Republicans and Democrats Alike Restore Local Authority in Colorado

Yesterday, Colorado voters in three counties and five municipalities were asked whether they want to restore local government authority to build or partner for broadband networks. A 2005 law, lobbied for heavily by incumbents, prevents local municipalities from offering telecommunications services, even if they already have the infrastructure in place.

According to the law, local communities can ask voters to reclaim local authority to establish a telecommunications utility. We have seen Longmont, Montrose, and Centennial take action in prior years. In Longmont, the community has successfully established a telecommunications utility and the community is loving it.

An interesting wrinkle in Colorado is the wide support across the state - communities that vote heavily for Democrats supported local authority for municipal networks in similar numbers that those in areas voting heavily for Republicans.

In Yuma County, where approximately 85% of voters supported the GOP Senate candidate, the measure to reclaim local authority passed with 72% of the vote.  Yuma County overwhelmingly voted for the Republican candidate for Governor and every race in Yuma County went to a Republican candidate. The cities of Yuma and Wray within the County also had their own ballot initiatives to reclaim local authority; those ballot measures also passed by 72%.

Rio Blanco County's numbers were very similar to those in Yuma County. The only exception was that their ballot question 1A on reclaiming local authority passed with 76%. Again, every race went to a Republican candidate in Rio Blanco County.

Boulder, with considerable fiber assets already in place, decided to take the possibility of using those assets to the voters this year and the voters said yes. Much like the voters in Yuma, Wray, Yuma County, and Rio Blanco County, Boulder voters approved their measure 2C by a high 83.6%. Unlike the voters in Yuma, Wray, Yuma County, and Rio Blanco County, Boulder chose to support Democratic candidates in every race. Many of those races were not close.

Approximately 80% of San Miguel County voters, another region supporting Democrats in this cycle, chose to reclaim local authority on ballot measure 1A [PDF].

If we see communities described as strongly supporting either Republican or Democratic candidates also supporting municipal network authority, it is logical that communities with mixed support of both parties would also support local authority initiatives. 

Cherry Hills Village in Arapahoe County and Red Cliff in Eagle County each presented similar ballot questions to voters and both passed. Red Cliff's results are not official as of this writing but are projected at about 60-70% and Cherry Hills Village results are around 80%. Arapahoe County voters elected a mix of Republican and Democratic candidates with some races very close. Eagle County voters also chose mixed representation.

Yesterday's election in Colorado showed us that supporting local government authority to build or partner in fiber networks is popular across the political spectrum. Regardless of their party affiliation, they agreed that those smart decisions should be made at home, not by legislators in Denver. And if they were going to give advice to the new Congress in DC, it would probably be to restore and preserve local decision-making on this issue.

Layton Resident Breaks Down the Numbers on UTOPIA Service: Letter to the Editor

Thane Packer, a Layton resident, attended a community meeting this fall to learn what he could about UTOPIA. Packer is like many others who consider his costs for Internet, TV, and phone as an important factor in whether or not to support UTOPIA. After attending the meeting, he considered the presentation and what he described as "some very heated, and some very biased opinions."

He then examined his existing triple play costs and shared his findings in a letter to the Standard Examiner. The rest of his letter is reproduced below (emphasis ours):

The total bundled bill for home phone, Internet, and a TV package was $273.63. That is $93.25 per month for the internet and home phone plus $180 for TV. The telephone service is fine but the Internet is frustrating. The signal fluctuates, is spotty and unreliable.

In Provo, because there is competition from a fiber optic network, this exact same package, which includes, total Internet, home phone and the TV package is available from a provider for only $99.94 a month.

This means that even if I didn’t use a fiber network like the one in Provo the competition price from the provider would save me $178.69 a month. That means that without the competition from a fiber system like UTOPIA, the provider stands to make, (from me) a total of $2,144.28 a year and in 25 years (the pay-off time for the current bond, for which we receive nothing) is over $53,000

If I were able to switch to fiber system here in Layton a much better service would cost even less and I can certainly find a better place to use my $53,000.

So ask yourself this question. What is your current service costing you, how much extra are you paying, and what are you getting for it? For me the advantage of saving at least $178.69 a month and getting better service for it is obvious.

So please Layton, find a way to make this or something like it work for us. A very vocal minority should not be able deprive the rest of us from better cheaper service.

Community Fiber Networks And the Future of the Broadband Marketplace

We were glad to see Gigi Sohn, Special Counsel for External Affairs in the Office of the Chairman of the FCC, discussing how community broadband projects are going to play an important role in expanding high quality Internet access. 

The webcast comes courtesy of the Internet Society, which recorded this session at an event hosted by the newly formed Philadelphia Chapter of the Federal Communications Bar Association, co-chaired by Kevin Werbach, Walter Anderson and Brian Rankin.

