Slashdot Mirror


Telco Sues City For Plan To Roll Out Own Broadband

Syngularity writes 'MaximumPC is featuring an article about one broadband provider's decision to sue the city of Monticello, Minnesota after residents passed a referendum to roll out their own fiber optic system. TDS Telecommunications had earlier denied the city's request for the company to provide fiber optic service. During the ensuing legal battle, which prevented the citizens from following through with their plans, TDS Telecommunications took the opportunity to roll out a fiber system.'

47 of 681 comments (clear)

  1. That'll learn 'em. by AltGrendel · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Next time the town should be more careful about granting exclusive contracts.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

    1. Re:That'll learn 'em. by bleh-of-the-huns · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Easier said then done..

      Outside of large metro areas where we might be lucky if we have 2 options, most smaller areas are outright monopolies. I personally do not consider DSL broadband anymore, then again I have FIOS :) ....

      I believe that the municipalities should put in the backbone connecting all the housing and business infrastructures of an area with their choice of networking, then lease that to the telcos and ISPs, that way, anyone who wants entry into the market just has to provide the infrastructure up to the municipal peering locations.

      That would provide competition.. and easier entry for non incumbents...

      --
      I came, I conquered, I coredumped
  2. Revoke TDS' exclusive license by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Problem solved. Actually I bet just the threat alone would be enough to make TDS fall on its knees and obey the government.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    1. Re:Revoke TDS' exclusive license by erroneus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I appreciate your fear and concern about government run communications networks, but there are constitutional and other laws in place to ensure that whatever the government does in terms of snooping or investigating is available to public scrutiny. One way the government uses to get around this is by asking non-government entities to do the spying for them.

      I think the concerns are the same regardless of who is running the show. But in this case, especially, it was the community at large who pushed for the creation of a fiber infrastructure. I think there would be less to fear from this particular government body than from the typical self-appointed/self-anointed government players we typically see day-to-day.

  3. Re:Not government's job by argent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So you're against public roads then.

  4. Re:Not government's job by gclef · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Except in this case the citizens *asked* the government to perform this service (hence the part about the referendum). This isn't the government "dabbling" in other services. This is a government doing exactly what it's citizens are asking it to.

  5. You're against the post office? by bigsexyjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Indeed Thomas Jefferson would roll over in his grave if he new we had public mail service. Oh wait... And of course our socialist fire department.

  6. Re:Not government's job by Rockoon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    These people wanted fat pipes, but private enterprise wasn't going to give it to them. So like any free group of people willing to pay the costs necessary to get what they wanted, they started gathering the money necessary to do it themselves.

    This is capitalism at its finest.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  7. 1 Million Strong Against our SOCIALIST Fire Depart by bigsexyjoe · · Score: 5, Funny
    I think the best Facebook group ever is 1 Million Strong Against our SOCIALIST Fire Departments:

    For too long now, fire departments across the United States have been SOCIALIST organizations, resulting in TAXES on the American people.

    FACT: Most Americans never use the socialized services of the fire department. We have the best fire departments in the world in the US, but that doesn't mean that anyone (even non-US citizens) should be able to dial up and have fires put out, etc. There are private companies (Halliburtion, Etc.) who could step in tomorrow and take over every fire department in America and charge the consumer directly.

    This is AMERICA. NO FREE FIRE SAFETY.

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in asbestos and carrying a fire hose."

    This is THE new political movement in America. The Birther movement and The Teabagger movement have FAILED. We are The Flamer movement, and we are succeeding at tearing down ALL forms Socialism - starting with our Fire Departments.

    Please tell everyone you know about this group.

    When it comes to ObamaFireCare, remember, we are: Taxed Enough Already For American Red Truck Socialism.

    "This is America. Pay to Spray." - Member Susan Weinberg

  8. Re:Not government's job by MikePo · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The Citizens of Monticello request several times to TDS Telecommunications that they upgrade the cities connection. They kept saying "Soon, we'll get to it" That is when the citizens, not the government, passed a referendum to install a city run fiber network.

    It was only after the city started installing that TDS Telecommunications sued the city and tied them up in a prolong court battle, which prevented them from continuing their install. During that time they started laying fiber of their own, by the time the city won the law suit TDS Telecommunications had completed their project and now offer 50mb to every household there for about 50$ a month.

    I guess this just shows if you want your ISP to upgrade your connection, pass a law to get the city to do it and force their hand.

  9. I would have taken the lawsuit by dunezone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to live in a Tri-City area outside of Chicago. The three towns were going to go in on a municipal internet system that would have provided TV, Phone, Internet, over fiber-optic.

