Urban Broadband Users in Minnesota

The Task Force is moving out of the "gather information" phase and into the "negotiate positions and write the report" phase of our work.

We gave ourselves a report-writing assignment at the meeting last Friday -- each of us is charged with writing a few paragraphs that we bring to the next meeting (April 24th).  Our paragraphs can be aimed at any section of the report outline.  So I'm calling on you to help me out with my writing assignment.

I'll paste the report outline into this post in a second.  View it as a Christmas tree that we're hanging paragraphs on.  Find the part (or parts) of the outline that you're most interested in, and write a paragraph.  Post them in the comments (cross-reference your paragraph to the section of the report you'd like to address).  Try to cram your paragraphs into this structure, but let me know if you just can't -- we may need to add a few sections here and there.

Deadline for your paragraphs -- end of day on April 17th (a week before our meeting).

I can't promise that I'll take them all verbatim, but I can promise that this will dramatically improve the quality of the input to the report.

This is the big-deal moment peepul.  Help write us a report that really helps Minnesota move forward on this broadband stuff.

And thanks!

Report Outline;

1.    Executive Summary

2.    Chapters of the report:

a.    Statement of values

i.    Advancement of State

ii.    Collaboration

iii.    Technology neutral

b.    Where we’ve been

i.    The history of it all, for example, how voice telecommunications evolved, how it was subsidized, etc…

ii.    How we got to where we are today

c.    Where we are today

i.    Mapping Project

1    Unserved areas shown & defined

2    Underserved areas shown & defined

ii.    Where competitors are today

1    Surrounding states

2    Leaders in the US

3    Leaders worldwide

iii.    Demographics

1    Rural/Metro population

2    Per capita income

3    Household income

d.    Where we want to be

i.    For each of the 8 points from the legislation, how we pay for it, what policy changes are necessary

1.    Identification of the level of broadband service, including connection speeds for sending and receiving data that is reasonably needed by all citizens by 2015. (What’s needed for tomorrow—big picture, by functionality and rural/metro considerations. Essentials we want to make sure to provide, no matter what.)

2.    An evaluation and recommendation of the security, vulnerability, and redundancy actions necessary to ensure the reliability of high-speed broadband

3.    A description of economic development opportunities made possible by the wide dissemination of high-speed broadband

4.    An evaluation of how access to high-speed broadband can benefit educational institutions, healthcare institutions, community-based organizations, and government institutions.

e.    How are we going to get there? [A high-level look]

i.    A description of the policies and actions necessary to achieve the goal including the elimination of obstacles to investment and the identification of areas in the state that currently lack infrastructure necessary to support broadband service

1.    A description of the opportunities for the public and private sectors to cooperate to achieve the goal

2.    A description of what other states have done either by public policy or legislation to increase broadband (Utah grant program, WI tax credit, for example.) Evaluate strategies, collaborations, financing methods, and financial incentives used in other states and countries to support the deployment of high-speed broadband

3.    How we pay for it

a    Estimate of the costs of reaching the broadband goal, including capital costs

b    Identify who will [or should] bear those costs

c    Opportunities to leverage investments

4.    Future scenarios and how to take advantage of them

f.    Define broadband by functionality: define what’s needed for each application (e-mail vs. telecommuting, vs. HDTV downloads, etc.) – similar to the California report

3.    Comprehensive Policy Recommendations

A.    Be sure to cross reference 8 points of legislation

B.    Recommend focus of future legislation

C.    Other recommendations the Governor/Legislature should consider for future study

Our meeting is coming up in a couple days, so here's a reminder for y'all.  Click HERE for the agenda and locations.

Don't forget, there's a public comment period at the beginning of the meeting.  This is your chance to sing out and get your thoughts on the record.  If you can't make the meeting, but have a short (1-2 minute) statement, I'm happy to read them into the record for you.

