Slashdot Mirror

Re: "No person shall have their property tax increased beyond 3% in any calendar year, nor increased greater then 100% since the time of purchase or transfer of ownership of their primary residence by any goverment agency." (Prevent trying to steal and redistributed land through taxing people out of their homes)

Sounds like a good idea, but without any caps on spending, you end up with things like Michigan's Proposition A. Long time home owners pay much less property tax, newer home owners pay much more. Also results in a large financial penalty to buy & sell real estate. Oh, that and property tax bills that go up when home values are falling.

For reference:
http://blogpublic.lib.msu.edu/index.php/2008/09/03/tax-analyst-explains-michigan-property-t?blog=5
http://www.oakgov.com/equal/assets/doc/07_01_A_Guide_to_PropA.pdf
http://www.mitchross.com/blog/index.php?itemid=149&catid=6

Jobs:

It will take until February to release an SDK because we're trying to do two diametrically opposed things at once-

      Allow nearly open software development but completely restrict the ability to use VoIP (and upset ATT).

There. Fixed that for you.

(Side note: I live in Oakland County - home of a county-wide wireless project. If residents could run VoIP on an iPhone, then cellular revenue would plummet here. I suspect that would catch on like wildfire, once proven. This is RISKY business for Apple.)

Oakland County (Detroit suburb) seems to be having some success with their effort. http://www.oakgov.com/wireless/faq

So, what do you propose instead?

Oakland County Wireless

This is the largest muni-wireless project in the world (910 square miles). It costs the taxpayers *nothing* to have free wireless internet access. It does not prevent people from having cable internet or DSL at home. It only adds an option at zero cost.

I live in Oakland County and this is for real - I can get basic internet connectivity at no charge (128kbps symmetric) or pay extra for faster speeds.

Next question please.

San Francisco is mired, Chicago gives up but Wireless Oakland chugs along. One of my ex-Michigander Bay Area friends can't believe that I have free wireless but the Googlenet (or whatever SF plans) is still not working.

How is this any different than any other municipal wireless project? I suppose it's different because it isn't intended to actually provide public wireless internet access (in the short-term, anyway).

Oakland County, MI is currently implementing a wireless network across over 900 sq. miles. Granted the free service is pretty slow (128 kbps), but the for-fee service being offered is competitive with cable offerings in the area.

I live in oakland county in MI, and by the end of the year they will provide free Wifi across the whole county. I love it as after it becomes avalable I won't have to choose between a phone line I don't want (to get DSL) or Cable I don't need (for Cable modem) just to get online. I'll be able to save well over 50$ a month. Fyi where I am we have ONE phone provider, and ONE cable provider. More info about wireless oakland can be found here http://www.oakgov.com/wireless/

Oakland County, Michigan, just north of Detroit, has been doing much the same thing as Washtenaw is planning. MichTel is setting up the hot spots and offering a limited speed (128 kbps, unencrypted) for free. There is a higher rate plan with encryption for a fee.

Oakland County in MI has their 802.11 pilot up already. Causing a few problem w/business's who already had an 802.11 network deployed. It's nice to be able to jump on a non-monitored, non-proxied network from work!!

Where did you hear this? Just last month, my township signed up for the next phase. Not to mention the networks is owned by a telecom.