At MuniNetworks, we often focus on access to the Internet, but the impact of telecommunication policy extends beyond data. In 2016, families might finally see reasonable prices for phone calls to incarcerated loved ones.

Last October, the FCC voted to close loopholes and cap rates for Inmate Calling Service providers in jails and prisons across the nation. While incarcerated, folks couldn’t choose their long-distance service provider, and the prices these Inmate Calling Service providers demanded could reach up to $14 a minute. Although the FCC had some regulations in place, they did little to prevent add-on fees and service charges. 

These charges proved absurdly expensive for low-income people, disproportionately impacting people of color. As if that wasn’t bad enough, people with disabilities found that the Telecommunications Relay Service (which enables people with hearing or speech disabilities to use the phone) was sometimes considered an add-on. The FCC's decision puts a stop to any extra charge for this necessary service. 

We’ve covered the monopoly power that these providers have over incarcerated folks for some time. In Community Broadband Bits Episode 20, Chris spoke about prison phone justice in more detail with Amalia Deloney of the Media Action Grassroots Network and the Center for Media Justice. Deloney explained the many ways Inmate Calling Service providers exploit incarcerated people and the families.

The Pioneer Press published this op-ed about Minnesota high speed Internet access and availability on December 3, 2015. 

Christopher Mitchell: Competition and community savings

Minnesota has just one more month to achieve its goal of high speed Internet access available to every resident and local business. In 2010, the Legislature set a 2015 goal for universal Internet access at speeds just under the current federal broadband definition. But the state never really committed to anything more than a token effort and will fall far short.

Even for those of us living in metro areas that have comparatively high speed access, we don't have a real choice in providers and most of us lack access to next-generation gigabit speeds.

The big cable and telephone companies excel at restricting competition by manipulating markets, state and federal government policy, and other means. This is why so many local governments across the nation are themselves expanding Internet infrastructure: to ensure local businesses and residents can access affordable next-generation services and create a real choice. We should be encouraging these local approaches.

The Institute for Local Self-Reliance is tracking more than 450 communities where local governments are expanding choices with direct investments in networks. Just this month, some 50 communities in Colorado and two in Iowa voted to move forward with plans for their own networks or partnerships.

Here in Minnesota, we have seen a variety of successful approaches. Eagan's modest network attracted a data center.

Dakota County has saved itself millions of dollars by placing conduit for fiber in the ground at very low cost as part of other projects. Now it can use that to help local companies to compete with the big cable and telephone companies.

Scott County's fiber network has helped create more than 1,000 jobs and tremendously improved access in area schools. In Sibley County and part of Renville, cities and townships joined together to help launch a new cooperative, RS Fiber, which shows tremendous promise. Cooperatives, which are effectively community-owned as well, offer some of the best connectivity in rural regions of the state.

The Salt Lake Tribune published this op-ed championing local investment in Internet infrastructure on December 11, 2015.

Op-ed: Spanish Fork’s success shows municipal Internet networks work

By Christopher Mitchell

For nearly 10 years, large telephone and cable companies have claimed municipal Internet networks are so risky that local government authority should be restricted. But after 15 years of experience, we can only conclude that the cure is worse than the disease.

Utah has three municipal networks, where local governments invested in Internet infrastructure to provide choices in a monopolistic environment. But only two of those networks are regularly discussed and used as examples of why local governments shouldn't be in this business: iProvo and UTOPIA, which were not able to meet their financial targets.

The network missing from the conversation is Spanish Fork Community Network, which has just finished paying off its debt and has generated millions of dollars in surplus revenue for the community. The network is now upgrading from community cable to community gigabit fiber optics.

Of the over 450 municipal networks tracked by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, Spanish Fork's experience is above average. The vast majority of municipal networks deliver benefits well in excess of costs and do not require subsidies to operate.

It may come as a surprise, but iProvo and Spanish Fork are nearly twins, separated at birth and raised in dramatically different environments. Both were conceived at the same time — the same consultant did the feasibility study for each. But Spanish Fork, being smaller and more nimble, was able to move forward before Utah's Legislature weighed in to restrict local decision-making.

Comcast and the predecessor to CenturyLink crafted the legislation, which was revealed in a brilliant 2011 BusinessWeek article aptly entitled "Pssst … Wanna Buy a Law?" by Brendan Greeley and Alison Fitzgerald.

Since then, any new Utah municipal network has been subject to numerous requirements unlike anything private providers face, including a de facto requirement to use a wholesale-only arrangement.

Lake Oswego, Oregon, was pegged as a potential target for Google Fiber in 2014 but this town of 35,000 may not wait for the tech giant to bring fast, affordable, reliable connectivity. They may just do it themselves.

In order to get more information about municipal fiber networks, our Chris Mitchell visited during an October City Council meeting at the request of community leaders. The Lake Oswego Review covered the meeting.

According to the Review, the northwest community issued an RFP in June and received two responses. City leaders are still pondering the responses and feelings are mixed over whether or not to make the investment.

City Manager Scott Lazenby told the Council:

Just getting this network would put Lake Oswego on the map…I think increasing that level of service, especially for the demographics we have here — highly educated, many tech-oriented folks in our community — that would be a real service to make available.

