Local leaders discuss benefits of municipal broadbandDate: 5/3/2021 WESTERN MASS. – Local leaders from several Western Massachusetts communities gathered to discuss the creation and benefits of municipal broadband during a virtual forum.
Springfield City Councilor Jesse Lederman explained the group’s discussion surrounding municipal broadband began last year when larger companies began implementing data caps and charging additional fees for data use past the implemented cap. He said access to the internet had become imperative throughout the pandemic and the group went on to “pass identical resolutions in each of our communities in opposition of arbitrary data caps.” Now that companies had announced their decision to postpone implementing data caps for all users, Lederman said that instead the group had turned to assessing municipal internet options within their communities.
“We share a collective belief that in this day and age the internet is an essential utility and that proper protections and options need to be in place to ensure affordable, fair, capable and equitable access for all of our constituents,” he said.
Other local elected officials in attendance for the discussion were Holyoke City Councilor and Mayoral Candidate Rebecca Lisi, West Springfield City Councilor Sean Powers, Northampton City Councilor Gina-Louise Sciarra, Northampton City Councilor Bill Dwight and Agawam City Councilor Rosemary Sandlin. Panelists for the discussion included Catrin Ferriter from Westfield Gas and Electric Whip City Fiber, Sean Fitzgerald from South Hadley Light and Power Fibersonic, Timothy Paul from OmniPoint Technologies and Thomas Flaherty from Westfield Gas and Electric Whip City Fiber.
The panelists were asked a series of questions about fiber internet, beginning with what exactly fiber internet was. All panelists explained that fiber was glass rather than the traditional copper wires allowing for faster internet. Fitzgerald said fiber internet was “considered the gold standard of broadband now.” Paul went on to say that the ability to control price was attractive, while Ferriter added that the ability to increase bandwidth would allow to accommodate the needs of homes.
Sciarra then asked what the steps were to establishing municipal fiber options in communities. Fitzgerald said the biggest obstacle he had faced was clearing the hurdle of risk. He said the take rate, or percentage of people who chose to adopt fiber internet from municipal options, was 50 percent in most communities and 80 percent in underserved communities, something he said they were approaching in South Hadley. Paul said the towns and communities control the “right of ways and roadways,” and would be able to control the quality of fiber internet at an affordable price.
Dwight said people used to think of “cable as cable,” however, people now understood that internet was a “critical utility, a critical lifeline to education, healthcare, banking, work, business, emergency services, everything that we find essential in the community.” He said he suspected that people attending the forum were seeking an answer to if there was an alternative to large cable companies such as Comcast.
“I think you guys have made an excellent case. I think one of my concerns is that we get a little wonky, we’re a little wonky in our descriptions and explanations because the problem is that probably a lot of folks coming to this are just like me. I get in an airplane and take it on faith that it’s going to fly because smart people told me it was,” he said. “That’s great, but I have no idea why it does and I don’t care as long as it gets me up and gets me down.” He added that he felt as though they should continue the conversation in the same manner to ensure it was accessible to everyone and asked the experts to explain in simple terms the benefits of municipal fiber internet.
Flaherty said one of the biggest benefits was simply that customer service was local, so they were able to send a worker out to an area where there may be an issue immediately. However, this was not the case for larger companies which may be located on the eastern side of the state or internationally. Paul said another benefit was that it cost just “pennies more” to lay additional fiber that could be leased as an additional source of revenue for communities that may not wish to bring on the expense of laying their own fiber. Ferriter added that there were no contracts or rental fees associated with municipal fiber networks as customers often found when signing up for the internet with larger companies. Fitzgerald also added that it was essential that they invest in the future and that the internet had become the current electricity in terms of essential utilities.
Sandlin questioned the cost typically associated with a municipal fiber system and additional revenue sources that may aid in the cost for communities establishing such systems. Flaherty said they were “$21 million out of pocket” currently and would likely end up being close to $30 million in the end of the process, but their profits would cover the cost so they “wouldn’t have to do more buy in.” Fitzgerald said the average cost for towns in Western Mass. would be between $15 million and $35 million. He said for a smaller community such as South Hadley it was closer to $15 million while a city such as Westfield with more customers would be on the higher end of the spectrum. Paul, however, added that the cost for cities such as Springfield, Holyoke and Northampton would be beyond the cost typically seen.
Sandlin specifically asked Paul about the complexities of bringing fiber internet to a city such as Springfield. He said their approach for Springfield would cost more like “$100 to $120 million” due to the larger population. However, he said there would be a larger take rate. Currently, he said Springfield was looking at other towns OmniPoint had worked with and how successful they had been to see if those results could be replicated locally.
|
