Incumbent providers, grown lazy on a steady diet of public subsidies and monopoly rents, have done their best to cast this as a debate between efficient private competitors and inefficient government monopolies. But it is the incumbents that would rather regulate than compete. They resist municipal entry not because it is incompetent – no one resists incompetent competitors – or because it is unnecessary. Rather incumbents resist municipal entry because they recognize the ability of local government to offer a genuine competitive alternative to a high priced monopoly or duopoly services.
The Case for Municipal Broadband in Florida
Publication Date:
April 4, 2005 
From the Executive Summary:
From fiber optic communications between medical offices and hospitals in and around Leesburg, to advanced services for schools, students and a business park in Quincy, to a wireless “Downtown Canopy” in Tallahassee, cities and towns throughout the State of Florida are taking charge of their futures by investing in new, exciting and innovative broadband technologies that attract businesses, educate the young, and improve the quality of life. For many communities, the availability and affordability of broadband services is just as important to their future as roads, schools, water systems, airports and convention centers have been in the past. Unfortunately, legislation has been designed to restrict or inhibit the ability of Florida’s municipalities to provide these vital public services to their communities which puts millions of Floridians at risk of being left behind in the digital revolution.
The Florida Municipal Electric Association does not have this paper on its site anymore.
Comments
Post new comment