The following stories have been tagged natoa ← Back to All Tags

Wheeler Praises Lafayette's Network Deployment at NATOA Conference

At the 2014 Annual Conference of the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA), FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler praised Lafayette, Louisiana, home of muni LUS Fiber, during his keynote address. 

Wheeler addressed a variety of issues, including wireless broadband, the drive to increase competition, and a thoughtful transition to IP based 911 service.

While he did not address the pending petitions from Wilson, North Carolina and Chattanooga, Wheeler did express his admiration for LUS Fiber and the tough persistence of the local community:

However, I do encourage you to consider how local choice and competition can increase the broadband opportunities for your citizens. I love the story of Lafayette, Louisiana where the local incumbent fought the city’s fiber network tooth and nail, bringing multiple court challenges and triggering a local referendum on the project. Thankfully, none of the challenges managed to prevent deployment – sixty two percent of voters approved of the network in the referendum, and the Louisiana Supreme Court unanimously sided with the city – but they did delay deployment almost three years. When the network was finally built, the community experienced the benefits of competition, as the local cable operator decided to upgrade its network. Local choice and competition are about as American as you can get.

We were pleased to hear the Chairman acknowledge the spirit of the community and how their efforts have paid off. Just this year, the community and its network attracted three new companies and approximately 1,300 new permanent and seasonal jobs. Lafayette has focused on improving its tech workforce in order to complement its next generation network - two critical ingredients to creating the Silicon Bayou.

Read more about Lafayette and LUS Fiber in our report, Broadband At the Speed of Light: How Three Communities Built Next Generation Networks.

For the entire text of Chairman Wheeler's key note address, check out the transcript PDF online. You can also read more about the NATOA Annual Conference, held this year in St. Paul, Minnesota's Lowertown. 

Community Broadband Media Roundup - October 3, 2014

“The Times, they are a-changin” quoted Chairman Wheeler this week in St. Paul. And with it, must come faster Internet speeds if the United States is going to keep up in the competitive economy. Multichannel’s John Eggerton reported on Wheeler’s visit to the National Association of Telecommunications Officer and Advisors (NATOA) conference this week, where Wheeler channeled both Bob Dylan and Garrison Keeler. You can also read the full transcript of his remarks. 

Oh, dear US Representative Marsha Blackburn is at it again. This time with a letter to editor in The Tennessean. Blackburn provides the same arguments she presented previously. And yet, oddly enough, still no acknowledgment that the top donors to her campaign fund happen to be big telecom lobbyists. 

In other municipal networks news, Andrew Denney with the Columbia Tribune in Missouri covered the pushback his city is seeing from big telecom, after the city announced it might be interested in expanding its existing fiber network. 

“A CenturyLink spokesperson warned city officials that, “if the city proceeded with the idea, it would amount to a taxpayer-subsidized entity wading into competition with private business.” 

Our own Christopher Mitchell responded in the same article:

The fundamental motive is to make sure they limit competition to their benefit,” said Chris Mitchell, director of community broadband for the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. 

Citizens Speak Out

ILSR cannot be in all places at the same time, so it’s important that people weigh in on these issues, comment, and contact elected officials. So we’re praising several people and organizations who have come out in support of these important issues.

As Megan Epler Wood writes in Burlington Free Press, 

“Local ownership is a viable means to protect Net Neutrality according to many leading experts. Municipal fiber networks not only foster competition with the ISPs, they create citizen empowerment. According to Christopher Mitchell director of Community Broadband Networks at the Institute for Local Self Reliance municipal fiber networks "ensure open access to the Internet regardless of what tolls the big cable companies charge."

Bill Nemitz’s message in the Portland (Maine) Press Herald couldn’t be clearer:

Don’t suffer with slow Internet, rural Maine!

The Dalles, Oregon editorial board staff weighed in on the success of their own community networks. The city paid off its fiber-optic network last month. 

