video

Geoff Daily VidChat with Director of LUS Fiber, Terry Huvall

Terry Huvall, the head of Lafayette's municipally owned fiber to the home network, discusses the history and motivations behind the community fighting for four years to build their own network. Lafayette has a strong tradition of publicly owned utilities -- they were the first community in Louisiana to build a municipally-owned water and electricity utility, voting to tax themselves to fund it in 1896.

That investment allowed Lafayette to prosper and surpass other communities in the following decades. This investment will have the same effects.

Wilson's Greenlight Keeps Time Warner Prices Low in Community

Catharine Rice gave a terrific presentation detailing the ways Time Warner has responded to the municipally-owned Greenlight fiber-to-the-home network: raising the rates on everyone around them and cutting great deals to Wilson residents. I saw the presentation on the Save NC Broadband blog which also has a link to her slides - make sure you follow along with the slides.

She details how Time Warner has raised rates in towns around Wilson while lowering their prices and offering better broadband speeds in Wilson. Once again, we see that a community building their own network has a variety of benefits: a superior modern network that is community owned, lower prices on the last-generation network from the incumbent, and some investment from the incumbent.

Now the question is whether Wilson's residents will be smart enough to support the publicly owned network in the face of Time Warner's low low prices - a recognizing that a few short years of low prices (for low quality) are not worth abandoning the publicly owned network and the benefits it has created in the community.

Video: 

Chelan Video: What has Publicly Owned Fiber Done for Them?

A video from Chelan shows the benefits of a publicly owned fiber-to-the-home network in a rural public utility district in Washington State. The network has literally saved lived with tele-medicine applications. Citizens also cite educational advantages and increased business opportunities thanks to this smart investment.

Video: 

Your browser is not able to display this multimedia content.

Monticello Advertisement

FiberNet Monticello put one of their advertisements on YouTube.

Video: 

Comcast Trying to Gouge Palo Alto, Lesson for Others

It looks like Palo Alto should move quickly on expanding its publicly owned fiber-based I-NET - as the city renegotiates the cable franchise with Comcast, the private cable company is trying to rip-off taxpayers with exorbitant prices for community anchor tenants.

California is one of several states to recently take negotiating power on cable television franchises away from communities and grant it to the state. Historically, communities negotiated a free or reduced rate for connectivity to schools, public safety buildings and other key community anchors in return for access to community Right-of-Way - an essential permission necessary to build a cable network.

However, as these agreements come up for review, the regulatory landscape is significantly different than it was when they were negotiated in the past. Federal and state decisions have limited the power of communities to gain concessions from cable companies as they continue to raise prices and post large profits.

In response, many communities have embarked on smart efforts to build their own fiber-optic networks connecting key institutions. These networks often save money while greatly increasing available bandwidth, allowing local governments to be more efficient and use cutting-edge applications. In some communities, these Institutional Networks have formed the backbone of next-generation networks that extend full fiber-to-the-home network access to businesses and citizens. Palo Alto has not yet connected all the necessary buildings with its network and still depends on Comcast for bandwidth to those areas.

Communities should beware - network ownership means power. The network owner can decide what price to charge schools - prices that must be paid with tax dollars. Communities building their own networks have slashed these prices and reduced pressure on the tax base. They don't have to worry as much when cable franchise negotiations are up again - like Palo Alto is now.

Joe Saccio, deputy director of Palo Alto's Administrative Services Department, said Comcast's proposed rates for I-Net would essentially enable the cable company to bill the communities twice for the fiber network. The network's construction was funded by cable subscribers and according to the staff report, Comcast has already largely (if not completely) recouped those costs.

"It's felt that all the ratepayers had already paid for the system that Comcast had put into the ground through their rates," Saccio said during the City Council's Oct. 19 study session with state Sen. Joe Simitian. "It's double charging the infrastructure is already paid for and they want to continue to charge the districts for it."

...

"I will say that we plan to and will charge competitive market rates that will reflect the current demand and supply of fiber networks in the Palo Alto region," Johnson [Comcast Spokesperson] said.

This is one of the key problems - there is no competitive market for telecom. Even if there was, it makes far more sense for communities to connect themselves and keep prices low rather than paying full market prices. Why rent when you can own? Companies far smaller than municipal governments build their own fiber network connecting sites because it is the economically rational decision.

Additionally, owning the network allows for better network design - improving reliability by providing more redundancy. Private companies do not always provide redundancy because of the added expense. This may be fine when delivering television service to subscribers but is intolerable when a public emergency knocks out connectivity to the police or fire station. Smart communities control their destiny by building their own network.

Photo used under Creative Commons license, courtesy of Titanas on flickr.

Video on Australia's Proposed National Broadband Network

Alcatel-Lucent has created a terrific video (I saw it at Fiberevolution.com) for Australia regarding their proposed National Broadband Network. Australia is the latest of many countries poised to surpass the U.S. while we decide whether to take control of our future or let Comcast and AT&T control it.

I recommend the video, and not just for the accent. Most of the video applies equally to the U.S. in terms of what pressures we face and a possible future.

For those unfamiliar, the NBN will be a massive collaborative project between the public and private sector in Australia, resulting in an impressive open access broadband network. We need more videos like this in order to explain to everyday Americans why this infrastructure is so important and we cannot leave it to a few monopolistic companies to build.

Video: 

CNET's Real Deal Video - On Broadband Networks

Wherein I answer some questions to clear up common misconceptions about the broadband and cable networks upon which we depend...