    Comcast did a massive advertisement campaign against the system and how if it failed we would foot the bill. They also had techncians out for three weeks straight installing new lines across the town. When it came to vote in my city of the three city's it failed 6000 votes to like 7500 votes, the funny part is, if the 6000 people who voted yes bought into the system and the system lasted for 5 years it would have paid itself and would have become self-sustaining.

  10. The government runs pipes all the time! by FranTaylor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Municipality can run water pipes, sewer pipes, and gas pipes.

    Please tell me why the Internet pipe is any different from these other pipes.

    1. Re:The government runs pipes all the time! by Androclese · · Score: 5, Funny

      Sewers take the shit out and the Internet brings the shit in?

  11. Ha! by Jaysyn · · Score: 3, Informative

    My company actually did some of the design for this. Now I know why they wanted such a fast turn around time on it.

    --
    There is a war going on for your mind.
  12. Re:I wish the system could do something good for o by Interoperable · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This doesn't relate to the article, but I can't not respond to the parent.

    You're complaining about the youth offenders system in Australia? On /. ? People complaining about short jail sentences, particularly for young offenders was why I had to stop reading the forums on Canadian news sites. Canada and Australia both have extremely low crime rates because the criminal justice system has reasonable sentences, especially for young people. I'm tired of the "lock them up and throw away the key" mentality; it focuses on vengeance rather than prevention.

    The role of the criminal justice system is to make streets a safer place, not to make you feel better after crimes have been committed. If you make it impossible for offenders to find jobs or otherwise become part of society again you limit their options and increase the likelihood of a re-offense. Certainly a strong punishment is necessary for the enforcement of laws but longer sentences are not the solution to crime; they're a simple campaign line for politicians because everyone loves to hear it. The only important factor is making sure that the fewest possible crimes occur.

    I plan to move to Australia later this year. Don't fuck it up before I get there. (It already seems to be the only developed country with worse internet service than Canada, which makes me sad, although the weather looks better.)

    --
    So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
  13. Re:Not government's job by mrsquid0 · · Score: 4, Informative

    The problem with this is that gas taxes do not even come close to covering the costs of building and maintaining the road network. Public roads are heavily subsidized.

    --
    Just because you are paranoid does not mean that no-one is out to get you.
  14. The People's Republic of Burlington, VT by figmagee · · Score: 3, Interesting

    has had a municipal fiber-to-the-premises system for the past two years. I doubt I would have been alive long enough to see FIOS rolled out, particularly since the outfit that Verizon dumped^H^H^H^H^H^H sold their landline infrastructure to, Fairpoint, has just filed bankruptcy. Comcast, the only other game in town, has been howling to the state regulators about the sheer UNFAIRNESS of a publically-owned body actually implementing something that they had no intention of providing (in their neverending quest at maximizing shareholder value). Most recently, certain parties (first two guesses don't count) have been agitating to have the city shut down Burlington Telecom over perceived financial malfeasance. After all, it's downright UN-AMERICAN to have such an important piece of infrastructure exist without money flowing into corporate coffers!

  15. Privitization by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Can you imagine what this country would look like if we had treated paved roads like we have treated much of the rest of our infrastructure (i.e. only allowing private companies to build and maintain them). Does anyone honestly think we would have an interstate system today (or even standardized road signs) if we had followed that model?

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    1. Re:Privitization by daniel.b.douglas · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, for a period of America's early history there were many privatized roads - the word turnpike actually comes from the idea of having a pointy gate (resembling a row of pikes) that is turned aside to let a horseman or wagon pass only after a toll is paid. I'm not sure if any toll roads today are privately operated, but it is the same idea.

    2. Re:Privitization by griffinme · · Score: 4, Informative

      I used to live near one of those in suburban Chicago. It was still called Plank Road. An excerpt from a local paper (http://www.ledgersentinel.com/article.asp?a=5946).

      "The roads were financed by private, state chartered corporations, in which stockholders expected to make a profit. Tolls, generally a penny a mile for a one-horse buggy or wagon and an additional half-cent for every other animal providing the power. Up in Wisconsin, driving from Milwaukee to Green Bay via the plank turnpike cost $3.78—a not inconsiderable sum when government land was selling for $1.25 per acre.

