Municipal Networks

Incumbent telephone and cable companies, as well as a variety of anti-government think tanks, frequently label community broadband networks as failures. The truth is that the vast majority of community broadband networks, particularly fiber-to-the-home networks, have tremendously benefited their community. Telco and cableco slurs against them are predicated on ignorance; they assume that most people will not independently research the supposed failures.

It's been a tough slog for cities and towns that want to build ultra-fast fiber internet networks to benefit residents, businesses and their local economies — so tough, in fact, that virtually none has managed to do it. In May, a ruling by the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority further diminished their odds.  PURA's May 9 decision, which may end up in state court, blocks municipalities from using their legally reserved space on utility poles to build fiber networks that offer broadband internet service to residents and businesses, including through contracts with third-party developers.

Abdul El-Sayed, who is running for governor of Michigan, just laid out an ambitious program that could serve as a model for states across the country. “MI-Fi” is a a public-public partnership in which the state would provide cities and municipalities with funding to share the cost of constructing their own high-speed broadband networks. These networks would then be run by the cities themselves—in some cases, in competition with private companies.

The case for city-operated broadband is compelling. It offers comparatively fast service. It’s celebrated as a means by which to preserve net neutrality.

At the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, we create maps analyzing publicly available data to show disparities in access and highlight possible solutions. We've recently taken an in-depth look at Georgia and want to share our findings with two revealing maps. According to the Federal Communications Commission's 2018 Broadband Deployment Report, 29.1 percent of the state's rural population lacks broadband access, but only 3 percent of the urban population shares the same problem. Cooperatives and small municipal networks are making a difference in several of these rural communities.

San Francisco (CA) plans to narrow its digital divide with a new network of high-speed fiber connectivity. The city is scheduled to begin the first phase of a three-year buildout in the first quarter of 2020, San Francisco Mayor Mark Farrell said. “We believe this is one of the most important broadband projects in our country today,” said Mayor Farrell, as he reiterated a need to bring affordable high-speed Internet access into every home and business.

Los Angeles Councilmember Paul Krekorian has introduced a motion to study the feasibility of a municipal broadband network that would provide at-cost high-speed Internet to the city's local businesses and residents. The motion calls for a study into the creation of a new public department to oversee what is essentially an effort to improve the city’s broadband capabilities.

As the Federal Communications Commission in the Trump era dismantles vital rules protecting net neutrality and users’ privacy, Americans need an internet provider that they can trust and is accountable to the public, not profits.

The Cortez (CO) City Council voted unanimously to approve the fees and costs for a broadband pilot program. Through the program, dubbed the Cortez Community Network Pilot, the city will install in-home wireless devices called GigaCenters, and provide fiber to connect some residents with the city’s existing network. Installation will cost $150, and participants in the pilot will pay $60 per month, plus a $10 rental fee for the device, to get internet speeds of up to 100 Mbps.

[Op-ed] Publicly owned broadband networks exist for one purpose: to give the most people the best service at the lowest possible prices. They do this because they know it benefits their residents’ quality of life and incomes. Verizon, Comcast and other big internet providers don’t like localities encroaching on their business, and they have gone to court to stop public broadband networks from being established. They have lost these cases, but defending them costs governments time and money.