Video: 
See video

Aurora's Nonprofit Approach with Muni Fiber - Community Broadband Bits Episode 123

Aurora, Illinois, has been named one of the "Smart 21" most intelligent communities of 2015 according to the Intelligent Community Forum. We have been tracking Aurora for a few years and wrote about OnLight, its nonprofit ISP, that we wrote about earlier this year.

With some 200,000 people, it is the second largest city in Illinois but it has one of the most interesting hybrids of municipal fiber and nonprofit partnerships we have come across. For this week's Community Broadband Bits podcast, Lisa Gonzalez takes the reins and interviews Rick Mervine, Alderman of the 8th Ward in Aurora.

Alderman Mervine explains why the city first invested in the fiber network and why they later decided to create OnLight to serve community anchor institutions as well as others in the community.

Read the transcript of this episode here.

We want your feedback and suggestions for the show - please e-mail us or leave a comment below. Also, feel free to suggest other guests, topics, or questions you want us to address.

This show is 20 minutes long and can be played below on this page or via iTunes or via the tool of your choice using this feed.

Listen to previous episodes here. You can can download this Mp3 file directly from here.

Thanks to Jessie Evans for the music, licensed using Creative Commons. The song is "Is it Fire?"

"Envisioning a Gigabit Future" on November 18th in Chattanooga

Next Century Cities and the Southeast Tennessee Development District will host an event on November 18th in Chattanooga entitled "Envisioning a Gigabit Future" at The Church on Main.

The field hearing runs from 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. EST. Participants will hear from panelists who will discuss how and why gigabit infrastructure is quickly becoming a critical component to local community vitality.

From the invitation:

Chattanooga is one of America's first - and leading - truly "gigabit" communities. Although the city's investment and commitment has yielded dividends for the city itself, this is not just an issue of local or parochial concern. The potential for gigabit and next-generation broadband to improve America's communities is a national question, with national implications. 

For example, Tennessee is one of about twenty states that restrict community broadband choice, prompting Chattanooga and Wilson, North Carolina (another such state), to petition the Federal Communications Commission to remove these restrictions so that Chattanooga and Wilson can expand their highly successful networks.

Speakers and panelists will include:

  • Mayor Andy Berke, Chattanooga, TN
  • Senator Janice Bowling, Tennessee State Senate (16th District)
  • Mayor Gary Davis, Bradley County, TN
  • Harold DePriest, President and CEO, EPB
  • Jonathan Taplin, Director, Annenberg Innovation Lab, University of Southern California
  • Tony Perez, Director of the Seattle Office of Cable Communications and President of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors
  • Aldona Valicenti, Chief Information Officer, Lexington, KY
  • Rick Usher, Assistant City Manager, Kansas City, MO
  • Beth Jones, Executive Director, Southeast Tennessee Development District

You can register online for the free event.

Community Broadband Media Roundup - October 31

More cities around the country are taking action and joining the Next Century Cities coalition. What started as a league of 32 is poised to double in size after the NCC launch, according to Jason Koebler with Motherboard. 

“The group includes cities that have built their own municipal broadband networks, cities that want to build their own, and cities that have worked with companies such as Google to bring fiber, gigabit-speed internet to their residents—the idea being that cities that don't have ultrafast internet can learn how to jump through legislative and logistical hoops from those who have been there before.”

Boston is one of the Next Century Cities founding members and the Boston Herald’s Jordan Graham writes that the city is facing some unique challenges.

“The city has been plagued by slow internet access for years — blamed in part on Verizon’s refusal to build its FiOS network in the city as well as the infrastructure challenges that any old city faces.” 

Meanwhile in Michigan, more than 400 policy makers, tech providers and broadband champions came together to talk about broadband strategies and implementation plans for Michigan communities. 

While cities and states are forming coalitions, individuals can make an impact as well. Andrew Banchich of Buffalo, NY is rooting for his city to get on the municipal Internet super-highway. The Buffalo native announced the creation of the “Free the Web” forum to help get the message out to local policymakers.

“Municipal Internet would provide Buffalo residents with faster, more reliable Internet speeds, at a lower cost. It would help stimulate Buffalo’s economy, improve the quality of life for our residents, provide service to some people who might not currently have access to the Internet, help attract people from other cities, promote healthy competition between other Internet providers, and support our booming medical campus, where scientists and researchers rely on fast Internet connections.” 

Many reporters seem to be hung up on trivial matters like how long it takes you to download a movie, but Claire Cain Miller with the New York Times gets it, she really gets it!

“America’s slow and expensive Internet is more than just an annoyance for people trying to watch “Happy Gilmore” on Netflix. Largely a consequence of monopoly providers, the sluggish service could have long-term economic consequences for American competitiveness.”

