national public broadband

Tagged Stories

Lake County, National Public Broadband, Go Separate Ways

Wed, February 09, 2011 | Posted by christopher

For two years, National Public Broadband (led by Gary Fields and Tim Nulty) has worked with Lake County, Minnesota, to build a universal rural FTTH broadband network to everyone in the County and some nearby towns in Saint Louis County. Toward the end of 2010, the relationship became somewhat tense as some county commissioners questioned what NPB had told them about Burlington Telecom, and a number of media outlets raised questions about Nulty's relationship to BT's problems without actually investigating the story.

Now the Lake County News-Chronicle (which, over the course of this story, has taken the time to report facts rather than following the lazy lead of the Star Tribune and Duluth News Tribune), reports that Lake County and National Public Broadband are kaput. Lake County is seeking a new partner to build the project.

Lake County could not reach agreement on a permanent contract with National Public Broadband, its consultant firm for nearly two years. The two sides battled for nearly two months and couldn’t solve issues based on bonus payments and the ability for the county to fire NPB without cause and without penalty. The negotiations had bogged down work on the actual project, Commissioner Paul Bergman said, and the board wanted a fresh start.

Additionally, due to the state of financial markets, the County is planning to self-fund the $3.5 million local obligation required to access to the broadband stimulus award. Lake County hoped to bond for the matching funds but the current interest rates make that an fiscally unwise approach.

While this does not change the project, it will change the perception of the project and open it to increased attacks from those who don't want the County to build a network (despite the fact that private providers have no interest in providing anything other than slow DSL and cable networks).

The County had long maintained that no public money would be used. However, most people will likely not care as long as the project keeps its promise to deliver fast, reliable, and affordable broadband to the community. This is the need -- and people need to stay focused on achieving this goal.

At a commissioner meeting in late December, Gary Fields commented to the Board that they had to have trust in NPB if the project was going to work. It is hard to know without being at most of the previous meetings, but I suspect the problem came as a result of NPB being nuanced about Burlington Telecom (until late 2009, no one knew how badly the post-Nulty management had hurt BT). Some of the Commissioners apparently interpreted BT as an unqualified success and felt misled when they learned of BT's present problems.

Regardless of who was at fault (and to what degree), Fields was correct. These projects are necessary but still damn hard to build. There will be a lot of stress and it is better for NPB and Lake County to split now if they cannot heal the past. Otherwise, the inevitable bumps in the road of the project (that will occur no matter who builds the networks), would likely just open old wounds and hurt the project. The project needs to have the strong support (and unwavering oversight) of the community, particularly as incumbent providers (ahem, Mediacom) look for any weakness to derail the potential for residents to have actual choices in telecommunications services.

National Public Broadband should be credited with bringing the stimulus award to Lake County -- now it is on Lake County to follow through and make the project work. No one builds these networks because it is easy -- they build them because the future of the region requires fast, affordable, and reliable broadband.

Add New Comment

Update from Lake County Fiber Project (Minnesota)

Fri, January 07, 2011 | Posted by christopher

New Update: Mediacom has invented language in the Joint Power Agreement and threatened the Mayors of Silver Bay and Two Harbors. Let's see how dirty Mediacom will get to prevent competition.

Lake County, recipient of a broadband stimulus award to build a rural county-wide (larger, actually) fiber-to-the-home network, has been wrestling with questions they have related to the problems at Burlington Telecom. After some lazy reporting in the Star Tribune and Duluth News Tribune exaggerated Tim Nulty's role in the problems Burlington Telecom now faces, some on the County Board began asking more questions of National Public Broadband (of which Tim is CEO).

I attended a meeting after Christmas to observe the discussion, share our understanding of the situation, and discuss the experiences of other community networks. Next week, the County Board plans to decide whether they will alter the arrangement with National Public Broadband or possibly seek another partner in the project -- a development that may have implications for changes or revocation of the stimulus funding.

It is important to note that due to structural differences, the problems in Burlington (which, at the least, were hidden from the public allowing them to snowball) are extremely unlikely to repeat in Lake County.

The Lake County Chronicle has published a lengthy editorial responding to concerns and noting the ramifications of any changes to the partnership with National Public Broadband. As of this writing, it is not yet behind a pay wall.

It offers some wise thoughts:

Like the debate over whether the meetings being held to draw up the rollout plans for the county should be public or private, NPB needs to better apply the rules of working within the expectations of open government. We demand transparency and a full accounting of tax dollars.

It’s fair to wonder, as some board members did last week, just what NPB would withhold from the board if things don’t go swimmingly with the Lake County plan. All adjustments, all bumps along the road, need to be publicly and fully discussed.

The county can use NPB’s disclosure mistake to its advantage, by holding NPB’s feet to the fire on all elements of the fiber rollout plan. If NPB can convince the board that this early communication snafu is the last, members would be right to keep moving forward with the project by permanently partnering with NPB.

The real lesson to learn from Burlington is the importance of proper oversight and communication. Lake County Commissioners and the public need to be apprised how the network is doing, including what problems arise and how they are resolved (there are always problems!). This does not mean National Public Broadband should have to publicly disclose what it pays for channel contracts - but it will likely have to disclose more than competitors Mediacom, Qwest, or other private sector companies publicly disclose. Such is the nature of accountability.

Any risk with the current plan is outweighed by the risk of continuing to rely on the private sector for this essential infrastructure:

You can’t begrudge the services already in place. But we can do better and Lake County is taking a lead on getting up-to-date, enviable technology to the region. Those who depend on higher-speed, dependable Internet have been looking for someone to step up.

