By Dave Clark
On Feb. 6, the City Council voted to spend $2.5 million to get a “build ready” design for a public municipal broadband service in the city of Loveland and additional measures for this process. I voted no on each of those measures. Did I vote no because I am against broadband service in Loveland? Am I a supporter of Comcast and want to make sure they have no competition? Am I against “progress” in the future? The critics will answer yes. Well, they are wrong. Below is a list of my concerns and questions.
One of my biggest concerns is the lack of information we have received. Again, the critics will argue that the City Council has had 16 or more meetings to review this issue. While that is true, the real issue is the lack of information on all of the options available to the city, not just the option of a municipal broadband service. They say they have done their due diligence; I say the information presented has been fairly one-sided. To counter that, some of us on council (namely, Councilors Overcash, Olson, Jersvig and myself) finally requested a special meeting be held where the other side could be heard. So, on Jan 30, there were six private companies that presented to council their proposals for city broadband services — either to expand/improve existing services or provide new.
English: Availability of 4 Mbps-Capable Broadband Networks in the United States by County (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Carl’s opinion piece is clearly in support of an industry that is very happy to sell equipment to these new customers because the incumbent telco business is not growing very fast, if at all. Allowing government to offer communications services in a particular market is not competing; it is taking it over because they can use bonds (low interest) and taxpayer money to fund these networks. State legislators have created these laws to prevent just these things from happening along with providing protection when half of these ventures go bankrupt.
Telcos are not clean on this because they are using crony capitalism to protect their monopoly or duopoly. If legislators enact such laws they should hold incumbents to the universal service agreement that AT&T adhered for decades.
The city council in Wilson, North Carolina, has reluctantly voted to turn off the fiber Internet service it provides to a nearby town because of a court ruling that prevents expansion of municipal broadband services.
The Federal Communications Commission in February 2015 voted to block laws in North Carolina and Tennessee that prevent municipal broadband providers from expanding outside their territories. After that vote, Wilson’s Greenlight fiber Internet service expanded to the nearby town of Pinetops. Continue reading
I’d like to respond to two letters in your July 13 edition that praised Rep. Mike Carter’s efforts to expand statewide broadband access. Rep. Carter wants more government involvement in the broadband sector, including an expansion of taxpayer-funded, municipal broadband networks.
Rep. Carter’s supporters argued he’s standing up for consumers against huge telecommunications companies, but by supporting greater government ownership of broadband he’s really working against small businesses like mine. While it’s true many of my colleagues in the telecom sector oppose Rep. Carter’s efforts, the bills he supports wouldn’t hurt the giants of the industry. They’d hurt small, locally owned internet service providers like mine that are struggling to provide good service in our neighborhoods and good jobs in our communities. Continue reading
From watching Netflix to building a business to conducting cutting-edge research, we don’t just need technology to be successful — we need it to be fast. That’s why the city of Santa Cruz, Calif., has recently formed a partnership that will use fiber-like wireless technology to deliver gigabit-class-level Internet speeds throughout the city.
This innovative fiber-like wireless technology makes the project, made possible through a partnership among the city, Siklu Communication Ltd. and local Internet service provider Cruzio,the first of its kind in the United States. The tech is composed of a Siklu millimeter wave radio attached to Cruzio’s existing fiber. Continue reading
At least the mayor of Provo realizes the benefits of the network and is looking for ways to continue its existence should Veracity default.
Provo Mayor John Curtis said he is following the Boy Scout motto to be prepared when it comes to the future of the city’s fiber optic network.
The Municipal Council made another move towards the mayor’s working contingency plan, or Plan B, at Tuesday’s Council meeting. The council voted to appropriate $50,000 from the city’s fund balance to hire two consulting firms to help develop the plan.
For nearly a year city administrators have been discussing the need to have a plan B if the need should arise. It’s something they haven’t had since iProvo was sold.
LAS VEGAS — Deploying fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) is as much a culture change as a technology change for carriers, according to leading players here at the FTTH Council Conference.
Companies that have tried to sell the new service in traditional ways haven’t always found success.
For example, Telefónica Brazil put its FTTH infrastructure into place before preparing its services, customer service, IT, and back-office operations, said Andre Kriger, the carrier’s FTTH director, in a keynote speech here. And that initial attempt at a massive new service rollout fell flat, he said.