Cynthia over at IP Democracy has a good summary of the current state of SF’s municipal Wi-Fi project. The current deal proposes that Earthlink and Google will have exclusive rights to build and support a new wireless network.
On the uspide, I am glad that the city is not trying to build its own network, which would be an underperforming, wasteful boondoggle. Mayor Newsom agrees:
But Newsom rejected alternatives, saying San Francisco has neither the expertise nor the money to spare.
"I'm not going to take $10 million from poor people to pay for something that a private company has offered to pay for," he added, suggesting money for a system owned or part-owned by city government would take money from social programs.
However, granting exclusive rights to Earthlink/Google raises problems of its own, as Cynthia points out:
Aside from limiting competition due to EarthLink’s control of the unlicensed radio bands, not to mention Google’s role as sole ISP, the deal won’t even help the city’s low-income residents, who might have to shell out $80 to $200 for [home equipment] plus pay $21.95/month for relatively low-speed broadband service
I’ve said before that it’s not even clear there is a verifiable demand for this, which is to say customers who will pay for the network in such a way that supports itself. I also think it’s far from clear that Wi-Fi is the best technological choice (with WiMax on the horizon) or that blanket coverage of the city is a good allocation of resources.
For example, why would we blanket every residential neighborhood with Wi-Fi? I can buy DSL or cable for Internet access, and I doubt that a Wi-Fi antenna sitting down the block will offer anything that’s as reliable or fast. Plus, I can buy a 3G wireless plan for Verizon or Sprint if I need the mobility. So exactly what gap is being filled by muni Wi-Fi, at the end of the day?
The only argument I can see is for true public spaces, which is to say, the city might consider Wi-Fi as part of its parks and libraries budgets. Those are places that residents actually expect municipal services. And if coffee shops and shopping malls want it, those businesses can do it themsleves. Many already do, of course.
Seems to me the city should simply be non-discriminatory and let any company that wants to come in and build a network to do so, with the same rules applying to all comers. It would obviate the politics and offer a true test of the viability of municipal Wi-Fi.
Comments