Last year’s line break that put cell phone, landline phone, and Internet service out for much of the North Shore was just one of the inadequacies put in the spotlight. The question to ask is this: How long are we supposed to wait for private companies to bring proper service to the area and what do those hoping to boost the economic footprint of the area tell companies who are demanding better service?

The editorial goes on to discuss a local business operating out of Duluth rather than Two Harbors (County seat) because Two Harbors does not have the reliable (and presumably affordable) connection he needs.

Add New Comment

Rural Folks Need Broadband Too

Tue, December 08, 2009 | Posted by christopher

After reading an impressive article in the South Washington County Bulletin, I am convinced that most Americans now understand that broadband is essential infrastructure for communities. Don Davis' "Speedy Internet could boost rural Minnesota" is a lengthy and thorough discussion of why every community needs broadband connections.

He starts by noting the MN Broadband Task Force, which found that the state should make sure broadband access is ubiquitous in the coming years at minimum speeds considerably above what is available currently in most of Minnesota. What it lacked was a suggestion of how to get there.

Don delves into the Lake County solution:

A northeastern Minnesota county is doing just that and may have the answer, at least for those in the "second Minnesota."

Lake County hopes to blaze a trail to a faster Internet with private businesses paying most of the cost.

County officials want to lay fiber optic cable, capable of carrying high-speed signals, to every home and business with electricity. If it happens, Lake County could become a model not only for Minnesota but the country by offering its rural citizens the same service as their big-city cousins receive.

As detailed in the article, Lake County has lost economic development opportunities precisely because they cannot guarantee fast and affordable connectivity to those who otherwise want to locate there.

What he does not make clear is that Lake County will own this network. It will be operated by National Public Broadband - a nonprofit. The private sector is not interested in bringing true broadband to the North Shore and local citizens should be glad of it - they will get a far superior network than Qwest could have built.

Once the public builds this fiber network (using private sector contractors), other private sector companies will provide services over it. This is a good model - the public builds the infrastructure and allows private companies to deliver services. The public can ensure everyone has equal access by physically connecting every residence and business.

Unfortunately, one of the MN Task Force members - who should know better - is quoted as saying it isn't "financially feasible" to build fiber to every home. What is or is not financially feasible is debatable. There were plenty of doubters when it came to rural electrification.

The key is to empowering communities to build their own networks. States that discourage publicly owned networks take these choices away. In the future, communities with subpar broadband connections should only have themselves to blame for failing to take responsibility for an essential piece of community vitality. If that is the case, we will have done the best we can do. As it is now, much of telecommunications policy discourage communities from solving their own problems by making them jump through more hoops than absentee companies that have little interest in making long-term investments.

Lake County is following a smart path:

Lake County hopes to get a low-interest federal economic stimulus loan for a private company to lay fiber cable. Then private firms will be allowed to provide service over those lines. The county does not plan to be an Internet service provider itself.

What is important is who makes the decisions - and Lake County will be the decider because it is take responsibility for owning the network.

Photo by Jackanapes, used under creative commons license.

Link: 
Blandin on Broadband Coverage of Lake County
Link: 
Saint Louis County Joins Lake County Fiber Network
Add New Comment

Community Broadband in July/August Broadband Properties Magazine

Wed, August 26, 2009 | Posted by christopher

The July/August issue of Broadband Properties features a number of stories relating to community broadband. Editor Masha Zager explains how the stimulus rules hurt communities:

The NOFA explicitly calls 768/200 Kbps broadband “sufficient access to broadband service to facilitate rural economic development,” but how many jobs will this kind of broadband really attract to a depressed area? How many new services can service providers sell over such networks? Will the networks support public needs for distance education or health care? And how long will it be before the equipment has to be replaced? In the words of a rural telco manager I spoke with recently, “You want to put money into something long-term if you’re going to start building networks. Don’t build something you’ll have to throw away in two or three years.”

Steve Ross takes a look at two networks in Minnesota - the much discussed Monticello FiberNet and a proposed network in Lake County (see Lake County Fiber Network Project FAQ):

Lake County is a rural area in northeastern Minnesota. Its planned network requires 800 miles of fiber to more than 7,300 homes and 500 businesses – every premises in the area that has electricity or telephone service now. It’s the first project of National Public Broadband (www.nationalpublicbroadband.org), a nonprofit helping communities develop and operate municipal fiber networks. NPB’s CEO is Tim Nulty, director of the ECFiber project awaiting funding in Vermont.

Steve discusses the crap that TDS is pulling to again prevent competition in Monticello. Despite being laughed (albeit slowly) out of court in their attempt to stop the city from building a fiber network, they are now attempting to incite a bondholder lawsuit by spreading more FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt). Interestingly, Steve suggests that TDS' numbers do not add up and that they are advertising fiber services while offering advanced DSL (not that any other private companies have similarly lied).

Finally, I recommend "Texas School District Delivers Online Learning Over Fiber." This is another why-rent-when-you-can-own story. Just as many other schools districts have found, they should own the networks rather than lease circuits from private providers. It results in better services at lower prices.

Ultimately, the economic inefficiency of leasing fiber, the anticipation of more bandwidth-intensive interactive learning programs and the proposed expansion of the number of network endpoints led the school district to investigate implementing its own fiber infrastructure. In addition to saving the cost of leasing lines, building its own fiber network enabled the district to have complete control over its network.

However, these networks should be built as part of a larger plan. It hardly makes sense for the schools to pay for an entire network that will likely overlap the network other community institutions needs. Therefore, these networks should be built in conjunction with a larger publicly owned network to ensure the entire community can benefit.

Add New Comment