The failure of policy and leadership at the federal level in addressing the digital divide was ever more clearly exposed as Covid-19 restrictions were put into place last spring. And, as the pandemic continues to rage, daunting connectivity challenges remain. 

Yes, the Connect America Fund (CAF) II program has doled out over $11 billion since 2015 in subsidies to the big telcos like AT&T, CenturyLink, Frontier, Windstream, and Consolidated ostensibly to upgrade rural broadband to speeds of at least 10/1 Megabits per second (Mbps). But, as Doug Dawson, president of CCG Consulting notes, it’s been a massive subsidy failure given that “even in 2015, it was ludicrous to spend money to build 10/1 Mbps broadband” – the same year the FCC defined broadband as 25/3 Mbps, which means “the FCC was investing in new Internet infrastructure in 2015 that didn’t qualify as broadband at the time of the award of funding.”

And there is reason to doubt that those subsidized upgrades were even completed, even as the FCC just extended the CAF II program for a seventh year.

So as states — and in many instances, local municipalities — step into the breach, the National Governors Association has released a new report that outlines a list of strategies governors can use to increase broadband access in underserved communities. 

Published just before Thanksgiving, the report first lays out the challenge:

According to the FCC, in 2018, at least 18.3 million people lacked access to fixed broadband in the United States that meets minimum [I]nternet access speed of 25/3. 1 Of those 18.3 million people, representing 6 percent of the total population, 14 million live in rural areas and 1 million live on Tribal lands, which amounts to 22 percent and 28 percent of those respective geographic populations [even as] studies have claimed that the FCC data is undercounting the number of people in the U.S. without fixed broadband access, and that the total may be as high as 42 million people.

I have been tracking from afar local grassroots efforts in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to start a municipal broadband network for years. I've visited them locally and spoken to various people from citizens to elected officials about the different options. The following are my observations. I'm not trying to channel their thoughts on how to move forward.

Cambridge is a high-tech city with nearly ubiquitous coverage from Comcast, delivering more or less the same services they offer to millions of homes — which is too say mostly reliable and high-cost Internet access (that will be still higher cost next year and the next after that). In the case of Comcast, it comes with crippled upload speeds compared to fast download capacity. Customer service is . . . well, you do your best to never have to use it.

But with MIT and Harvard within its confines, many in Cambridge are well aware that Internet access can get so much better and not be mediated by a company willing to spend millions in D.C. to preserve its right to set up tollbooths for certain kinds of content if they so choose.

However, Cambridge is remarkably similar to Palo Alto, which is also home to high tech households that mostly use Comcast cable and sometimes have the option of AT&T fiber. And in both instances, there is a strong case for some kind of municipal network that would create more local Internet choice. Both appear to have significant support in the community for a public option. But both also have city staff that have decided to prevent any meaningful investment.

They have run into the challenge that Seattle also wrestled with. These high profile cities have refused to consider creative, incremental, and targeted efforts. Instead, they have focused almost entirely on the costs of duplicating Chattanooga or Wilson, where the community built the entire citywide at once with debt-financed capital.

In Cambridge, the city council is rebelling after having been stymied by a city manager that has successful resisted efforts to study municipal broadband for years.

New York City has been looking for a way to address Internet access disparities - quality, pricing, and infrastructure investment - for years. Their New York City Internet Master Plan from the Mayor's Office of the Chief Technology Officer, released today, recognizes that the current market solution has failed "The Big Apple" and its residents. In order to move forward and to extend broadband to all New Yorkers, the city will take a more active role, which will include open access fiber optic infrastructure and nurturing private sector investment.

Read the New York City Internet Master Plan here.

The Market Failure

The highly-anticipated report, which we hope to cover more in-depth after we've had more time to dig deeper into its 88 pages, describes the breadth of the problem and digs into why New York's Internet access availability is fraught with so much disparity. Other urban centers that struggle with similar digital disparities can use this groundbreaking approach as a foundation to study their own communities and search for a way to bring broadband to everyone.

From the Executive Summary:

The private market has failed to deliver the Internet in a way that works for all New Yorkers. Citywide, 29 percent of households do not have a broadband subscription at home. The same percentage of households are without a mobile broadband connection. The substantial overlap between these under-connected populations means that 18 percent of residents – more than 1.5 million New Yorkers – have neither a mobile connection nor a home broadband connection.

The report notes that the millions of New Yorkers who are not connected also tend to be those from lower-income households who don't have broadband at home. Competition tends to be only in high-density neighborhoods with high income households, which needs to change. The report accentuates the correlation between income levels and disparities in broadband service with striking maps.

On November 15th, the City of New York announced that it was looking for ideas to bring high-quality connectivity to every resident and business. Their goal is to get every one connected by 2025; they’re starting with a Request for Information (RFI) to solicit ideas for potential strategies and partnerships. Responses are due January 19th.

The Big Apple’s effort comes on the heels of San Francisco’s decision to invest in municipal broadband to connect the entire city. New York’s RFI states that they will use all their assets — from rooftop to, to poles, to organizational resources — to move their efforts along so New Yorkers can enjoy fast, affordable, reliable connectivity. City leaders want to exhaust all avenues and are encouraging both public and private sectors to become involved in the initiative.

The Vision

In their vision, New York City leaders have identified five goals they wish to achieve through better broadband infrastructure:

Promote competition in the residential and commercial broadband markets.

Provide high-speed residential Internet service for low-income communities currently without service.

Increase investment in broadband corridors to reach high-growth business districts, with a focus on outer-borough neighborhoods.

Promote seamless user experience across public networks to create high speed access across the boroughs.

Explore innovative ways to provide high-speed Internet to homes, businesses, and the public.

At this point, they’re open to any technology or business model that can achieve these goals and is future proof.