“The plan to install a fiber-optic loop to bring better access to high-speed internet to The Dalles faced harsh skepticism at its beginning. But, time and again, that access has proved to be a valuable commodity. Its existence has provided an added attraction to help bring jobs and growth to the community, not least of which is the Google data center, which is in the midst of a massive expansion with more jobs promised.”

We like the sound of that!

From success stories, to cities that are touching their toes to the water— Jeff Buchanan wrote this for The Isthmus in Madison, WI:

“Fortunately for consumers, there's an alternative: Cities are tackling the connectivity problem by building municipal fiber-to-the-home networks. Political and business leaders in Madison seem to agree that the status quo is unsatisfactory. But they're split in how urgently they want to address the problem, with city hall favoring a wait-and-see approach and a younger class of technocrats wanting to implement short-term, low-cost solutions immediately.”

And Hartford Business journal’s editorial staff said this week that high speed Internet is now a “must” investment, not just a want. 

“While the average Connecticut resident doesn't need ultra-high-speed bandwidth to play movies or download music, high-tech companies — particularly the increasing number of businesses that rely on big data — need it to compete. But Connecticut's lack of a fiber-optic cable network makes it difficult and expensive for businesses to access high-speed Internet, putting them at a competitive disadvantage.”

Another self-proclaimed proponent of private industry is baffled by Republicans stance against broadband competition. Mike Montgomery wrote about his support for allowing municipalities the chance to build broadband networks on HuffPo. 

“Broadband takes big investment, but it also means big money for providers. And while I'm among those who believe private industry is best suited to build and maintain networks, I also find the states' rights argument fairly ridiculous. After all, who better to know what a community needs than a local government? If elected officials recognize a need for better broadband access in their state, shouldn't voters have the final say as to who gets to build and maintain its broadband networks?”

Comcast/Time Warner Cable Merger

This is what happens when Comcast decides you’re no longer making them enough money. They decide it’s time to pack up shop. Todd Shields reported in Bloomberg’s MSN Money that Comcast wants to relinquish its Detroit customers as part of its proposed merger with Time Warner Cable. But don’t worry, it would pick up two other markets…

“As it drops Detroit, Comcast would gain the nation’s top two markets, New York and Los Angeles. The $45.2 billion acquisition would enlarge Comcast by 7 million video customers. The castaways in Detroit, Minneapolis and elsewhere would belong to a new company, GreatLand Connections Inc., to be created in what the companies call a tax-efficient spinoff. The new company’s debt would exceed industry averages -- something that has raised concerns about service in those communities.” 

And Emily Steel wanted you to know that if you oppose the Time Warner Cable merger, Comcast thinks you’re guilty of extortion. We’re not making this up!

Meanwhile, The Consumerist’s Chris Morran covered a new era in the most hated company in America’s customer service department. Charlie Herrin became the new VP for “customer experience.” And while he promised that “our customers deserve the best experience every time they interact with us.” Morran broke down some of the so-called “manure spreading” this way: 

“Without competition, Comcast has no reason to actually back up this “we love our customers” sentiment. What are you going to do, switch to slow DSL service from your local phone company that hasn’t maintained its copper wire network in years? Or maybe you can get wireless broadband and pay the same amount as Xfinity for 1/70th the amount of data each month.

In spite of what Comcast and Time Warner Cable would have you believe, those are not alternatives.”

Last week, the other “big guys” said that a lack of competition just isn’t a problem. In our office, we like to talk about “CrazyTown”, where Big Telecom (and other nonsensical creatures) live; Jon Brodkin of Ars Technica, and The Consumerist’s Kate Cox give them a message from “Planet Reality.”

Game Politics, Brad Reed of the Boy Genius Report, and Electronista all wanted to make sure that people knew about the ridiculous claims of Comcast.

Kate Cox also reported on how two of the three FCC commissioners who voted against Net Neutrality now “don’t think the proposed rule is the right fit.” Here’s to seeing the light, let’s hope it lasts.

