SofC - Broadband
From:
Jan Carr
Date:
Mar 25 19:09 UTC
Short link
Christopher,
While governments have traditionally built transportation networks,
traditionally, the private sector has assumed responsibility for
communications and power networks (phones, tv, radio, electricity,
natural gas). The exception is the postal system, but even there, the
private sector (UPS, Fed Ex et al) seems to do it better than the
government.
I think we need to be exceedingly leery about encouraging local
government to undertake the considerable investment required for
either a wi-fi or fiber optic system.
I don't know zilch about all this, but I know you will now probably
trot out the TVA and the REA.........<G>
The bottom line is, however, that after getting a property tax
increase that took my breath away, I'm not anxious for the city to
raise my taxes still again to build a fiber optic system.
At 1:09 PM -0500 3/25/08, Christopher Mitchell wrote:
> > Basically, "............ momentum has sputtered to a standstill,
>> tripped up by unrealistic ambitions and technological glitches. The
>> conclusion that such ventures would not be profitable led to sudden
>> withdrawals by service providers like EarthLink, the Internet company
>> that had effectively cornered the market on the efforts by the larger
>> cities."
>>
>>
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/us/22wireless.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=community+internet+service&st=nyt&oref=slogin
>
>Jan - thank you for bringing that up. The network I have in mind would
>be fiber-optic based rather than wireless. Wireless could be a part of
>it, but not in the way that other cities have depended on companies like
>Earthlink to do it.
>
>As for whether it would work, St. Paul would need to consider what it
>could get out of the network (increased efficiency for mobile gov't
>workers, police officers) before deciding it the investment were worth it.
>
>> Whether or not cities should step in to make the considerable investment
>> required to either build or subsidize a wi-fi system is going to be a
>> contentious issue.
>
>Always - and as it should be =)
>Building a fiber network would be more expensive and much more
>contentious. However, I think it makes the most sense for the City to
>first build a network that would solve government and schooling needs
>within the city.
>
>Currently the City gets most of its connectivity from Comcast in the
>form of an Institutional Network from its franchise agreement. This
>network, once state-of-the-art, no longer meets the City's needs. In 5
>years, the franchise expires. Few expect cable companies to continue
>providing these services to cities - new contracts tend to be structured
>differently.
>
>So St. Paul will soon need to figure out how to meet its connectivity
>needs. I believe the City should do what any massive institution would
>do (and what large companies do) - build its own fiber network to
>connect its buildings. Despite the high upfront costs, it makes more
>sense than leasing indefinitely.
>...
>
>In response to John Harris' excellent points regarding the other things
>that need to be done in order to deal with the digital divide - such as
>getting computers into homes and making sure they keep working - there
>are groups working on those issues now and the problem certainly will
>not go away. There are many issues here but I believe a serious
>discussion about building a network is a good first step.
>
--
Jan Carr
1000 Portland Avenue
St. Paul, MN 55104
Cell: 651-341-8441
STP-DOG
St. Paul Dog Owners Group
"Parks for People with Dogs"
Join our Google Group:
http://groups.google.com/group/st_paul_ppwd?hl=en
.