DOCSLIB.ORG

The Philadelphia Story Learning from a Municipal Wireless Pioneer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Philadelphia Story Learning from a Municipal Wireless Pioneer The Philadelphia Story Learning from a Municipal Wireless Pioneer Joshua Breitbart, Author Naveen Lakshmipathy, Appendices Sascha D. Meinrath, Editor NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION 1 The Philadelphia Story Learning from a Municipal Wireless Pioneer Joshua Breitbart, Author Naveen Lakshmipathy, Appendices Sascha D. Meinrath, Editor Washington, DC Contents Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................................1 Introduction..........................................................................................................................................................3 Keys To Successful Municipal Wireless Network Deployment......................................................................4 Welcome To Philadelphia ............................................................................................................................................7 About This Report ..........................................................................................................................................................8 Philadelphia A Case Study..........................................................................................................9 Pilot Project.......................................................................................................................................................................9 The Executive Committee .........................................................................................................................................10 The Consultant...............................................................................................................................................................11 Stakeholder Analysis/Needs Assessment ...........................................................................................................11 Public Meetings.............................................................................................................................................................12 Business Plan..................................................................................................................................................................14 Request For Proposals ................................................................................................................................................16 Incumbent Pressure .....................................................................................................................................................17 The Proposals.................................................................................................................................................................21 The Selection..................................................................................................................................................................21 Negotiating The Network Services Agreement................................................................................................22 The City Council ...........................................................................................................................................................25 Proof Of Concept..........................................................................................................................................................26 Implementation............................................................................................................................................................26 The Role Of Wireless Philadelphia ........................................................................................................................27 Evaluation .......................................................................................................................................................................29 Conclusion ......................................................................................................................................................................30 Recommendations for a Successful Municipal Broadband Development Process.............................31 Recommendations for Communiy Engagement..............................................................................................33 Appendix A: Selected Profiles Of Other Municipal Wireless Networks...........................................35 Appendix B: Recommended Resource Guide...........................................................................................43 Appendix C: Glossary Of Key Terms ...........................................................................................................49 Acknowledgements..........................................................................................................................................51 Endnotes..............................................................................................................................................................53 Executive Summary he Philadelphia story told here is an this problem was a driving principle Tanalysis of one city’s efforts to build behind the Philadelphia wireless initia- a municipal wireless network. This tive and shaped many of the project’s report examines how Philadelphia’s outcomes. Philadelphia was a pioneer municipal wireless initiative helped shape among large cities in using wireless tech- the national debate regarding the need nology to promote broadband adoption, for public broadband infrastructure and and its actions have influenced how the impact the project’s successes and cities and towns design and pursue their failures had on the local community. The municipal broadband projects. Philadelphia story holds numerous les- sons for decision-makers and regulators Key Decision-Makers and Decisions and is a powerful tool for understanding n Philadelphia’s chief information officer, the interactions between network imple- Dianah Neff, initiated the project. menters and the constituencies these net- n An executive committee, set up by the works are supposed to serve. mayor’s office and tasked to study The Philadelphia case study is Philadelphia’s options for building a presented in chronological order, with municipal wireless network, assessed recommendations for