Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Dayton, Ohio: Free City-Wide WiFi

Posted by timothy on from the approaching-normalcy dept.

_Bunny writes "The City of Dayton, Ohio announced a plan to make all of downtown a WiFi hotspot - and as of last week, the network is live. This makes Dayton the first Ohio city to offer free WiFi access. Approximately one square mile of downtown is now live, including Fifth Third Field, the Oregon District, Webster Station and RiverScape. The WiFi project is a public/private partnership not funded by taxpayers, and comes at no charge to the end user." (According to the linked story at WHIO-TV, the city is actually paying about $5,000 per year, with advertisers picking up the rest of the tab.)

7 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. Re:History in the making by bob670 · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Trust me, even free state wide wi-fi would not be a good reason to stay here, run far away and never speak those words aloud.

  2. Re:History in the making by OrangeTide · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    People mainly screw and drink in Ohio. Unless you're a jesus freak, then you just go to church 8 days a week.

    So you see there are plenty of things to do in Ohio, if you like fat white girls, cheap American beer or Jesus.

    --
    Poor taste doesn't make me a troll

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  3. Re:City Wide? by INetUser · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I don't see why it's cool. I see it as the city assuming greater expense with minimal or no added value. I don't see the value, if someone could tell me what the great value for such a thing is.

    In these tight economic times, why would a city consider it a wise move to spend tax payer monies on project like this just escapes me. How is this system going to pay for itself? What sort of economic advantages to the city and the population are going to be generated by this? Isn't this just like the all the tech stock over evaluations that lead to the great tech bomb?

  4. Re:City Wide? by KUHurdler · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    By "city wide", I think they mean:
    The whole city is footing the bill.

    --
    Fix Your Own TV - RiddledTV.com Avoid the Landfill
  5. Re:Advertising by NardofDoom · · Score: 0, Flamebait
    Make it really really free. Pay taxes and get free WiFi if you live or work downtown.

    "Waaa!!! I don't have a laptop and I live downtown!!! I disagree with the use of tax dollars!!!"

    Well, I didn't agree with the war in Iraq and I haven't seen benefits. Guess we should just disband the Army.

    --
    You have two hands and one brain, so always code twice as much as you think!
  6. Re:City Wide? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Thats what you get for voting in a democratic mayor...

  7. Bad idea... TANSTAAFL. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Flamebait

    Hey, the public sector is not equipped to handle this (read: accommodating the risks and rewards of the private market.)

    Why?

    Let me tell you about another Ohio city called Lebanon. Lebanon estimated that it would cost $5 million to enter the broadband market but ended up spending $9 million. Where did the extra cash come from? Electricity rate increases and $14.8 million in mortgage revenue bonds to cover their losses.

    So who paid for the "Free" wi-fi? The residents that choose not to pay for it themselves in the first place.

    So to muck it up ever more, Lebanon now requires ISP's to connect to its network. It essentially forces ISP's to pay the city between $1,250 to $2,000 for each customer they sign up.

    That's just one example. How about a few more?

    • Iowa Communications Network received over $23 million in 1999 and still ended up losing nearly $6 million.
    • California's CALNET system was privatized in 1998 after finding itself in debt to the tune of $20 million.
    • The city of Marietta, Georgia sold its "FiberNet" system to a private company in September 2004 for about $8 million after losing more than $35 million on the program. Mayor Bill Dunaway explained that "[W]e should not be in this business--you have to keep reinvesting. It's negative cash flow once you consider reinvestment of capital."
    • The Tacoma, Washington Power Utility launched its Click! Network in 1997. By 2000 it had lost $15.7 million. Projections of cost, time to construct, number of customers, earnings, and net profit were all overly optimistic.
    • Paragould, Arkansas is losing money and may have to increase property taxes in order to pay off bonds floated to shore up its faltering cable business.
    • Ashland, Oregon's attempt to expand its electric department's customer base by entering the cable/Internet business ran into trouble due to unanticipated competition from the private sector.
    • Scottsboro, Alabama faced similar price competition and responded by attempting through court action to prevent its competitor from cutting its rates.

    TANSTAAFL!