Verizon/AT&T

Infoworld recently reported that Moldova, Latvia, and Estonia continue to run Internet circles around the United States in terms of download speeds— that’s according to the UN Broadband Commission’s Annual report. But still, AT&T is unmoved— claiming that the reason our speeds are so slow is because no one wants faster speeds:

 "Given the pace at which the industry is investing in advanced capabilities, there is no present need to redefine 'advanced' capabilities. Consumer behavior strongly reinforces the conclusion that a 10Mbps service exceeds what many Americans need today to enable basic, high-quality transmissions," AT&T said in a filing on the FCC's proposal to raise the definition to 10Mbps. Verizon made similar arguments.”

Google’s ALEC Problem

From the “All Things are Connected” File— Google announced last week that it is pulling it’s support of conservative lobbying group “ALEC” over “literally lying” about climate change. Motherboard’s Sam Gustin and Jason Koebler, DSLReports’ Karl Bode, and Nicole Arce from Tech Times, reported on the announcement, along with dozens of others. Why? Because ALEC, or the American Legislative Exchange Council has come out in opposition to net neutrality and municipal broadband— and is in support of Comcast’s Time Warner Cable merger. 

And though we’re glad Google might be jumping to the other side of the fence on some issues, Network World’s Colin Neagle explained that Google is probably *not* pulling its support of ALEC because of municipal broadband public opinion.

“… it’s probably no surprise to hear that Comcast, Verizon, AT&T, and Time Warner Cable have all been ALEC members for years. It's in their interests.

But a Daily Beast report from August 2013 outed Google as a member of ALEC’s Communications and Technology Task Force, alongside several other tech companies, including Yahoo and Yelp. All three are also members of the Internet Association, whose stances on net neutrality and broadband are the polar opposite of ALEC's."

After the Daily Beast article unveiled Google’s affiliation with ALEC, dozens of activist groups pointed out the paradox in a public letter calling for the company to leave the organization. Google's only response came in a reply to Ars Technica’s request for comment: "we aren't going to be commenting on this letter."

So when a group like the Internet Association speaks out on a given issue, it doesn't necessarily mean that all of its member groups are giving it their full support. Some affiliations are more valuable in public, while others are only valuable in the dark.” 

National Coalition Opposes Anti-Muni D.C. Legislation; Time to Call Your Rep!

The National League of Cities (NLC), National Association of Counties (NACo), and National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA) joined together this morning to send a letter to Congress expressing their opposition to anti-muni legislation being discussed in the House.

As we reported yesterday, it is imperative that concerned constituents speak out against two anticipated amendments that can stifle local investment or end local telecommunications authority. The amendments are expected within the next few days, so we need to act now.

Appropriations bill H.R. 5016, introduced on July 2nd, provides funding for financial services and general government, including the FCC. H.R. 5016 will be the vehicle to force through language to further restrict community broadband networks.

The amendment most damaging to local telecommunications authority is expected to come from Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN). The amendment's purpose is to remove authority from the FCC to preempt state laws preventing local broadband infrastructure investment. By restricting the FCC's use of its funding, the legislation will choke the agency's ability to explore its plan to influence anti-muni state barriers so local communities can decide their own fates.

As the NLC, NACo, and NATOA write in their letter to Congress:

The National League of Cities (NLC), the National Association of Counties (NACo), and the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA) strongly urges you to oppose any amendment to HR 5016 that would hamstring the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from taking any action on – indeed, even discussing – the issue of state laws that prohibit or restrict public and public/private broadband projects. It is clear that such laws harm both the public and private sectors, stifle economic growth, prevent the creation or retention of thousands of jobs, and hamper work force development.

...

The private sector alone cannot enable the United States to take full advantage of the opportunities that advanced communications networks can create in virtually every area of life. As a result, federal, state, and local efforts are taking place across the Nation to deploy both private and public broadband infrastructure to stimulate and support economic development and job creation, especially in economically distressed areas. 