The Consumerist's Kate Cox thinks this kitty will help you understand why US consumers seem to be content to pay more for slower Internet. Spoiler Alert: even the cat doesn't get it.

Following the same story, Gerry Smith with Huffington Post, Anne L. Kim with Roll Call,  and Elizabeth Hagedorn with Cleveland’s News 5 and Newsy covered New America Foundation’s new Open Technology Institute report, that says very clearly: big US cities are falling behind, while (no surprise here) Chattanooga, Lafayette, and other smaller cities are the ones competing globally with the likes Seoul, Hong Kong, Tokyo and others. 

As Susan Crawford shows in an article this week, a new investigation reveals that your Internet Service Provider may already be intentionally slowing down Internet speeds.

 “M-Lab’s data suggests the logical conclusion that Verizon and Comcast, as well as Time Warner Cable, CenturyLink, and AT&T, are intentionally squeezing data coming from some incoming networks — in particular, networks associated with Netflix, which competes with these companies in video entertainment. Customers of these eyeball networks are getting degraded service that cannot be explained by anything other than business decisions.” 

Lots of questions surround building broadband networks, and this week, Chris Mitchell took part in a unique conversation on with Jon Brodkin of Ars Technica. As a follow-up to Brodkin’s coverage of cities taking control of their broadband futures, Mitchell joined former FCC official Blair Levin, Wilson NC broadband operations manager Will Aycock, and Ted Smith with the Civic Innovation Office in Louisville, KY for UNITE Live: a discussion on cities revolutionizing broadband. But, as Brodkin continued, it’s not quite time to uncork the champagne.

As always, we have much more work to do. 

Boo! Share Your Comcast Horror Stories With Media Mobilizing Project

It was a dark and stormy night... A woman screamed! A shot rang out! You are gripped by the terror of your Comcast bill! No! No! Nooooo!

The Media Mobilizing Project knows how dealing with the most-hated company in America sends shivers up your spine. Now they want you to share your stories of terror at #Comcast HorrorStory. You can also find them on Facebook and relate your tales of bloodcurdling cable butchery.

More on the campaign:

Tell us your Comcast Horror Story! We at Media Mobilizing Project and CAPComcast.org know that many people have horrible times trying to get affordable rates and reliable service for their Comcast cable and internet.

In honor of Halloween, we want to hear your Comcast horror story! Did your bill make your blood boil? Does Comcast’s attempt to merge with competitor Time Warner Cable send chills down your spine? Tell us now, and on Halloween day we’ll share snippets from the top-10 scariest Comcast stories we see.

At the same time, we think it is "horror"-ble that Comcast pays less than 1/3 of the average taxes other PA businesses pay, with huge tax breaks on their headquarters in Philly -- while our City shutters public schools and cuts education to the bone.

You can also go to the CAPComcast.org website to share your story and sign their petition.

Can we handle the carnage? Only time will tell...

Chanute City Leaders Approve Financing Strategy for FTTH in Rural Kansas

Chanute's City Commission passed a motion this month to fund its planned FTTH project with revenue bonds, bringing the entire community closer to fast, affordable, reliable connectivity, reports the Chanute Tribune

In addition to authorizing a plan to secure $18.9 million in revenue bonds, the motion also included funds for a pre-deployment baseline analysis focused on economic development and funds to hire an attorney. The bonds include debt service reserve funds and additional funding to make early interest payments. The plan determines the city will pay off the investment in a little over 14 years, based on a 45 percent take rate.

The Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC) must approve the plan. The KCC is a state regulatory body with a variety of responsibilities, including regulating telecommunications utility rates. The KCC also handles rates for electricity, natural gas, and liquid pipeline services. They handle safety issues, licensing, energy conservation, etc. If the KCC does approve the plan, the bonds can be secured without a public vote unless the city receives any petitions. Chanute still plans on providing residential gig service for $40 per month.

According to the Tribune, 62 percent of 1,030 returned surveys indicated yes or maybe as to whether or not they would be interested in signing up for high-speed service at home or at work; 38 percent said no. City officials are optimistic that the project will blossom even beyond those figures:

“I think once it starts rolling out, a lot of people will see what type of services they’re getting through the city,” [Mayor Greg] Woodyard said, “and they’ll get those bundle packages and we’ll be able to offer them a better product than they’re currently getting at a cheaper price. I think more people will sign up for it in that point in time.”

Woodyard also noted that Chanute is setting an example for other Kansans suffering from poor connectivity:

“A lot of other communities are looking at starting to do this, possibly,” Woodyard said. “We are the trendsetters for the state of Kansas. Everybody’s looking at us to see how we go through the process of doing the fiber project.”

For the complete story on Chanute's network, download our 2012 report Chanute’s Gig: One Rural Kansas Community’s Tradition of Innovation Led to a Gigabit and Ubiquitous Wireless Coverage.