Network Neutrality and Public Goods

Following up on my recent piece about Comcast and the public interest, I wanted to note some good arguments for network neutrality.

Teresa Martin penned a good article for capecodtoday.com that noted:

That notion of the public good is a quaint concept, one that has been bludgeoned out of favor over the past 30 years. But maybe it is time to re-think that a little and to take the concept and re-examine it in the face of the 21st century.

Is the Internet part of the larger public good? If so, net neutrality would seem to flow naturally.

Does this impede an operator’s ability to make money? Not at all. But it does prevent the asset from flowing to the highest bidder first. It means that information isn’t given priority based on the pocket book of its sender. It means that the recording industry and the movie industry, two strong opponents of net neutrality, can’t use their profits to buy preferred space in the network and block competition.

Photo used under Creative Commons license from AdamWillis.

Video: 

Rural Vermont Fiber Update

Vermont's proposed East Central Fiber Network is moving forward, confident that the strength of their application for federal broadband stimulus funding will get them an award. Atlantic Engineering has been surveying pole and prepping so they can get started as soon as possible.

They are also offering network-branded apparel - it reads: ECFiber.Net Community owned Fiber-Optic network. I think this is pretty fricking cool - it shows the enthusiasm these folks have.

Geoff Daily has given EC Fiber his stamp of approval:

First off, compared to the VTel project, I'm immediately inclined to favor ECF's by the simple fact that they're a public project, which the original stimulus language suggested should get priority, and they're looking for a loan rather than a grant, and I think so long as a project will be self-sustaining, it's always better to loan money that you'll get back some day than to just give handouts of free money. I also prefer ECF's project because they're going to be bringing fiber to every home in their service area. They're not going to leave anyone behind, creating second-class digital citizens. Finally, I think that ECF's project has a greater chance of establishing a model that the rest of the country can learn from, proving both that fiber can be economical in rural areas and that open multi-service networks can be financially viable.

Vermont was also one of the four states to receive the first awards for mapping broadband. Vermont is doing the work in-house:

The new federal funds will be managed by the Vermont Center for Geographic Information (VCGI) to implement the Vermont Broadband Mapping Initiative, a collaborative broadband data collection and verification effort involving partners from the public, private and academic sectors.  This team -- VCGI, the Vermont Telecommunications Authority, the Vermont Department of Public Service, the University of Vermont’s Center for Rural Studies, and Vermont’s Enhanced 9-1-1 Board -- will use the latest technology to create a comprehensive and verified broadband availability map. 

A local television station recently covered the EC Fiber Network in a good video segment.

Meanwhile, communities near Rutland (which is south and west of the EC Fiber network) are banding together to build their own network and are working with Valley Fiber (the initiative employing Tim Nulty helps communities build their own networks). They are in the process of finding towns willing to commit to the project. Comcast previously encouraged the Rutland City Council to avoid the project by misrepresenting their own network as a fiber network - nothing new there.

The plan is for the Rutland Redevelopment Authority to form an LLC (limited liability corporation) and to apply for federal funds made available for rural broadband expansion under the 2008 Farm Bill.

In return, towns would receive payments in lieu of taxes, or PILOT, and revenue sharing based on a town's volume of participation when the company becomes profitable – something that Nulty estimated would happen at the end of the fourth year in business. Participating towns can also expect that every residence will be connected "without excuses," product packages – including cable television, Internet and phone service – cheaper or on par with private competitors like Comcast and "superior service."

So far, the proposed network has 5 municipalities officially expressing interest. They are aiming for 14 partners in total.

One of their motivations is a recognition that both the EC Fiber areas and a potentially expanding Burlington network will really disadvantage them if stuck with the pokey investments made my cable and telephone companies who seem to forget that people in rural New England need broadband too.

Image from the National Atlas of the United States, which is in the public domain.

Residents Oppose Closing of St. Cloud's CyberSpot Wi-Fi Network

Many have held up the CyberSpot Wi-Fi network in Florida's Saint Cloud as a successful example of public provisioning of wireless. From my perspective, the network was always interesting in that it did not attempt to pay for itself out of network revenues. The city built the network and provided services over the 15 square miles for free - they viewed it as a public service.

The network start-up cost was $2.5 million and was funded by the Economic Development Fund. It cost another $370,000 each year in operating costs - some $30,000 a month. Some 77% of the city used the network within half a year according to Free Press. St. Cloud has some 30,000 people and had at least 8500 unique devices connect to it monthly in recent months - due to NAT routers (non-geeks, ignore this) we can safely assume that there are more than 8500 devices using the network.

In order to keep the local taxes level, the City Council decided to cut Cyberspot along with a number of a other programs. Popular outrage led to another meeting in which many people testified that they wanted the network to remain funded. The Orlando Sentinel covered the extension of the city service for 3 more months and public reaction:

Scores of angry residents packed commission chambers Thursday, demanding that the city not pull the plug. " St. Cloud is not a hick town anymore," said resident Keith Harris. "We're country folks, but we're not backwards. One of the reasons for that is our Internet."

One of the people (in part 2 - the second video below) noted that the cost to him for raising taxes to cover CyberSpot would be a few dollars a month. The cost of eliminating CyberSpot to him is far greater - he will now have to pay ten times as much to get an Internet connection.

I watched the first half hour of the meeting and found the public comments quite interesting. The rest are probably interesting as well - you can find all the videos here.

Update: The network stopped offering public service on February 16, 2010.

Video: 
Syndicate content