State barriers to public broadband are counterproductive to the achievement of these goals. Efforts to strip funding from the FCC to even discuss this issue, let alone take action, are misplaced and wrong. Please oppose any amendment to HR 5016 or any other measure that could significantly impair community broadband deployments or public/private partnerships.

Contact your Representative's D.C. office today and tell them to vote NO on any H.R. 5016 amendment that negatively impacts community broadband, restricts the FCC, or impairs local authority over telecommunications decisions.

UPDATE: The Coaltion for Local Internet Choice (CLIC) also released a letter to Congress today. From CLIC's letter:

As Congress and the Commission have often recognized, ensuring that all Americans have reasonable and timely access to advanced telecommunications capabilities, particularly in rural and other high-cost areas, is “the great infrastructure challenge of our time.” Toward this end, Congress has assigned the Commission a central role in defining the relevant terms and standards and in identifying and removing barriers to broadband investment and competition. While preemption of State barriers to broadband investment and competition should be used rarely, in only the clearest of cases, it should not be ruled out categorically in all cases, as the Blackburn amendment would do.

At this critical time in our country’s history, we should not preclude or inhibit any potentially successful strategy that will enable our communities and America as a whole to thrive in the emerging knowledge-based global economy. Nor can we afford to take off the table any approach that may be necessary in certain cases to remove barriers to broadband investment and competition.

Read both letters below.

Local Government Groups: "We Need Local Authority"

As the FCC considers the role of local authority in expanding Internet access, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler is hearing from coalitions opposing state barriers on municipal networks. On July 3, Executive Directors from the National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors (NATOA), the National League of Cities (NLC), and the National Association of Counties (NACo) sent Wheeler a joint letter of support [pdf].

From the letter:

The diversity of cities and counties in America also reflect differing values and needs. As such, Local governments should have the flexibility to address broadband and Internet access in a way that meets the needs of the people they serve.

The importance of Internet choice at the local level has never been more important. In many places in the U.S, locally-driven projects—including innovative partnerships with private sector companies—have demonstrated that local creativity and local authority is a viable means by which new next-generation broadband infrastructure can emerge.

The letter was close on the heels of a parallel Resolution passed by the U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) at their June 22nd Annual Meeting. From the final Resolution:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the US Conference of Mayors recommends that the FCC preempt state barriers to municipal broadband service as a significant limitation to competition in the provision of Internet access.

Businesses Mount Opposition to Anti-Competition Cable Bill in Kansas

In a very quick turnaround, a number of prominent companies have signed on to a letter opposing the Kansas bill to block competition for existing Internet providers, like Time Warner Cable. Firms signing the letter sent to the Commerce Committee include Alcatel-Lucent, American Public Power Association, Atlantic Engineering Group, Calix, CTC Technology & Energy, Fiber to the Home Council, Google, National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, OnTrac, Telecommunications Industry Association, Utilities Telecom Council. The Committee will hear the bill on Tuesday morning. We understand that no recording or live streaming is planned.

Update: When originally posting this, I failed to credit Jim Baller - who organized the letter and works to preserve local authority, so communities themselves can decide whether a network is a wise investment.

We, the private-sector companies and trade associations listed below, urge you to oppose SB 304 because this bill will harm both the public and private sectors, stifle economic growth, prevent the creation or retention of thousands of jobs, hamper work force development, and diminish the quality of life in Kansas. In particular, SB 304 will hurt the private sector in several ways: by curtailing public-private partnerships; by stifling the ability of private companies to sell equipment and services to public broadband providers; and by impairing economic and educational opportunities that contribute to a skilled workforce from which businesses across the state will benefit.

The United States must compete in a global economy in which affordable access to advanced communications networks is playing an increasingly significant role. As the Federal Communications Commission noted in challenging broadband providers and state and municipal community leaders to come together to develop at least one gigabit community in all 50 states by 2015, “The U.S. needs a critical mass of gigabit communities nationwide so that innovators can develop next-generation applications and services that will drive economic growth and global competitiveness.”

