Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 86 posts

Re: Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

#11

Post by ourmandave »

thelastgallon wrote: post #3

> despite billions in tax breaks, regulatory favors, and subsidies, companies like AT&T have long refused to upgrade low-income and minority Cleveland neighborhoods to fiber. There is a very easy solution to this. Electric utilities should be required to lay fiber along with electric. They can choose to offer internet (better) or offer fiber with a choice of carriers. EPB in Chattanooga has been providing fiber to ho…

Given the way things go, there'll be a line item charge on every bill:

Connection to AT&T backbone surcharge..............................$39.99

Re: Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

#12

Post by mfer »

zrail wrote: post #6
thelastgallon wrote: post #3

> despite billions in tax breaks, regulatory favors, and subsidies, companies like AT&T have long refused to upgrade low-income and minority Cleveland neighborhoods to fiber. There is a very easy solution to this. Electric utilities should be required to lay fiber along with electric. They can choose to offer internet (better) or offer fiber with a choice of carriers. EPB in Chattanooga has been providing fiber to ho…

If the municipality owns the poles and the power company this is comparatively easier. In places that own both, like Traverse City in Michigan, Chattanooga TN, or Longmont CO, this model can be incredibly effective. The problem, at least in my part of the world (Michigan) is that most municipalities do not own the poles or the power company. The power company is instead a large publicly traded corporation, albeit wit…

In Michigan only telecommunications companies, power companies, cable companies, and municipalities can be on the poles. So, an Internet only company is excluded.

Michigan also has one of the most unique laws here. A municipality needs to put out an RFP to build the broadband network. If it gets three or more qualified bids it cannot proceed.

Re: Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

#13

Post by mfer »

chasd00 wrote: post #10
zrail wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the municipality owns the poles and the power company this is comparatively easier. In places that own both, like Traverse City in Michigan, Chattanooga TN, or Longmont CO, this model can be incredibly effective. The problem, at least in my part of the world (Michigan) is that most municipalities do not own the poles or the power company. The power company is instead a large publicly traded corporation, albeit wit…

isn't "pole ownership" and access to those poles what doomed google fiber? In some cases it's easy to run fiber yourself in other cases it's completely impossible.

I would suspect access more than ownership. Lots of places legally limit access and Internet companies are excluded.

Re: Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

#14

Post by jshier »

mfer wrote: post #12
zrail wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the municipality owns the poles and the power company this is comparatively easier. In places that own both, like Traverse City in Michigan, Chattanooga TN, or Longmont CO, this model can be incredibly effective. The problem, at least in my part of the world (Michigan) is that most municipalities do not own the poles or the power company. The power company is instead a large publicly traded corporation, albeit wit…

In Michigan only telecommunications companies, power companies, cable companies, and municipalities can be on the poles. So, an Internet only company is excluded. Michigan also has one of the most unique laws here. A municipality needs to put out an RFP to build the broadband network. If it gets three or more qualified bids it cannot proceed.

Sorry, but if it gets more bids it can't proceed? What?

Re: Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

#16

Post by jrgifford »

It'll be interesting to see if they can do this better than previous attempts. I remember in 2009 when OneCommunity tried[1], 2014 when OneCommunity launched everstream, their for-profit arm (and didn't change much)[2], or the 2018 Old Brooklyn/Ward 13 project[3].

Somewhere in there, there was an initiative (probably 2009 or so?) that included public wifi in Cleveland Heights along much of Cedar Road, where One Community had a wifi SSID "OneCommunityPublic" (or something similar). That got shut down quickly.

[1] https://www.cleveland.com/business/2009/07/onecommunity_seek...

[2] https://everstream.net/press-releases/onecommunity-launches-...

[3] https://connectyourcommunity.org/cdjc-program-four-points/fr...

Re: Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

#17

Post by zrail »

jshier wrote: post #14
mfer wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Michigan only telecommunications companies, power companies, cable companies, and municipalities can be on the poles. So, an Internet only company is excluded. Michigan also has one of the most unique laws here. A municipality needs to put out an RFP to build the broadband network. If it gets three or more qualified bids it cannot proceed.

Sorry, but if it gets more bids it can't proceed? What?

Yep. It's messed up.

Re: Cleveland launches plan to provide cheap broadband

#19

Post by tw04 »

Spivak wrote: post #9
bombcar wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the obvious solution, so of course it won't be done. I now have four separate companies' fiber running through my property, of which I am connected to only one, but I could switch to two others anytime I wanted to, and then they'd run the "last connection" to my house. It's kinda silly. (The fourth is a business line, which I could connect to but that involves more work as it is older.)

I'm not saying it's right but I'm predicting the argument against will be that it will increase the cost of running electric which you think would be "who cares" but homeowners end up footing that bill and are more let's say more price-sensitive than governments. It's crazy we still haven't won the fight of "if you build a house the literally state controlled electric company has to hook you up" but here we are.

Electric companies already run fiber with every new power line in most places. They simply use it as dark fiber for internal purposes. The cost to string a couple more strands for public use would be a rounding error for them.
Post reply on HN