      Here in Kendall County, Oswego was the target for two plank road ventures. According to “A History of the County of DuPage Illinois” published in 1857: “The Naperville and Oswego plank road was laid through the central part of this town [Naperville]. The projectors of this road thought to facilitate the communication between Oswego, Naperville and Chicago...The road was completed from Chicago to Naperville, but no farther. The project was a failure; the stock was worthless, for people would travel by railroad. The material of which the road was constructed is now being torn up and converted to other uses.”"

      --
      Is he strong? Listen bud, He's got radioactive blood.
    3. Re:Privitization by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You don't have to imagine what the country would look like - there's actually a neat historical example in Germany for this. At the end of the 18th century, Germany was splintered into many local city states, and had approximately 1800 customs barriers. The impact on traffic and goods was so blatantly obvious to everyone that the states voluntarily abandoned their individual independence and formed toll coalitions.

      The people who argue for privatization of everything are merely ignorant of history. Most of their ideas have been tried already, and abandoned because of their catastrophic impact.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  16. Re:Not government's job by QuantumRiff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you don't drive, then you don't pay the "use fee" collected at the pumps.

    Your kidding, right? Do you ride the bus? Buses run on Diesel (mostly.) which pays road tax. Do you purchase food at local stores? Guess how it got there.. You pay more as a driver, but everybody helps pay for it. But mostly, Look at water.

    You know, other easy to make comments aside, you have no idea how much we take water for granted in the US. The vast majority of Americans are given very clean drinking water, and their waste is treated, by the government. We take that for granted, but many illnesses that used to be very common are exceedingly rare in the US. People talk about bottled water, and how much it makes for the companies, but its usage pales in comparison to a single days output from a municipal system. If you want to see the errors in your very conservative logic, go read about south America, where several nations (bolivia comes to mind) have "sold" the exclusive rights to make drinking water to a private, profit driven company. Make sure you read about the riots, protests, cost increases, and even how some protesters were killed. Meanwhile, we take it for granted here.

    --

    What are we going to do tonight Brain?
  17. Re:Not government's job - call the wambalance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    what happnes when you dont drive - dont pay for the road and you have a heart attack does the ambalance have to drive cross country because YOU never contributed to a road in your life?

    Should someone come and take all the pavement and street lighting etc up at your your house?

  18. Can someone explain... by Simulant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ... on what grounds TDS sued the town? This is not explained in the article.

  19. Re:Not government's job by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Interesting

    False. The amount of money collected from gasoline/diesel taxes *far exceed* the amount spent on annual maintenance. Where does the excess go? I don't about your state, but in mine the gas taxes are used to subsizde the Light Rail trains. I've sat in the State House and seen the vote for myself - money taken from the road fund and used to build a new rail line from Tysons Corner to Towson.

    The senior minority leader had a fit, saying it was a misappropriation of funds, but of course he was unable to stop it.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  20. Re:Not government's job by Old97 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Right and if your are not a victim of crime then you shouldn't pay for the police, courts or jails. If the polluted water or air isn't passing through your sources then you shouldn't have to clean it up or pay to enforce environmental laws to make the guilty parties pay - assuming they are still in business, that you can find them and that they have the means to pay for the damage. If thugs go after some ethnic group that isn't yours you should not have to pay for their protection. If some indigent gets sick or insured you shouldn't have to pay for their care. Let them die if they don't have the money. Children too. If children are stupid enough to have poor or dysfunctional parents, screw em. Let them all suffer and die. Maybe they can get jobs in the child porn industry. Yeah. My birth and education were paid for by the citizens of my parents generation but now that I'm an adult I can just walk away from it all. Who needs government to force us to help people. We can rely on the charity of all the suckers who are willing to pay and if that doesn't work then too bad - unless it's me that needs the help.

    --
    Very often, people confuse simple with simplistic. The nuance is lost on most. - Clement Mok
  21. Re:Not government's job by noundi · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That's fine. Their town; their decision.

    But rather than have government do the job, I think I would simply called Verizon on the phone and said, "We want FiOS and and have the 70% of the population willing to buy it." Corporations have the expertise and experience to do the job, which politicians lack, so let corporations handle it.

    Preventing the creation of a governmental company, no matter what line of business, is anti capitalistic. Sometimes something is of the collective interest of everybody, then, in general, there are no differences. When everbody agrees (more or less) is when you create a governmental postal system, fire dept., health care, roads, and in this case communication. There should always be private alternatives and they should never be banned, as that would be anti capitalistic as well. But adding the artificial constrain on a market which means prohibiting the formation of a governmental company does not foster sane capitalism. There should be fair grounds though, but that's easily arranged.

    --
    I am the lawn!
  22. Re:Not government's job by Cemu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Huge difference in what you're trying to compare. One is the government providing a service, the other is denying human rights.