The private sector alone cannot enable the United States to take full advantage of the opportunities that advanced communications networks can create in virtually every area of life. As a result, federal and state efforts are taking place across the Nation, including Kansas, to deploy both private and public broadband infrastructure to stimulate and support economic development and job creation, especially in economically distressed areas. SB 304 would prevent municipalities from working with private broadband providers, or developing themselves, if necessary, the advanced broadband infrastructure that will stimulate local businesses development, foster work force retraining, and boost employment in economically underachieving areas.

Consistent with these expressions of national unity, public entities in Kansas and across America are ready, willing, and able to do their share to bring affordable high-capacity broadband connectivity to all Americans. Enactment of barriers to public broadband initiatives, including SB 304, would be counterproductive to the achievement of these goals. SB 304 is also inconsistent with America’s National Broadband Plan, which calls on States to remove existing barriers to community broadband initiatives and to refrain from enacting new ones.

We support strong, fair and open competition to ensure that users can enjoy the widest range of choices and opportunities. SB 304 is a step in the wrong direction. It is bad for Kansas communities, bad for the private sector, particularly high-technology companies, and bad for America’s global competitiveness. Please oppose SB 304 and any amendment or other measure that could significantly impair community broadband deployments or public private partnerships in Kansas.

NATOA Keynote Panel Discusses Role of Local Governments in Improving Internet Access

In September, I joined the keynote lunch panel at the annual NATOA Conference to discuss what local governments can do to improve Internet access. Joanne Hovis moderated a discussion between Rondella Hawkins of City of Austin, Milo Medin of Google, and myself.

I have embedded the video below so it starts with the panel discussion. However, if you go back to the beginning, you will also be able to watch the annual award presentations, including one to Longmont in Colorado, as well as Milo Medin's 10 minute presentation prior to this panel discussion.

We discuss many important issues, particularly the various actions local governments can take to either build their own networks or to make the community more tempting to others who might build a network.

Port Angeles' "The Mesh" Up and Running

Citywide Internet will soon be available as a monthly service in Port Angeles on Washington's Olympic Peninsula. Mayor Cherie Kidd, Police Chief Terry Gallagher, and Councilwoman Brooke Nelson participated in a ceremonial "cable cutting" event last week. The event was to celebrate the new network, nicknamed "The Mesh." Arwyn Rice, of the Olympic Peninsula Daily News covered the event in a recent article.

According to the Metro-Net website, a $2.6 million Broadband Technology Opportunity Program (BTOP) grant funded part of the $3.7 million Wi-fi system. The network serves a dual purpose, serving public safety first responders and a separate level for public access. From the News article:

The public safety system allows police officers to track each other through the city so that they know where their backup is without having to call radio dispatchers.

They also can do their own searches on driver's licenses and license plates, check recent call histories and access reports, said Officer Erik Smith, who demonstrated the use of the system in his patrol car.

Eventually, the system will be patched into the city's security cameras and police car dashboard cameras — and potentially Port Angeles School District security cameras — so that officers will be able to monitor situations at City Pier from their cars at Lincoln Park, said Police Chief Terry Gallagher.

“The limitation is our imagination,” Gallagher said.

While access is free through October 31, OlyPen MetroNet will start offering a variety of plans on November 1. Mobile and fixed-point service will be available and range from $5.95 (some sources say $4.95) for one day to $37.95 per month. Every user will receive the first hour of Internet access free each day.

As we have often found, the spirit of collaboration and determination on a local level helped realize this possibility:

The extensive Wi-Fi system was possible because those creating the network had the cooperation of a utility system that already had the infrastructure in place, said Columbia Telecommunications Corp. founder and principal engineer Lee Afflerbach, who designed much of the system for the city.

The system that was created depended on the ability of the many public and private entities who were willing to work together, Afflerbach said.