I love this piece by Clay Shirky in which he describes why the "newspaper" business-model is failing.  A very thoughtful piece that I think carries directly over to the "telephone" and "television" business models.  Click HERE for his article.

He lays out the "unthinkable scenario" for newspapers;

The unthinkable scenario unfolded something like this: The ability to share content wouldn’t shrink, it would grow. Walled gardens would prove unpopular. Digital advertising would reduce inefficiencies, and therefore profits. Dislike of micropayments would prevent widespread use. People would resist being educated to act against their own desires. Old habits of advertisers and readers would not transfer online. Even ferocious litigation would be inadequate to constrain massive, sustained law-breaking. (Prohibition redux.) Hardware and software vendors would not regard copyright holders as allies, nor would they regard customers as enemies. DRM’s requirement that the attacker be allowed to decode the content would be an insuperable flaw. And, per Thompson, suing people who love something so much they want to share it would piss them off.

Then goes on to point out how the rational folks who saw this coming were treated;

Revolutions create a curious inversion of perception. In ordinary times, people who do no more than describe the world around them are seen as pragmatists, while those who imagine fabulous alternative futures are viewed as radicals. The last couple of decades haven’t been ordinary, however. Inside the papers, the pragmatists were the ones simply looking out the window and noticing that the real world was increasingly resembling the unthinkable scenario. These people were treated as if they were barking mad. Meanwhile the people spinning visions of popular walled gardens and enthusiastic micropayment adoption, visions unsupported by reality, were regarded not as charlatans but saviors.

That's how I often feel I've been treated by folks in the telephone and cable-TV industry -- "Mike, oh he's just a whacko."  For exactly the same reaon -- there's an Unthinkable Scenario for telephone and television as well.  My guess is that they're both likely to be gone in 10 years and the whole shebang will just be bits, delivered via the Internet.  There are differences (there is a natural monopoly at work in the fast pipes), but his article has lots of observations that ring true for me.

Want to see my thoughts on how we can move more quickly to the Unthinkable Scenario for telephone and cable?  Click HERE.  It's a little screed I put together called "Switch to Winners."  Monopolistic consumer behavior, that's a way to do it.

Two blog posts for you to read, and ponder.  Both deal with the question "what should the role of States be in the allocation of broadband stimulus money?"

The first is by Geoff Daily (who testified to our task force brilliantly at our last meeting).  He kicks his piece off with this;

According to the legislation, NTIA is supposed to seek out and consider states' advice about which projects should be prioritized, but there's no mandate that they have to follow those recommendations.

According to the latest scuttlebutt I've heard, because of the overwhelming wave of applications about to come crashing down on NTIA they're leaning towards shifting the responsibilities of making these decisions on who gets what to the states.

But before we go any further we need to answer the question: is it a good idea to have states making these decisions?

I'll leave that dangling out there as bait for ya.  You'll have to go read the rest of the post (by clicking HERE) to find out what he's recommending.

Charles Benton (of the Benton Foundation) followed up with a more proscriptive post this morning.  I think this might be a model for the conversation that I hope we have at the task force meeting which is coming up next week.  Click HERE to read the whole article.  Here's an extract;

NTIA asks four questions:

a. How should the grant program consider State priorities in awarding grants?

b. What is the appropriate role for States in selecting projects for funding?

c. How should NTIA resolve differences among groups or constituencies within a State in establishing priorities for funding?

d. How should NTIA ensure that projects proposed by States are well-executed and produce worthwhile and measurable results?

My feeling is that the NTIA should move -- swiftly -- to define the parameters of the NTIA-State consultations.

I agree.  We here in Minnesota should move swiftly as well.

