If there is something to come next -- speaking as an outsider -- you probably need someone who sees this as an imperative and will work tirelessly to get it done. These projects are never easy, but it seems like things have gotten harder for y’all.

At a July 2009 City Council work session, items 1 through 4 above were completed or closed. It was reported that Northfield had greater opportunities to fund a FTTP network by pursuing a low interest loan rather than applying for federal stimulus dollars. Staff was asked to research alternative financing options and report back to Council. This discussion item will update the Council on the financing options that were researched.

I have heard a couple of different predictions, but that is the main one -- and one that I think is inevitable. Just not sure what the timeline is.

Some have talked about just delivering a lot of bandwidth to the home via a network rather than formally providing channels and phone service because users can get a lot of content already over the net (between Hulu and MLB.com). But I think that is premature now.

Television over fiber is basically an unlimited number of channels, which leads one to think we’ll see URL like “channels” rather than clicking from channels 00001 to 99999.

Did they appoint a workgroup? It sounds like it but I thought I’d ask in case I missed something.

Thanks!

In most of the networks with which I am familiar, the city, or utility, provides the network services. However, times are a little different now. Monticello would have partnered would HBC if the lawsuit didn’t drag them down.

Powell, Wyoming, has a unique partnership with a local provider, but I don’t know that it is old enough to yet draw conclusions from it.

Danville, VA, owns the network but services are provided by others, including incumbents…I think. However, this is not a citywide project yet. It is a Design Nine -- Andrew Cohill -- project if you want to look more deeply into it.

Partners were less important when anyone could get into the NCTC to get fair contracts on television content. Now that it is more difficult, partners that have access to those contracts are good to have. Television may be disappearing according to most, but it will drive enough revenue in the near future that it cannot just be left out of a FTTH network.

However, I have also heard that there are IPTV aggregators that are reasonable now so I may be too hasty in encouraging a partner for those reasons. But I think these are things that need to be considered as primary motivations for partnerships.

Getting your own contracts for television content is always possible, but the costs are high and the frustration is even higher.

At Monday’s Council mtg, Councilor Jim Pokorney made a good point, that if we ARE able to get stimulus money to pay for 80% of the infrastructure costs, then we might NOT want an ownership partner.

Regarding North St. Paul, they view FTTH as a lifeline for the future of the community. They are getting feedback from the community regarding how to finance the network.

I would be surprised if they do not go after stimulus money, but I not expect them to stop if they don’t get the stimulus money.

They recognize that they do not show up on the map for the their multi-state incumbent providers (except when they have a referendum) and want to ensure the community has excellent access to the networks of the future.

Whether enough people from North St. Paul agree and are motivated to vote yes on a future network remains to be determined.

It is not so different from communities 110 years ago that had to vote on whether to electrify. The costs are high and the break-even point takes a long time. And you can count on being outspent at least 10-1 by those who say you will fail.

It is not an easy path, but one that few regret -- as I learned from speaking to people from Reedsburg, Wisconsin; Burlington, Vermont; even Ashland, OR -- where they had several problems and ran up debt but have still greatly increased the number of small independent businesses and forced incumbents to upgrade their plant to provide better services at lower prices.

I’ve contacted Rick. I will follow up with Blake, Jody and Kathy at our meeting this afternoon.

Thanks for the tip.

Lois Quam leaves Piper Jaffray to start incubator

Quam said Tysvar will help facilitate
the transfer of clean technology
between Minnesota and Norway, which
has a large sovereign wealth fund and
expertise in renewable energy. She
also will help start-ups build a
diversified business model to better
withstand economic cycles.

I have Charter’s 20mbps down/5 up service for $60/month.

The ubiquity of free wi-fi, esp. in downtown establishments, is actually pretty amazing.

I think it would help for the Chamber, the NDDC, and the City to promote what we have already.

I see your links to:

St. Paul Community Fiber Network
FiberNet Monticello

It’ll be good for us to keep an eye on those.

We have pretty good diversity of slow broadband here in Northfield: Charter Cable, Qwest DSL, St. Olaf Telephone Co (fiber and DSL), two high-speed wi-fi providers. And Jaguar Communications is installing FTTP in rural areas south of Northfield.

And of course, the Colleges have their own Internet II backbone that runs right through the middle of downtown Northfield… but only the public library taps into that.

It’s a mere 123 pages (PDF): CCG’s FTTP (Fiber To The Premise) Feasibility Study report

Second – Steward says the city should focus on “essential services,” implying that broadband isn’t essential. To me, broadband is essential. It’s definitely essential to attract new businesses, to prepare for future healthcare applications and for the schools.

The stimulus funding is a great opportunity to dive into a plan – and with the feasibility study in hand, Northfield is poised to be an attractive candidate for funds.

I ran into EDA President Rick Estenson on the sidewalk late last week. We were both racing for meetings in opposite directions so time was limited.

However, he gave me about a thirty second update from his perspective on Northfield’s efforts in this area, including the opportunities, challenges and issues. We agreed to chat more at a future time. Perhaps you might be interested too.

Personally, I’m looking for an incremental, and achievable, step that we might take to strengthen Northfield’s economic competitiveness within the region.

One may find many or few similarities to North St. Paul -- I don’t know what the cable situation is in Northfield -- cable offers the fastest speeds aside from fiber and cable companies were the main opponents in North St. Paul.

If people in Northfield want to have the best broadband in Minnesota- they will have to work for it. Incumbents and other anti-government groups will fight hard against anything that the local government is involved in because they don’t want competition. Monticello had to work at it -- they overwhelmingly passed a referendum (also used CCG consulting, btw) -- but they had a vibrant community group and engaged local government pushing hard for it. Of course, they are now locked in a legal battle because their incumbent realized they could delay the project for years for a few million in legal fees.

Most relevant is probably Ross’ post from Aug. 2008, since that has 45+ comments attached to it, including many from last month:

Should Fiber Optic Network be Public Infrastructure?

I’ve fine with discussion continuing there or here.

I see you blogged about PolarNet the day of the election in Feb:

PolarNet vote on FTTH in North St Paul
http://blandinonbroadband.org/2009/02/24/polarnet-vote-on-ftth-in-north-st-paul/

Do you have any reaction to MinnPost’s Tom Steward’s criticism of the plan
http://www.minnpost.com/community_voices/2009/02/23/6892/polarnet_more_risk_than_reward_and_should_government_even_be_involved