how to improve the City’s situation and solicited input community engagement highlighted from a wide range of stakeholders. throughout. The committee recommended non- profit ownership of the network as a Context preferred business model. Cities are under pressure to address the n Wireless Philadelphia (WP), the non- “digital divide” in their communities— profit formed to own the network, dis- that is, the gap between those who have regarded the executive committee’s rec- Internet access and those who do not— ommendation by accepting EarthLink’s an urgent problem that the federal gov- bid to own and operate the network. ernment and most state governments n Having given up ownership of the have not addressed. The notion of proposed network, WP was in the “spending no tax dollars” in dealing with conflicting position of having to both 1 The Philadelphia Story promote EarthLink’s services and hold the serv- of public ownership of municipal and/or non- ice provider accountable. profit networks may be disregarded in favor of a n In addition to its marketing and oversight roles, “free lunch” corporate ownership model. Wireless Philadelphia focused on the project’s public interest “digital inclusion” goals. How- ever, WP has no capacity to provide direct serv- Policy Recommendations ices to its constituents, and operating expenses For city officials and decision-makers: and debt service have eaten up its share of rev- n Involve all stakeholders. enues. WP’s current strategy to address digital n Sustain open participation. inclusion has been to raise additional funding n Promote horizontal relationships among and establish one-to-one partnerships with non- stakeholders. profit service providers to fulfill its original n Be open with information. mandate. n Go offline. n Leverage existing assets. Outcomes n Seriously consider the benefits of public/nonprofit n Wireless Philadelphia disregarded the recom- ownership and open access business models. mendations that grew out of the public process n Treat connectivity and digital inclusion as basic and that supported nonprofit ownership of their public rights. wireless network. Instead, WP yielded to politi- cal pressure when it accepted EarthLink’s bid to For community members and local organizers: own and operate the network. n Organize a coalition. n WP has underperformed because it de-priori- n Get to know the key players and decision-makers. tized public input and constituent interests. n Be the media and report on the process. n WP would have been more effective if it had n Do your own research and disseminate it within assumed ownership of the network. your community. n In the absence of substantial public control over n Start a community wireless project. the decision-making process, arguments in favor n Remain actively involved in all steps of the process. 2 Introduction ncreasingly, local governments are communities that meet this challenge— Imaking decisions that will shape the ensuring their local broadband networks way we communicate with each serve the public interest—will be able to other for generations to come. With dramatically narrow the digital divide no national
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scanless Fast Handoff Technique Based on Global Path-Cache for Wlans
    Scanless fast handoff technique based on global Path-Cache for WLANs Wanalertlak, W., Lee, B., Yu, C., Kim, M., Park, S. M., & Kim, W. T. (2013). Scanless fast handoff technique based on global Path-Cache for WLANs. Journal of Supercomputing, 66(3), 1320-1349. doi:10.1007/s11227-012-0805-7 10.1007/s11227-012-0805-7 Springer Accepted Manuscript http://hdl.handle.net/1957/48745 http://cdss.library.oregonstate.edu/sa-termsofuse Journal of Supercomputing manuscript No. (will be inserted by the editor) Scanless Fast Handoff Technique Based on Global Path Cache for WLANs Weetit Wanalertlak · Ben Lee · Chansu Yu · Myungchul Kim · Seung-Min Park · Won-Tae Kim Received: date / Accepted: date Abstract Wireless LANs (WLANs) have been widely adopted and are more convenient as they are inter-connected as wireless campus networks and wire- less mesh networks. However, time-sensitive multimedia applications, which have become more popular, could suffer from long end-to-end latency in WLANs. This is due mainly to handoff delay, which in turn is caused by channel scan- ning. This paper proposes a technique called Global Path-Cache (GPC) that provides fast handoffs in WLANs. GPC properly captures the dynamic be- havior of the network and MSs, and provides accurate next-AP predictions to minimize the handoff latency. Moreover, the handoff frequencies are treated Weetit Wanalertlak and Ben Lee School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Oregon State University Corvallis, OR, 97331, USA Tel.: 1-541-737-3148 E-mail: {wanalewe,benl}@eecs.orst.edu Chansu
    [Show full text]
  • Institute for Local Self-Reliance
    Fact Checking the New Taxpayers Protection Alliance Report, GON With the Wind ​ By Christopher Mitchell, Katie Kienbaum, Jess Del Fiacco, Ry Marcattilio-McCracken Institute for Local Self-Reliance In time, we may offer a more substantial reaction on our Correcting Community Fiber Fallacies page, ​ ​ which already addresses many of the claims repeated in this report. The Institute for Local Self-Reliance is offering this quick, critical reaction within hours of first seeing the Taxpayers Protection Alliance report in order to give the facts a chance — this is a biased attack against municipal networks and the ​ ​ competition they can provide in a market that desperately needs it. Learn More: ILSR.org MuniNetworks.org Get in Touch: @MuniNetworks @CommunityNets [email protected] The Taxpayers Protection Alliance has returned with another puzzling attempt to discredit municipal broadband networks: They have published a report, GON With the Wind, that mostly ​ ​ affirms that the community networks it picked to study are successful. TPA’s report offers 30 short case studies and there is no explanation of how TPA chose this odd subset of municipal networks. Yet they allege a failure of the network or failure to pay debt in only 9 of its examples. One of the claims of failure, North Carolina’s Wilson, relies solely on a false claim that was quietly retracted years ago by Christopher Yoo at the University of Pennsylvania, who admitted he did not understand the revenue bonds he was criticizing. To be clear, TPA chose 30 municipal networks to make its argument and can only accurately claim 8 out of 30 networks as failures.