Fantastic "access to government" process in action.  The NTIA, FCC and Department of Agriculture have an archived video stream of the first of several public-comment meetings.  The stream went out live, and the archive popped up pretty darn quickly thereafter.  Click HERE to watch the archived stream.  Great sound quality, good-enough video quality.  A terrific way to hear straight from the senior administrator's mouths what they're thinking.  The kick-off speaches were nifty, and the Q&A inspired me to take notes it was so good.

a few highlights from the Q&A session;

• They would like granular maps that are "better than what we see today" -- FCC
• FCC has to come up with a Rural broadband strategy by the end of MAY (so go get your comments put together)
• Applications consolidated across multiple providers (and across both RUS and NTIA) are a Good Thing
• Encouraged people to think about how to coordinate across other stimulus programs (Smart Grid, transportation, etc.) to avoid "digging the same trench twice"
• "Under served areas" hasn't been defined yet -- they're looking for comments on that
• Initial thought is to distribute the money in 3 equal rounds, about 6 months apart, across all types of applicants in each round
• They're not sure what the impact of the "buy America" provisions of the bill will be on equipment selection
• They haven't established "floor" or "ceiling" amounts on the grants yet -- looking for consultation on that
• The FCC chose to duck a question about opening up new bandwidth for broadband
• Hmm.  Question of how States are going to be consulted was greeted with kindof a mushy answer.
• They did NOT require that maps be in place (to certify under-served/un-served areas) before rolling forward with grants
• In answering a question about whether they favor copper/wireless/fiber there was a lot of talk about "investment for the future" (hint hint)
• New York State (deputy CIO) asked whether cash-strapped states/organizations can make in-kind contributions -- answer, we'd like to hear about that
• They're looking for comments on criteria to measure the effectiveness of individual grants as well as the overall programs
• RUS grants can go to some urban areas (a loosening of the strictly-rural requirements of previous programs), and the FCC is very interested in exploring this issue while they develop the national broadband plan -- so urban-users aren't to be left out in the cold
• They want to consult with the States -- and they want the States to tell them who they should be consulting with (since roles vary by state).
• A Washington-state connected communities (demand-generation project) person asked about replacing funds that were removed from their state's budget -- answer, "good idea"
• A followup question -- what does "at least" mean with regard to demand-side and community-computing projects -- answer, they'll grant at least that much money, maybe more, depends on how many good applications come in
• Sole proprietorships may be elegible for RUS grants (this would be a change from current practice)

Wow.  Great meeting -- I love the archived-stream approach.  It's lovely to be able to sit at my desk and get the conversation live and unedited.  I encourage all of you to pay attention to that NTIA site and keep an eye out for their "comments" system (it's not up yet, but on the way).   Another chance to SHOW UP peepul -- follow along, build your case, submit your comments.  I really can't recommend highly enough that you watch this stream, and the ones that will follow.

I'm happy to report that we reversed our decision and decided at the last meeting to go ahead and forward the shovel-ready list of projects.  The list got transmitted on March 3rd.  I can't find it on the task-force site, so here's a copy of the file that was transmitted to the legislators who requested it.

Click HERE for the file

Bill Colemand and Ann Treacy have kicked off a new gang -- The Minnesota Broadband Coalition.  I'm a member.  Here's our credo;

We are an ad hoc group of citizens, businesses and organizations that believes that more, bigger, better broadband is needed to ensure Minnesota’s and our own future.

I love tools.  Any kind.  Woodworking, welding, software, hardware, anything.  So here's a completely nifty data visualization tool that Al Essa (MNSCU) turned me on to.  I selected the indicators and the tool took over from there.

I decided to lay out a horse race between the US and the rest of the world when it comes to broadband.  I put Infant Mortality on the vertical scale to form the "lanes" that the countries would run in.  Number of subscribers per 100 people is the horizontal axis.  The size of the dot represents total subscribers in the country.

Hit the "play" button on the lower left to watch the horse-race unfold;

Click HERE for the cool chart.

Enjoy.  And realize that you can fiddle with all the parameters and figure out your own version of this chart.  Once you get a flavor you like, go off to a URL-shortening site like IS.GD to "save" your map and share it with others.  If your map is broadband related, post it in the comments.