Minneapolis To Go Wireless

an_mo writes " According to a Minneapolis Star Tribune article, Wednesday will see the announcement of a request for bids on a citywide wireless access service The city will unveil a request for a proposal for a privately owned, $15 million to $20 million citywide wireless and fiber-optic network to improve government communications by linking every city building, police car and housing inspector. The network would also would be available to every individual in the city for $18 to $24 a month."

Comments

Pros and Cons of Municipal Broadband...

[byteCoder]

As a resident of a suburb just outside of Minneapolis (Eden Prairie), I'm somewhat torn about this:

On the positive side, this influx of competition in the broadband arena is good for me as a consumer, currently tithing about $45/month to Time-Warner Cable (which serves Minneapolis and the SW 'burbs). More competition in the broadband arena is a very good thing--especially when it shakes up entrenched local monopolies (Qwest DSL and Time-Warner Cable). Also, as a Hennepin County (which contains Minneapolis and my suburb) taxpayer, technologies that can streamline government operations (and either provide better services and/or lower taxes) is another good thing.

However, on the negative side, I'm nervous about governments getting into the broadband business--the potential for intrusion and abuse of the citizen's rights to privacy is certainly increased. The fact that this deployment is run by a private company helps a little--but it still concerns me, since the government is providing the funding for it.

Technology itself is neutral and can be used for both good and evil purposes. Perhaps, what I'd like to see would be a citizen's oversight group that can provide the checks on government abuse of the network.

Another smaller suburb to my southwest (Chaska) has their own municipal deployment, which apparently is working out pretty well.

As long as municipal broadband doesn't block other entities from providing broadband service to a community and foster competition, municipal broadband could be a very good thing. But, I'm still concerned about potential abuse of the network by the local governments.

Re:Pros and Cons of Municipal Broadband...

[CharlieHedlin]

Many of my posts have been opposed to municipal wireless, but this Mineapolis project seems a little different.

The city is proposing a private city wide network. Sure they will be using City provided facilities, but so does every phone and cable carrier (the right of way for the cables).

The private carrier will also be allowed to sell their services to end users. It basically sounds like the government has invited the private industry to bid on the opertunity to setup the network, with the city as their largest customer.

There is far less chance for the government to censor the network in this arangement. Sure, as the carriers largest customer the city will carry weight, but they already carry weight with the franchises offered to cable and phone carriers.

Re:Pros and Cons of Municipal Broadband...

[ImaLamer]

I'm nervous about governments getting into the broadband business--the potential for intrusion and abuse of the citizen's rights to privacy is certainly increased. The fact that this deployment is run by a private company helps a little--but it still concerns me, since the government is providing the funding for it.

Just wait a few years when the religious zealots in town decide that "their" tax money isn't going to go to pr0n and that there should be filters in place. Hasn't this been the argument when it comes to filtering any other publicly funded access?

Re:why?

[Loco3KGT]

Because, surprise, it takes time and money to do things.

Kudos to the government for charging monthly for access. Charge the people that use it instead of taxing everyone for a handful of geeks to use it.

Wireless seems to be the "in" thing.

[Dzimas]

I'm impressed that so many cities seem to get the idea of blanketing the metro area with wireless, but it also concerns me because the technology changes so quickly. Telephone and cable took decades to pervade the nation, and the technology progressed at a relatively slow rate compare to the proliferation of wireless 801.xxx standards that flood the market year after year.

Spending $20 Million to install wireless is great, but it'll reflect poorly if the system isn't completely overhauled every few years.

Re:Wireless seems to be the "in" thing.

[Timesprout]

But this is the attraction of wireless, it requires far less infrastructure than previous networking technology so its cheaper and easier to implement and will be easier to replace.