    [Show full text]
  • In Blue Are the Updates Since the Last 1 June 2007 Summary)
    Muniwireless.com 1 August 2007 list of US cities and regions (in blue are the updates since the last 1 June 2007 summary) Region and citywide networks Tempe AZ MobilePro Chandler AZ MobilePro Pleasanton CA Network Anatomy Concord CA MetroFi, phase 1 rolled out Marina del Rey CA Planet Halo Foster City CA MetroFi Pacifica CA Veraloft Galt CA Softcom Anaheim CA EarthLink Mountain View CA Google Cerritos CA Cupertino CA MetroFi Sunnyvale CA MetroFi Santa Clara CA MetroFi Lompoc CA Hermosa Beach CA free Internet access San Diego Indian tribal villages CA West Hollywood CA Riverside CA AT&T, MetroFi - only a downtown hotzone for now Vail CO CenturyTel Longmont CO MobilePro St. Cloud FL Deployed and managed by Hewlett Packard Monticello FL Winter Park FL outdoor only Kissimmee FL Motorola, Scientel Adel GA Rome GA GTS Linton IN Scottsburg IN Brownsburg IN Moving Target Marion IN Western Kansas KS Lexington KY Owensboro KY Vivian LA Princeton MA Cape Cod MA Brookline MA Galaxy, Strix, multi-use network including public safety Rockland ME Redzone Wireless Thomaston ME Redzone Wireless Annapolis MD Annapolis Wireless Allegany County MD Coldwater MI operated by Coldwater Board of Public Utilities Bronson MI operated by Coldwater Board of Public Utilities Quincy MI operated by Coldwater Board of Public Utilities Tekonsha MI operated by Coldwater Board of Public Utilities Grand Haven MI Azulstar Ferrysburg MI Spring Lake MI Gladstone MI Washtenaw County MI 20/20 Communications Buffalo MN Chaska MN Moorhead MN Nevada MO Southaven MS Los Lunas NM Rio
    [Show full text]
  • How Broadband Populists Are Pushing for Government-Run Internet One Step at a Time
    How Broadband Populists Are Pushing for Government-Run Internet One Step at a Time BY ROBERT D. ATKINSON AND DOUG BRAKE | JANUARY 2017 To most observers of U.S. broadband policy, it would seem that the Heated debates about discrete issues such regular and increasingly heated debates in this area are about an evolving as net neutrality, set of discrete issues: net neutrality, broadband privacy, set-top box broadband privacy, competition, usage-based pricing, mergers, municipal broadband, and set-top box international rankings, and so on. As each issue emerges, the factions take competition are their positions—companies fighting for their firms’ advantage, “public subcomponents of a interest” groups working for more regulation, free market advocates broader strategic debate about what working for less, and some moderate academics and think tanks taking kind of broadband more nuanced and varied positions. But at a higher level, these debates are system America about more than the specific issue at hand; they are subcomponents of a should have. broader debate about the kind of broadband system America should have. One side wants to keep on the path that has brought America to where it is today: a lightly regulated industry made up of competing private companies. Another side, made up of most public interest groups and many liberal academics, rejects this, advocating instead for a heavily regulated, utility-like industry at minimum and ideally a government- owned system made up largely of municipally owned networks. The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) firmly believes the former model—lightly regulated competition—is the superior one.
    [Show full text]
  • Green2015-An-Action-Plan-For-The
    Green2015 Advisory Group Conveners and Participating Organizations Michael DiBerardinis, Department of Parks and Recreation Commissioner, co-convener Alan Greenberger, Deputy Mayor for Economic Development, co-convener Amtrak Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future Delaware River Waterfront Corporation Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission Fairmount Park Conservancy Fairmount Park Historic Preservation Trust Friends of the Wissahickon Greenspace Alliance Natural Land Trust Neighborhood Gardens Association Next Great City Coalition Office of City Councilman Darrell Clarke Office of Councilwoman Anna Verna Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Environmental Council Pennsylvania Horticultural Society Philadelphia Association of Community Development Corporations Philadelphia City Planning Commission Philadelphia Department of Commerce Philadelphia Department of Licenses and Inspections Philadelphia Department of Public Health Philadelphia Department of Public Property Philadelphia Department of Revenue Philadelphia Housing Authority Philadelphia Industrial Development Corporation Philadelphia Office of Housing and Community Development Philadelphia Office of Sustainability Philadelphia Office of Transportation and Utilities Philadelphia Orchard Project Philadelphia Parks Alliance Philadelphia Parks and Recreation Commission Philadelphia Water Department Redevelopment Authority of Philadelphia School District of Philadelphia Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Broadband in Concord: an In-Depth Analysis
