Muni Broadband Even More Important With Consolidation, Panelists Say
Consolidation makes it even more important for municipalities to be able to create broadband networks, but they face opposition from incumbents which have pushed restrictive state laws (CD March 3 p8), said proponents of muni broadband on a New America Foundation panel Wednesday. Speakers were optimistic about FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler’s recent comments about pre-empting the laws (CD April 29 p3). Wheeler should be applauded, said CTC Technology & Energy President Joanne Hovis, a NATOA board member and a consultant who specializes in planning public and nonprofit broadband projects.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Because of their sheer size, large cable companies like Comcast are “not going to do a good job” of providing quality broadband, said Christopher Mitchell, director of the Community Broadband Networks Initiative at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. Municipalities dissatisfied with broadband service have few options other than to take matters into their own hands, or hope to win the “Google lottery,” Mitchell said, referring to Google Fiber’s installation of high-speed broadband in select cities (CD May 9 p8). Given the importance of broadband on economic development, education and health care, “municipalities should be making investments now to make sure there isn’t a monopoly in the future,” Hovis said. Neither Comcast nor the American Legislative Exchange Council, which has pushed anti-muni broadband legislation in several states, had a comment immediately.
The debate over municipal involvement in broadband development has focused on large fiber-to-home projects, but some incremental projects have the potential to make a “huge difference,” Hovis said. Opponents of muni broadband have argued governments should not be competing with businesses and the projects have led to a number of boondoggles. The panelists said there have been successes. Montgomery County, Maryland, has been “steadily and cost-effectively” building fiber to its government facilities for 15 years, and will end up paying less for broadband service than from private providers, Hovis said. Holly Springs, North Carolina’s effort to build fiber for its government institutions, is expected to pay for itself in eight years, she said. Other communities have adopted policies to lay fiber whenever they open streets for road projects. Culver City, California, has been laying dark fiber in the hopes of attracting high-technology businesses, Hovis said.
Wilson, North Carolina, began its broadband network in 2008 and now serves more than 6,000 residential and business customers, said Will Aycock, operations manager of Greenlight, the city’s fiber network. It also serves 5,000 devices from security cameras to traffic lights, he said. The project has helped the city diversify its economy from tobacco production by attracting pharmaceutical and banking companies, he said. Whereas young people are moving away from many rural North Carolina, they're returning to Wilson, he said. The needs for broadband vary from area to area, Mitchell said. “Decisions should be made at the local level.”