Chris pointed out that the area is ripe with a number of high-tech companies and other entities that will find a fiber network attractive. “Not everyone has that regional connectivity that you have here,” he told the Council.

He also asked them to consider all the long term possibilities if Google does eventually enter into the market in Lake Oswego:

“When I think about relying on Google, if Google decides to get out of this business, the community has no say about who takes it over,” he said.

After discussion, the Council voted to negotiate an agreement with one of the RFP respondents for further review, contingent on a market study.

To view Chris's entire presentation to the Lake Oswego City Council, watch the video below: 

Over the past 12 months:

• Membership has grown from 32 communities to 121
• Population represented by Next Century Cities has climbed from 6.5 million to 23.9 million
• Member states have increased from 19 to 33

The organization has been recognized by the White House, testified before Congress, and has been instrumental in launching a number of awards. The organization has developed resources and organized events to assemble members who want to share innovative ideas. Learn more about their accomplishments at the blog.

We look forward to another year of working with Next Century Cities toward the goal of fast, affordable, reliable Internet access for all.

Image courtesy of tiverylucky at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

At a September conference in Lexington, Kentucky, Next Century Cities (NCC) hosted an influential and diverse group of leaders from the municipal broadband arena to share their experiences as leaders in community broadband. Four audio recordings, which you can find on NCC’s website, include panel discussions on a variety of issues surrounding the topic of financing for next generation broadband.

Recording #1: “Lexington Mayor Jim Gray and the Kentucky Wired Story” and Panel Discussion “Federal Support for Broadband Projects” 

The first recording begins with Lexington Mayor Gray and the city’s Chief Information Officer as they discuss their ongoing efforts to make Lexington a gigabit city. These efforts are part of a broader initiative also discussed on building a statewide 3,000 mile fiber optic ring. Several Kentucky government leaders make remarks about the project, called Kentucky Wired, including their thoughts about the public-private partnership model that is helping make the project possible.

In the second part of the recording, former Rural Utilities Service Administrator and current Vice Chair of Broadband Communities Hilda Legg, leads a panel of several experts examining funding supports and offering recommendations and next steps for communities.

Listen to the audio here.

Recording #2: “Achieving the Last Mile”

Our own Christopher Mitchell, the Director of the Community Broadband Networks Initiative at ILSR and the Policy Director for Next Century Cities, moderates this panel that includes officials who have led municipal broadband initiatives in their communities. These officials share some of the challenges they have faced and solutions they discovered in their efforts to finance last mile infrastructure.

Recording #3: “Exploring Options and Approaches for Broadband Financing”

On September 28th, Christopher participated in the Digital New England regional broadband summit in Portland, Maine sponsored by Next Century Cities and the NTIA (National Telecommunications and Information Administration). In the morning, he moderated a panel focusing on regional approaches to improve Internet access, and in the afternoon he moderated a panel that included incumbent providers on their preferences for partnerships.

If you were unable to attend the event or did not see the live stream, Next Century Cities has released a video playlist of the two day long event. Christopher can be found moderating the morning panel in the main room during part three. The full agenda is available online.

The Roanoke Daily Herald published this op-ed about local government action for broadband networks on September 25, 2015. We were responding to an earlier Op-Ed, available here. Christopher Mitchell wrote the following op-ed.

Local governments should make broadband choices

Community broadband must be a local choice, a guest columnist writes.

It is stunning any legislator can look at the constituents they serve in rural North Carolina and think, “‘These people don’t need the same high quality Internet access now being delivered in Charlotte and the Triangle. They should be happy with whatever cable and telephone companies offer.”

But that’s just what I think Representatives Jason Saine and Michael Wray are implying in their recent opinion piece on community broadband networks.

By supporting U.S. Sen. Thom Tillis’ legislation to remove local authority for building broadband networks, the two lawmakers are siding with big cable and telephone firms over their own communities.

It is hardly a secret that Time Warner Cable, AT&T, CenturyLink and others are investing too little in rural communities. The majority of residents and local businesses in North Carolina have no real choice today and can expect their bills to go up tomorrow.

Areas served by coops or locally-rooted companies are more likely to see upgrades because they are accountable to the community in ways that national firms are not. Local firms are more willing to invest in better networks and keep prices low because they live in the community.

North Carolina communities stuck with no broadband or slow DSL and cable at best are disadvantaged in economic development and property values. This is why hundreds of local governments have already invested in fiber optic networks — with remarkable success.

Our own Christopher Mitchell recently participated in a debate hosted by the Federalist Society. You can now listen to the debate at the Federalist Society website. We think it offers an intelligent airing of different points of view.

Chris, who is also Policy Director at Next Century Cities, disscussed the role of municipal networks in improving competition, reveiwed reguatory issues, and debated the anticipated legal outcome of February's FCC decision on local authority in Tennessee and North Carolina. He squared off against Charles M. Davidson, Director of the Advanced Communications Law and Policy Institute at New York Law School, and Randolph J. May, President of the Free State Foundation. Both organizations have spoken out against community broadband networks.

Rachel M. Bender, Senior Policy Director of Mobile Future, moderated.