Hi Folks,
This is a quick reminder that the Technology Working Group will be holding an online community meeting right here on BMG between 7:00 and 8:30 tonight. We hope you can join us.
The Governor-elect asked that our group concentrate on the following:
- A plan to implement statewide WiFi (or ubiquitous broadband)
- Using technology to rebuild communities
- Allowing for greater transparency in government
Our job is to listen to what you have to say, so let us know your ideas. We’ll see you at 7:00.
Please share widely!
I did a research paper on public/civic WiFi last year that looked at existing projects and the different means of payment (nothing too fancy, just a summary of freely available info). Public free/heavily discounted WiFi statewide seems more than a bit ambitious. It would be socially beneficial to encourage that kind of development in the rural or suburban portions of the state, but the efficiency and appropriateness of subsidizing a for-profit interest that will likely eventually find a way to reach those markets is questionable.
<
p>
While there’s some precedent, universal free/discounted urban WiFi seems a much easier and more realistic goal in terms of funding. In the city, you can reach a greater number of people with the same infrastructure. That infrastructure must be maintained, especially in salty, cold New England, and the money has to either come from the pockets of the users or the pockets of the taxpayers. As I understand it, long distance WiFi towers are more expensive (now) and more fragile than cell towers. If this is not correct, rural coverage could be prohibitively expensive for now.
<
p>
The San Fran model with Google seems to be the most forward-looking (free access has advertisements that are keyed to your actual location, a lesser fee for no-ads and the entire system allows for location specific queries). I would suggest contacting Google directly for the possibility of implementing a similar system in Boston (and subsequently Worcester, Springfield if they can get their budget on track, etc) with local ISPs and component manufacturers filling whatever portions of the plan are possible. Google may not be willing, but they really are easily the best suited partner in this.
<
p>
Universal broadband should definitely be encouraged, especially to schools and libraries where even the disadvantaged can take advantage. However, I think the current climate is very conducive to that happening anyway. Cable TV reaches (nearly?) the entire state. Telephone access reaches the entire state. There is no reason that broadband can not.
A project is already underway to connect the cape from Falmouth to Provincetown. 85% of Towns across the cape have already submitted letters of support and/or resources. The backbone will be a microwave link from water tank to cell tower, fire tower to monument,etc using municipal, donated and private resources. Redundant links will jump from Provincetown to Plymouth and from Falmouth to UMASS Dartmouth.
<
p>
To the Outer Cape this is an absolute neccessity since Verizon has already told those towns they should not depend on Verizon for services during a major emergency.
<
p>
Towns will be allowed to tap into the backbone to use the bandwidth as needed in their community. A combination of WIfI and WiMax are already being planned to provide public access to communities such as those who have property owners “beyond the last mile” serviced by the cable companies or beyond the loop length possible for DSL.
<
p>
Among the other uses for the wireless backbone are:
<
p>
Each community will determine how they use the bandwidth.
<
p>
The model is efficient and can be replicated state wide.
This is the one working group that can have influence.
Where is tonight’s meeting?
<
p>
Thanks.
<
p>
Bill Solomon
Just come by and start adding your thoughts to the stream of comments led by our fearless Technology Working Group moderators, plus Charley and me.
The idea of Universal Access to the Internet is an wonderful idea, but does the Governor-Elect mean free access to everyone across the Commonwealth? I don’t think so, not while maintaining a balanced budget. I believe the Commonwealth, through local government, should provide access in schools and libraries, but that also means that the infrastructure has to get to the cities and towns. Perhaps, through tax breaks or special state funding to entice providers to install the infrastructure.
So in Western Mass, there have been small rural towns meeting for the past 3+ years (see http://slbc.us/ – Shutesbury Leverett Broadband Committee – now also includes Wendell) to create access to broadband. Unlike prior post there is no expectation for free universal broadband – we can’t even get it if we paid. Verizon, utilities nor other playes won’t invest in rural areas of W. Mass – there is not enough profit to be made.
<
p>
Based on research we think setting up fiber loops with wireless coming off the loop would be a good solution. Beware, in many areas due to terrain and trees, wireless signals are not possible.
<
p>
Over the past few years of trying to get something off the ground, I would recommend the following:
<
p>
– create regulations that not only allow for, but also promote municipal broadband. If loans guarantees were made available for towns, the towns could take out commercial loans and undertake upfront capital cost. Over the long-term this would not only create value and infrastructure for towns but would also be a revenue stream for cash-strapped towns.
<
p>
-Small phone co’s (Richmond, MA) could be supported to use their unique status to invest in broadband in small rural towns. Ask Rep. Steve Kulik from Worthington. (done successfully in Vt).
<
p>
– Broadband access is hugely important for appropriate economic development in rural W. Mass. Small, low-impact business (mom and pop, self employed) can do competitive business IF they can get fast connections. Brings money to towns’ taxbase without need for more roads, construction, etc.
<
p>
– Finally, federal RUS grants make town broadband dependent upon privitization – like many things Bush. Deval should find ways to create local or regional public infrastructure.
<
p>
– Key allies: Jim Marzilli- Arlington, Steve Kulik- Worthington, Stan Rosenberg- Amherst
A low cost, tangible thing the new administratio can do is provide a grant program for towns/regions that want to start down this road – they ALL need engineering plan to determine build out. Grants for engineering plans would be huge boon. These plans can be taken to bank for loan, are necessary for planning tech aspects, and can contribute to a business plan.
Fiber links exist north of 95, but virtually no fiber exists in SE Mass.
<
p>
Fiber in the ground offers the lowest cost most stable long-term technology investments the State can make.
<
p>
The provision of fiber along existing State Rights-Of-Way (ROW) would establish an infrastructure which will allow this State to grow as the best place in the U.S. for developing technology-based businesses of every type.
<
p>
The ROI for a Sate-wide fiber back bone would be enormous as it sets the stage for growth on every technolgy frontier; bio, genetics, electronics, tronsportation, energy, etc. All need access to super-high speed, super-bandwith solutions only possible with fiber.
<
p>
A plan exist to extend the ‘T’ to New Bedford and Fall River, that plan should include a fiber ROW large enough to provide services today and to grow as demand increases.
<
p>
A branch of that system should continue from Plymouth to the Cape then from Falmouth to Provincetown.
<
p>
One of the prohibitive costs in stringing fiber on poles (really only way in rural areas) is the per pole cost that needs to be paid to utilities per month. If there was a way to provide reduced or free access for this, cost of setting up a loop would be dramatically reduced AND not cost state anything.
in SE Mass, stringing from poles is risky, especially as we approach the coast. Underground at least reasnably assures soem level of operation during severe weather emergencies and the States ROW’s shouldn’t cost anything.
Sorry for the disruption, folks — why don’t we move this to the new thread.
While it is important to have the infrastruture in place, it is also important to look at the funding, regulations, and development of the content that goes over the statewide WiFi. Next is the implementation cost associated with the universal access to the network. It is ideal to consider the rural area as perhaps most beneficial to this type of infrastructure, except that the access devices like PCs, laptop, and such may not be of sufficient quantities to make a commercial venture viable. So setting up a public utility should be considered, which begs the question of establishing and funding such a venture for the citizenry.
<
p>
Now circling back to my begining statement about the infrastruture… if they build it will they come? The “they” being the citizenry of the commonwealth. My answer is yes in the long term (5 to 10 yrs), but in the short term no. However in the short term businesses may be interested enough to utilize the WiFi network. And that may spark the growth of new industries, especially in the rural area, but not necessarily restricted to there. Cities and town could be more interested, similar to the industry built along the riverways in this area a century ago.