  23. free market by Tom · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, they're not friends of competition, are they?

    50-100 years ago we had this collective dream of free markets, capitalism, solving our problems.

    Then, corporations found out that the actual free market is bad for profit margins. Once they grew powerful enough, they started changing the game.

    Events like this should have the capitalists and free market supporters up in arms. But it doesn't. Why?

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  24. Greenlight by jDeepbeep · · Score: 3, Informative

    This is a very familiar story, that we have seen play out with Greenlight in Wilson NC.
    FTTP, up to 100 symmetric bandwidth, and the telecoms threw a freaking fit, and did their best to annihilate municipal broadband, and failed to stop it.

    --
    Reply to That ||
  25. To All The Constitution Advocates by kenp2002 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Constitution defines the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. All other powers are reserved for the state. Nothing, even in looking at the founding father's writings imply that LOCAL GOVERNMENT cannot compete with private industry. The City of Monticello is not, despite the suprising ignorance shown here this topic, part of the Federal Government.

    The City is more then capable of telling you what colors you can paint your house, where you can and cannot plant trees, and so forth. The issue building permits and license everything from the number of dogs you can have to how often you can water your lawn. They also can restrict businesses from opening from granting licenses to zoning requirements.

    Cities and Counties and even States run and operate businesses as far back as the 13 colonies. We have Police Depts, Fire Depts, various inspectors (electrical (state), building (city), surveyors (county), assessors, DNR, etc... All of which can be hired in the capacity of a business in the form of permits and special services (Fire dept. will burn a building down for you, police can be hired for security for special events, etc.)

    The sheer ignorance and lack of understanding of what the Constitution of the United States actually does is astonishing. The fact that when I was in high school and we were required in social studies to actually read the federalist papers compared to the teachers now that, "that stuff is nothing but a bunch of lies" thank you teachers union in district 622 here in MN speaks on how much misinformation exists on the purpose.

    Of course I expect little from my home state now, we've elected a wrestler and now a bad comedian. Perhaps Louie Anderson can run against Frankin... Hell I'd be happy to have KKKKAAAAAHHHHHNNNNNN! KKKKKKKAAAAAHHHHHNNNNNN!!!! tossed out...

    For those that do understand the Constitution, kudos for keeping the arguments rooted in reality.

    --
    -=[ Who Is John Galt? ]=-
    1. Re:To All The Constitution Advocates by steelfood · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't knock the comedians. Most comedians are very intelligent people, and as knowledgable or more than the averaged informed person. They are so intelligent, in fact, that they long ago realized that the best way to put out controversial statements is through comedy, that the best way to combat ridiculousness is not by shouting it down, but through ridicule.

      You can't say certain things and get away with it, but comedians can in their routine. Why do you think the Daily Show and Colbert Report are so popular? They say the things that we're all thinking, but we can't say for fear of the repurcussions. You don't see people calling Jon Stewart or Steven Colbert unpatriotic when they constantly derided Bush and co. But any other public figure would've had hell to pay had they said the same thing, on or off the air.

      So don't go knocking comedians. They make people think while making them laugh.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    2. Re:To All The Constitution Advocates by dkleinsc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Al Franken wasn't elected because of his comedy work exactly. Starting with Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot he used his comedy celebrity to engage in political advocacy. You may disagree with his politics, but he does actually stand for something, and if you read his books and listen to his speeches he'll let you know exactly what he stands for.

      I mean, if we're going to have a "no celebrities in politics" rule, then obviously Ronald Reagan should never have been president, but often the same folks who vilify Senator Franken for being an ill-informed celebrity are the same folks who wanted to name an airport after Reagan.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
  26. Re:Not government's job by Volante3192 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Goes to show the biggest enemy of the free market is...the free market.

  27. Corporate welfare state by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Next time the town should be more careful about granting exclusive contracts.

    Exclusive deals usually go sour before the ink is dry. It's not a new problem and if it were easily solved, it would be solved by now. Here's the obligatory quote summing up the problem:

    "There has grown up in the minds of certain groups in this country the notion that because a man or corporation has made a profit out of the public for a number of years, the government and the courts are charged with the duty of guaranteeing such profit in the future, even in the face of changing circumstances and contrary public interest. This strange doctrine is not supported by statute nor common law. Neither individuals nor corporations have any right to come into court and ask that the clock of history be stopped or turned back, for their private benefit."
    --Robert A. Heinlein

    It's tenacity probably owes something to shortcomings in human nature and the inability of society to self-correct in those areas.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    1. Re:Corporate welfare state by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your Google-fu is weak my son. Apparently the quote really is from Heinlein's first published story, "Life-Line", written in 1939.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
  28. Re:Not government's job by sribe · · Score: 3, Informative

    Do you ride the bus? Buses run on Diesel (mostly.) which pays road tax.