    BHI Policy Study March 2 0 0 4 Municipal Broadband in Concord: An In-Depth Analysis David G. Tuerck, PhD John Barrett, MSc Beacon Hill Institute The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University in Boston focuses on federal, state and local economic policies as they affect citizens and businesses. The institute conducts research and educational programs to provide timely, concise and readable analyses that help voters, policymakers and opinion leaders under- stand today’s leading public policy issues. ©March 2004 by the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University ISBN 1-886320-21-7 The Beacon Hill Institute for Public Policy Research Suffolk University 8 Ashburton Place Boston, MA 02108 Phone: 617-573-8750 Fax: 617-720-4272 [email protected] http://www.beaconhill.org $15.00 Table of Contents Executive Summary.....................................................................................4 I. Introduction..............................................................................................8 II. Cautionary Tales....................................................................................12 Tacoma Public Utilities Click! Network ............................................................... 12 Ashland, Oregon ...................................................................................................... 13 Lebanon, Ohio .......................................................................................................... 15 Braintree, Massachusetts .......................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 1 a Privacy Analysis of the Six Proposals for San Francisco
    A Privacy Analysis of the Six Proposals for San Francisco Municipal Broadband Six companies have proposed plans to bring municipal broadband to San Francisco. They range from approaches where users will pay monthly fees, to advertising-supported services and free services. Whatever the City's approach, we think it is important that the accepted proposal respect Californian's fundamental right to privacy. San Franciscans have the right to a network that respects privacy and autonomy, one that allows users to explore what the Internet has to offer, including information about medical conditions and the use of online banking, without fear of government or commercial surveillance and intrusion. In the summary below, we compare the six proposals against a model standard of privacy rights. This comparison only judges the proposals on privacy rights; other important interests, such as bridging the digital divide, reliability in service, and quality of service, are not considered. Again, we applaud City officials for their efforts to bring municipal broadband to San Francisco. This effort is an important experiment in public policy, one that we fully support. Our efforts are intended not to slow down or frustrate this important process, but rather to ensure that the network respects privacy rights. Background On October 19, 2005, the ACLU of Northern California, Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), and the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) submitted comments to TechConnect concerning the privacy implications of municipal broadband access. In that letter, the groups raised a series of privacy issues that sought to focus attention on whether uses of the municipal broadband network will have secure and private access to the Internet (see Appendix A).
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Broadband: Challenges and Perspectives
    Federal Communications Law Journal Volume 59 Issue 1 Article 4 12-2006 Municipal Broadband: Challenges and Perspectives Craig Dingwall Mintz Levin Cohn Ferris Glovsky and Popeo Follow this and additional works at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj Part of the Administrative Law Commons, Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons, Communications Law Commons, and the Legislation Commons Recommended Citation Dingwall, Craig (2006) "Municipal Broadband: Challenges and Perspectives," Federal Communications Law Journal: Vol. 59 : Iss. 1 , Article 4. Available at: https://www.repository.law.indiana.edu/fclj/vol59/iss1/4 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law School Journals at Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Federal Communications Law Journal by an authorized editor of Digital Repository @ Maurer Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Municipal Broadband: Challenges and Perspectives Craig Dingwall* I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY ................................................ 68 II. BROADBAND DEMAND ............................................................. 69 III. POSSIBLE JUSTIFICATIONS FOR MUNICIPAL BROADBAND ............. 76 IV. SPEED, FEATURE, AND PRICE CONSIDERATIONS ....................... 77 V. MUNICIPAL BROADBAND STATUS ............................................. 81 A. MunicipalBroadband Deployment ..................................... 81 B. State and FederalLegislation ................................................. 85 C. Nixon v.