Resources

This is the transcript for episode 254 of the Community Broadband Bits Podcast. Christopher Mitchell sits down with Joshua Breitbart, the Senior Advisor for Broadband to the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of New York City. Listen to this episode here.

Joshua Breitbart: From New York City, I think that we are maybe the first city to begin to look at how we can take responsibility for the space of the Internet itself.

Lisa Gonzalez: This is episode 254 of the Community Broadband Bits podcast from the Institute for Local Self-Reliance. I'm Lisa Gonzalez. Finding ways for lower income individuals and families to obtain high quality Internet access is a problem in most urban areas. As Internet access becomes more central to our lives for everyday tasks, solving that problem becomes more immediate. In New York City the Queensbridge Connected project is aiming to solve that problem by working with a private sector partner and involving the community. This initiative will bring high-speed Wi-Fi to residents of Queensbridge Housing, which is part of the New York City Public Housing Authority. In this interview, Christopher talks with Joshua Breitbart who works for New York City. Joshua describes how the project has progressed, how they view the Queensbridge Connected project as a model of other parts of the city, and shares some of the lessons learned that have helped guide the project. Now here's Christopher and Joshua Breitbart talking about New York City's Queensbridge Connected initiative.

Christopher Mitchell: Welcome to another edition of the Community Broadband Bits podcast. I'm Chris Mitchell, still in my hotel room, talking with another person from the Broadband Community Summit down here in Dallas, 2017. Welcome to the show, Joshua Breitbart. Senior advisor for Broadband to the CTO of New York City.

Joshua Breitbart: Hello, Chris. Good to be here.

As a major metropolitan community, New York City has found a way to establish a link between connectivity and real estate for potential commercial tenants. 

WiredNYC, a certification program launched in 2013, provides broadband ratings for office buildings in the city. WiredNYC has been renamed WiredScore and now operates across the United States, in partnership with local governments. The program provides a simple survey online at WiredScore.com that analyzes a variety of factors and provides a rating based on:

Building Connectivity: The number of internet service providers, the quality and speed of connections, and the access to provider cabling in the building...

Infrastructure: Factors specific to the building's physical internet infrastructure (i.e., number of entry points, designated utility spaces, and risers)...

Readiness: How ready a building is to improve its connectivity... 

The survey provides feedback based on the survey results and offers a preliminary rating of "Certified," "Silver," "Gold," or "Platinum." In order to complete the certification, the City will send an engineer to the building to verify the survey results. WiredNYC also provides advice for building owners and landlords who have taken the survey but whose structures do not meet the minimum standards for certification or who want to take steps to achieve a higher standard of certification.

Landlords can use Wired Certification to market their building to potential tenants. Their buildings appear on WiredScore.com website and they receive similar benefits.

A March report from the Vertical Systems Group concluded that fiber is now present in approximately 42.5 percent of U.S. commercial buildings. Ten years ago that figure was only 10.9 percent. Fast, affordable, reliable connectivity is quickly becoming an integral component of the real estate market. Programs like WiredNYC will allow entrepeneurs and established businesses find the types of connections that suit their needs.

Update: We have updated the story because WiredNYC expanded to be WiredScore and works with all manner of commercial buildings.

There are probably more mesh Wi-Fi networks operating in the U.S. than most of us realize. They require only one hard-wired connection to the Internet and there are many industrious, tech minded people out there who have the skills to set up this self-healing technology, though they are still working out the kinks.

A mesh network allows devices to engage each other without going through a central point. If I want to use my cell phone to call the cell phone of someone standing 10 feet away from me, the signal may travel thousands of times farther than it would have to because a cell phone company wants to track minutes, collect data, and more. In a mesh network, the two devices would just talk to each other without intermediation. 

A recent Technical.ly article, explores a dozen communities that are using the technology to serve local residents.

The article provides some basic info on these local mesh networks:

• Redhook Wifi, Brooklyn
• Bamboowifi, Philadelphia
• SMesh, Baltimore
• Meta Mesh, Pittsburgh
• Digital Stewards, Detroit
• NYCWireless, New York City
• Personal Telco, Portland, Oregon
• MileMesh, Hoboken, N.J.
• Wasabinet, St. Louis
• TFA Wireless, Houston
• Meshnet Project, Seattle
• La Canada Wireless Association (LCWA, Santa Fe)

We have reported on mesh networks in Poulsbo, Washington, and Ponca City, Oklahoma. An attractive feature for those communities was the ability to expand the network as needed with modest investment. As Technical.ly reports:

If you are still contemplating whether or not to trek to New York City on March 2nd and 3rd for Freedom to Connect 2015, now is the time to take action. Tickets are going fast and seats are limited. ATTENDANCE IS BY REGISTRATION ONLY and this year the event is hot!

Register online through EventBrite.com.

A working agenda has just been posted. An email from David Isenberg, who tirelessly plans and promotes the event every year, described some of the issues to be discussed:

The aspects of the Internet's protocol suite that make it the success it has become

The all-fronts attack on the Internet by the National Security Agency

How community controlled networks, especially the fiber to the home networks being built by communities such as Chattanooga TN and Wilson NC, as well as alternative networks being built by Google, Ting and others, are challenging incumbent telcos and cablecos

Title II as the centerpiece of the FCC Open Internet Report and Order

The agenda will continue to develop as planning progresses, so be sure to revisit.

Guest speakers include:

• Chris Mitchell from ILSR and MuniNetworks.org
• Susan Crawford, Cardozo Law School
• Harold Feld, Public Knowledge
• Jim Baller, Baller Herbst Stokes & Lide
• Deb Socia, Next Century Cities
• Gigi Sohn, FCC
• Tim Wu, Columbia Law School

...and many, many others.