“Port Angeles has unique character. It is small enough to work with but big enough to be real,” he said.

Afflerbach said he engineered the system for a major Silicon Valley city that initially expressed interest in a citywide Wi-Fi network but ultimately backed out.

“Port Angeles was the first to say, 'Do it,'” he said.

In September, Port Angeles received the 2012 Community Broadband Wireless Network of the Year award from NATOA for "planning and deploying an innovative, multi-use, multi-sectoral wireless network to serve public safety, consumers, local government and tribal needs."

ILSR and MuniNetworks.org Recognized By NATOA

The National Association of Telecommunication Officers and Advisors (NATOA) has recognized our work by naming us one of the Community Broadband Organizations of the Year for 2012. The award will be celebrated along with other 2012 Community Broadband Awards at their annual conference in New Orleans on September 27-29.

In the press release, NATOA noted our work "…for persistent reporting on community broadband initiatives and their opponents, thereby educating and informing the public and policy-makers nationwide."

The Massachussetts Broadband Institute (MBI) received a similar award for their work in regional broadband collaboration and development.

Other recipients include:

John Windhaousen, Blair Levin, Clakamas County, Oregon, the Cities of Wilson, North Carolina, and Port Angeles, Washington, and the Urbana-Champaign Big Broadband (UC2B) project.

From the Press Release:

We are thrilled to recognize such a broad spectrum of people, communities, and organizations that lead the nation in advocating for and improving government and public options in broadband technology," said Joanne Hovis, president of the NATOA Board of Directors.  "These pioneers have distinguished themselves in their extraordinary efforts, achievements and innovation in community-based approaches to broadband.

Upcoming Events Discussing Community Networks

We want to alert readers to some upcoming events that will discuss community broadband networks.

The first will be most interesting to those who are attending the National Alliance for Media Arts and Culture (NAMAC) conference in Minneapolis from September 6-8. On Saturday, September 8, Christopher Mitchell will join a panel entitled "Digital Frontiers: Copryright, Censorship, the Commons, Privacy." The panel is scheduled for 10:45-12:15. Check out the NAMAC conference page and register to join us!

The second is open to everyone - a webinar jointly presented by the Public Technology Institute and National League of Cities. Once again, Christopher Mitchell will present on the webinar and will be joined by speakers from BVU Authority out of Bristol and EPB from Chattanooga. Register for "How a Municipal Network Can Help Your City." The webinar is scheduled for September 13 from 2-3 Eastern time.

Finally, the 2012 National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors National Conference is scheduled for September 27-29 in New Orleans. Among the many good speakers, Vint Cerf will give a keynote on Friday.

Those who cannot make it to New Orleans may want to check NATOA.org to check for local chapters. The local chapters each have an annual conference as well and several are scheduled for the fall.

Community Broadband Bits 7 - Mary Beth Henry of Portland, Oregon

For the 7th Community Broadband Bits podcast, we talk with Mary Beth Henry from Portland, Oregon. Mary Beth is the Director of the Portland Office for Community Technology and Mt Hood Cable Regulatory Commission, as well as a past president of NATOA.

Our discussion covers the long struggle to ensure local businesses and residents had a real choice in broadband providers in Portland. We start with how the famous "Brand X" Supreme Court decision came into being. But after Portland lost that case (indeed, after all of America lost due to that decision) it continued to push for smart telecommunications policies to benefit the community.

Now Portland has its own network serving public entities (IRNE - the Integrated Regional Network Enterprise) and the public is discussing what it can do to get beyond the CenturyLink and Comcast duopoly. Below, we have embedded videos that Portland produced as part or Portland's Broadband Strategic Plan. You can find more documents and information about Portland's approach 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 18 minutes long and can be played below on this page or subscribe via iTunes or via the tool of your choice using this feed. Search for us in iTunes and leave a positive comment!

Listen to previous episodes here.

Thanks to Fit and the Conniptions for the music, licensed using Creative Commons.

Video: 
See video
See video