    No they don't. Special pumps owned by the city, filled with gas on which the taxes are not paid, same for all other city vehicles.

  29. TDS does suck by bryanp · · Score: 3, Funny

    My available options for broadband in my home?

    Comcast and TDS.

    And yes, I get better customer service from Comcast. Which should tell you something about TDS.

    --
    "An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." Col. Jeff Cooper
  30. Link to the Decision by Rageon · · Score: 3, Informative
    From the text of the decision, this was the telco's argument:

    Bridgewater's statutory claims focus on two provisions in Minn.Stat. 475.52, subd. 1. First, Bridgewater contends that Monticello did not have the statutory authority to issue the bonds because the Fiber Project is not a “utility or other public convenience from which a revenue is or may be derived.” Minn.Stat. 475.52, subd. 1. Second, Bridgewater asserts that Monticello intends to improperly apply the bond proceeds to pay current expenses, which is explicitly prohibited by the statute. Interpretation of these statutory provisions is an issue of first impression in Minnesota.

    http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archive/ctappub/0906/opa081928-0602.pdf

  31. Re:I wish the system could do something good for o by plague3106 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Well if killing were always wrong, you'd have a point, but there are times where its justified.

    Personally, I think its a great way to deal with the dregs of society; eliminate the ones causing problems, and you'll only be left with people who aren't causing problems.

  32. Re:Not government's job by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It is called a trade off. When the government spends money on infrastructure it isn't throwing it away. That money will provide jobs to people in the US those people will buy stuff and provide more jobs and all those people will pay taxes. Some of that stuff may be education for their children or themselves which will pay more benefits.
    Think about the rural electrification project from the 1930s. That paid huge benefits to the country in increased productivity and quality of life in rural America
    In the end things like roads, phone lines, and now data lines are used by everybody. The more people that have access the more benefit to everybody. I know that it is may be unpopular to say it but $300 spent on infrastructure will benefit the US a lot more than that same money spent on a game console made in china by a Japanese company.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  33. Re:I wish the system could do something good for o by mcgrew · · Score: 4, Informative

    TFA sucks and sucks hard. Ars Technica has a far better article. The suit is over, it started two years ago and the telco lost.

  34. Re:Not government's job by Delwin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Raise gas taxes and people use less gas. It's a regressive tax and if you push it too hard you'll see a massive flight to higher millage cars or even non-petrol cars. Then what do you tax? Electricity? Now you're taxing people who may or may not use the roads.

    As a second point everyone benefits from good roads not just those who drive on them. Police and fire departments can respond better on good roads. Less congestion means better air quality. Better roads also bring in more business which means more jobs. The road infrastructure is tied into almost everything we do. Thus everyone helps pay for it. Your precept that only those who drive benefit from roads is both short sighted and incorrect.

  35. Re:I wish the system could do something good for o by Obyron · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There's a chapter about this in "Freakonomics" by Dubner and Levitt, where they run the numbers and point out that legalizing abortion and putting more cops on the streets has done more to lower the crime rate than any number of executions per year ever will.

    --
    --Obyron
  36. Re:Not government's job by I'm+not+really+here · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No, the biggest enemy of the free market is the abused court system in this example...

    --
    Before commenting on the Bible, please read it first
  37. Re:raise taxes to pay for the fiber backbone insta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I could tell you about American Alarm in Orange County, CA who writes contracts seemingly with 1 length filled into a blank on the front but then a blanket 5 year term overriding on the back.

    They have this fat, ugly, semi-female "non-lawyer" (I wrote that for her benefit since she routinely scours the internet looking for negative news about American Alarm so that she can bully sites into cleaning it up... Hi, you ugly piece of crap that was obviously raped as a child to do what you do and look like you look!)

    Anyway, she sits at small claims court all day every day suing all their customers to get money for service they never provided and obtained through fraudulent means and the court backs them up, all day, every day in a complete travesty of justice...

    How's that?

  38. Re:I wish the system could do something good for o by Inda · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Dregs of society? Hell yeah! Add the Jews to the list too? Hell yeah! What about the blind, they're no good to anyone? Yeah, add them to the list too. Any generic part of society I can't stand? Put them at the top of the list.

    Fucking prick.

    --
    This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.