> Underserved.  Is there anything that I can do to get this blocked?
>>>
>>> Just a quit though - correct me if I am wrong, but...
>>>
>>> Isnt blocking competition very un-American somehow?
>>> Is "blocking" even possible?
>>>
>>> I hope you also applied for getting thru the trees, no?
>>>
>>>
>>>> 2. Now it appears that they asked for money for all the Census
>>>> blocks in the county.  ALL the cities have My service, DSL, and
>>>> Cable.  How can that be labeled as Underserved.  If we get one Block
>>>> rejected does that stop the one request which would be all my area?
>>>
>>> ---
>>> there's no place like 127.0.0.1, except maybe ::1 (someday)
>>>
>>> (üäö)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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/
>>
>> --------------
>> Chuck Bartosch
>> Clarity Connect, Inc.
>> 200 Pleasant Grove Road
>> Ithaca, NY 14850
>> (607) 257-8268
>>
>> "When the stars threw down their spears,
>> and water'd heaven with their tears,
>> Did He smile, His work to see?
>> Did He who made the Lamb make thee?"
>>
>> From William Blake's Tiger!, Tiger!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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/
>
> --------------
> Chuck Bartosch
> Clarity Connect, Inc.
> 200 Pleasant Grove Road
> Ithaca, NY 14850
> (607) 257-8268
>
> "When the stars threw down their spears,
> and water'd heaven with their tears,
> Did He smile, His work to see?
> Did He who made the Lamb make thee?"
>
>  From William Blake's Tiger!, Tiger!
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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/

Reply via email to