    [Show full text]
  • The Law and Economics of Municipal Broadband
    The Law and Economics of Municipal Broadband T. Randolph Beard, PhD* George S. Ford, PhD† Lawrence J. Spiwak, Esq.‡ Michael Stern, PhD¨ TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 3 II. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ........................................................................... 9 III. THE ECONOMICS OF THE BROADBAND BONUS ...................................... 14 A. The Externality Issue .................................................................... 15 B. Competition is Not the Solution to Externalities .......................... 16 C. Economic Development and Municipal Broadband .................... 17 D. Economic Migration Versus Growth ............................................ 18 IV. MUNICIPAL BROADBAND, COMPETITION, AND WELFARE ..................... 19 A. The Equilibrium Number of Firms ............................................... 22 B. Welfare and the Number of Competitors ...................................... 27 C. Adding Competitors to a Market Already in Equilibrium ............ 29 D. The Value of the First Firm .......................................................... 32 E. Externalities and the Equilibrium Number of Competitors .......... 32 V. SUBSIDIES, PREDATION, AND PRIVATE INVESTMENT ............................ 34 A. Municipal Broadband and the Number of Firms ......................... 35 * Senior Fellow, Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Public Policy Studies; Professor of Economics, Auburn University. † Chief Economist,
    [Show full text]
  • Rationalizing the Municipal Broadband Debate
    I/:A JUNLOLAWADPLC FO IFRAIO*H *OIT MICHAEL J. SANTORELLI Rationalizing the Municipal Broadband Debate Abstract: If one were to believe some of the hyperbole surrounding the many discussions on universal broadband access, one would be dismayed by how far the United States seems to have fallen behind its international counterparts in the race to build out networks. Indeed, by some accounts, the United States is on the brink of economic ruin if it continues without a coherent strategy to rectify the situation. Under these circumstances what is the United States to do? Local municipalities have sought to fill this apparent broadband void by building networks to compete, in some form or another, with incumbent broadband providers in order to speed network build-out and drive down prices. Contrary to this belief, many feel that the broadband market is healthy and robust. These competing perceptions constitute the crux of the current municipal broadband debate. This article seeks to clarify the debate by offering a valuable framework within which future disputes and misunderstandings might be avoided or current ones resolved. In order to accomplish this, the article will show that the market is in fact healthy and competition is robust. The article will then examine a number of municipal entrance strategies and derive from each a number of observations on what has and has not been successful to date. This article will conclude by enumerating a set of guiding principles for use by policymakers and regulators at all levels of government to consider before deciding whether it is prudent for a municipality to enter the broadband market.
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Broadband: Demystifying Wireless and Fiber-Optic Options
    POLICY BRIEF Revised - March 2008 Municipal Broadband: Demystifying Wireless and Fiber-Optic Options CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL [email protected] Executive Summary The United States, creator of the Internet, increasingly lags in access to it. In the absence of a national broad- Introduction band strategy, many communities have invested in broadband infrastructure, especially wireless broad- Minnesota’s capital city, St. Paul, recently considered band, to offer broadband choices to their residents. building a wireless network in order to quickly offer all 285,000 residents an affordable broadband connection. Newspaper headlines trumpeting the death of municipal With the Republican National Convention date approach- wireless networks ignore the increasing investments by ing in 2008, the City Council created a Broadband Advi- cities in Wi-Fi systems. At the same time, the wireless sory Committee and pressed it to move quickly. focus by others diverts resources and action away from building the necessary long term foundation for high The committee refused to act hastily and studied several speed information: fiber optic networks. broadband options for the city. Over the course of the next year, the committee decided a wireless network DSL and cable networks cannot offer the speeds re- would not serve St. Paul’s long-term interests and called quired by a city wishing to compete in the digital for a fiber optic network, built in phases, that could have economy. Business, government, and citizens all need wireless as an add-on. affordable and fast access to information networks. Today’s decisions will lay the foundation of telecom- The same week the St. Paul City Council accepted the munications infrastructure for decades.
    [Show full text]
  • ANCHORAGE to GO “FREE WIRELESS” THIS SUMMER National Firm Awarded Contract for Wireless Services in Downtown First
    press_release_20070618 Home | Departments | Mayor | Assembly | Employee Directory | Contact Us | Find You are here : Home > Mayor's Office > press_release_20070618 spacer spacer spacer For Immediate Release Contact: Julie Hasquet June 18, 2007 343-7103 ANCHORAGE TO GO “FREE WIRELESS” THIS SUMMER National Firm Awarded Contract for Wireless Services in Downtown First Downtown Anchorage is scheduled to be “wireless” with free Internet access this summer, under the terms of a license agreement the Municipality plans to award to the leading national wireless broadband service provider, Mayor Mark Begich announced today. The contract with MetroFi, Inc., of Mountain View, Calif., calls for the company to build a wireless broadband network using city facilities such as light poles and buildings. Initially scheduled for the downtown, the network would eventually be expanded to include the rest of Anchorage. The contract is subject to approval by the Anchorage Assembly. It is scheduled for action on June 26. “Cities across America are starting to experience the cutting edge benefits of wireless technology,” Mayor Begich said. “Anchorage will soon be part of this trend which is improving city services and connecting its citizens with government and businesses.” MetroFi will offer free wireless services to Anchorage residents, visitors and businesses working, visiting or living in the downtown core. Additional services, at competitive pricing, will also be available to residents, businesses and Anchorage’s municipal government. The selection of MetroFi was conducted through a Request for Proposal competitive process. Six firms, both in-state and out-of-state, submitted proposals. MetroFi was selected as the best proposal based on experience, its successful deployment of wireless technology in other cities and what it offers Anchorage.
    [Show full text]