Baltimore Residents Take the Initiative With CrowdFiber Campaign

A community group from Baltimore is taking their fiber campaign directly to the people. The Baltimore Sun recently reported that over 900 people have pledged more than $17,000 to the Baltimore Broadband Coalition. It seems the good people of Baltimore are tired of the city's on-again off-again romance with the idea of a municipal network.

According to the group's CrowdFiber site, the grassroots organization began in a church basement in the Roland Park neighborhood, quickly expanding to other neighborhoods.  There is no specific plan in place yet; the group hopes to use the campaign to first raise awareness of the problem. From the article:

"This is an advocacy effort to help to change what has been the city's plan, or lack of plan, on broadband," said Philip Spevak, one of the campaign's organizers. "Those numbers will help to motivate the city."

Members of the group are also visiting community meetings to help spread the word.

In a Sun commentary published shortly after the group organized, Spevak wrote:

Demonstrating demand alone is unlikely to change the broadband landscape. By adding communities to our campaign and extending the campaign to include the entire city, we hope to engage our city and state leaders to a greater extent. We hope our campaign will lead to a second phase where, in partnership with elected officials, there is a change toward more proactive public policy. Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake and Councilman William Cole understand that the availability of fast Internet is a necessity for economic revitalization. 

Spavek went on to explain their belief that the vision should be unique to suit the community, that Baltimore should locate and use its existing conduit, and that the city should adopt helpful dig-once policies. The group also wants the city to keep citizens, providers, and other stakeholders connected and reach out to federal officials.

Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake has been vocal regarding her support for better connectivity. She has cited the need to jump start economic development:

"You can't grow jobs with slow Internet... people don't want to invest in communities where they feel like they are running through sludge, trying to catch up with other businesses,...People want to be on the cutting edge."

The Baltimore Broadband Coalition goes on to address high-cost, no choice, and a growing digital divide in the city:

  • In Baltimore, compared to surrounding counties where effective competition for Internet services exist, we pay more (as much as $1000 over two years) and the quality of services available is less
  • We face a monopoly for fast Internet services in Baltimore leaving us with little choice in the broadband market
  • Digital injustice - 20-40% of city residents do not connect to the Internet when connectivity is now essential for effective participation

In August 2013 the city commissioned a feasibility study to survey existing resources and provide options to improve connectivity. The current administration expects to see the results by the end of the year. The Coalition is not depending on the city to lead the way:

"I think if the city decides that it is not willing or it's not able to be a municipal broadband, that's not a showstopper at all for our campaign," Spevak said.


Comcast Seeks "True Gig" Trademark for a Network Incapable of Offering a True Gig

In a world yearning for a gigabit Internet connection, what do you do if your legacy cable network cannot offer it? If you are Comcast, you seek a trademark for the term "True Gig." (More coverage from Ars Technica on this.)

Comcast's cable network may soon (testing in 2015?) be capable of offering a downstream gigabit but will not be able to come close to a gigabit in the upstream direction. Nonetheless, apparently it is planning to advertise its service as a "True Gig," likely in competition with Google in Provo since it plans to swap the Chattanooga territory to Charter as part of the Time Warner Cable merger plan. (Comcast is certainly not fleeing that market with its tail between its legs for having been spanked so badly by the city's municipal network).

Lest we forget, the Comcast network is shared among many users; its ability to actually deliver a gig is dependent on whether your neighbors are using their connections. So unlike a gigabit on a fiber network, the Comcast "True Gig" will likely be an inferior experience to a modern fiber network.

Google, of course, actually offers a gigabit in both directions. The same is true of Chattanooga and most municipal gigabit offers - symmetrical because who wants to wait hours to upload to the cloud if you can download in seconds?

And in case you forgot, the "True Gig" is coming from the same company that has taken credit for all fiber deployments announced in 2014 - on the thin premise that everything happening after Comcast announced its proposed takeover of Time Warner Cable was caused by the proposed takeover.

To recap... Comcast does not yet offer a gigabit service but has tried to take credit for most of the communities that either have a gig or could soon get it. They are technically incapable of offering an actual symmetrical gigabit. And to the extent they may offer a gigabit in only one direction, it will be shared among hundreds of homes and generally inferior to a downstream gig delivered by a fiber network. Yet, they will market their service as a "True Gig."

If there are indeed parallel universes, I would like to to request reassignment to one where a Comcast move like this is treated as it should be ... like the funniest joke in the world. However - that planet probably would have already died laughing at AT&T's Fiber-to-the-Press-Release antics or the hilarious claim by some coin-operated-research-outfits that the Comcast - Time Warner Cable takeover would be pro-consumer. OK - bad plan, I admit it. But seriously, I'm not allowed to cuss in these posts, so give me a break.

Video: 
See video