 
GNXPower
Got Boost?
Premium
join:2003-12-18
Huntington Beach, CA
| It's more choice... ...of course the telcos and cable companies are against it. They love to rape their customers and this could ruin their fun. On the flip side, with all the complaints about telcos and cable companies ripping off customers and customers getting little to show for it...no entity rips off more people and give them back less than government.
--
10.98@121 | |
|  | 
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| Re: It's more choice... The citizens group, Fiber For Our Future, is proposing the model of non-tax backed financing and writing the question for the ballots. The cities have ZERO to do with this at this point - except to say they are supportive of the financing idea that will NOT use general obligation bonds. This effort is completely a grass roots citizen group effort at the moment. The cities do not intend to put this on the ballot themselves unless they are forced to by the citizens who bring them the petitions with enough signatures necessary to place the referendum questions on the ballot. They want to see a groundswell of support. It is a political issue for the cities and the politicians want to see support since it didn't pass last year.
Everyone around here has hopefully seen the error of their ways and has felt the 26% (or more) price increases from Comcast etc... and the complaints have grown. Let's hope people see the value in competition this time around if we can get it on the ballots.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| 
montee4
Premium
join:2004-02-15
Chicago, IL
edit:
June 13th, @12:21PM
| More taxes?!? I have a friend in City Hall and there is apush to get an article on the bill to go to the taxpayers if the total amound ends up exceeding what was planned for. So I guess we will have to wait and see if this will affect us or not. | |
| | 
zabes63
join:2003-04-05
Batavia, IL
| Re: More taxes?!? Err....
Maybe you should have read the article above or the one in the KC Chronicle. I think that the recurring term "without the use of taxpayer money" makes your comment moot.
--
With a recovery like this... who needs a recession? | Tri-City Broadband | |
| |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
edit:
June 13th, @01:41PM
| Please get informed at www.tricitybroadband.com No tax-payer dollars will be used. Private financing is proposed. How is that using tax-payer money???
I don't know who this friend is at City Hall, but they are wrong. The story in the paper today is talking about a citizen-driven broadband referendum to build a utility to provide cable TV, Internet and telephone via Fiber to every home and business who wishes to take service. As the chairwoman of the citizen's committee, Fiber For Our Future I can tell you EXACTLY what we ARE and ARE NOT proposing, and how it relates to the CITY and the taxpayers. This referendum we are proposing will be financed entirely by private funding....whether from the private sector or venture capitalists. The cities will NOT be able to use general obligation bonds as an option for funding. The question is written to specifically exclude any tax-backed funding. If you have any questions please go to www.tricitybroadband.com . Get the real story from the people who are writing the question and leading the charge! City Hall has nothing to do with this referendum.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | 
pcscdma
Chocobo Chocobo Random Battle
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA
clubs: | Tell your friend to not listen to SBC and Comcast. | |
| 
thongsai
join:2002-07-04
Santa Rosa, CA | no tax? then wats the hold up? y do they need to vote? if its private fundin. this will eat the telco and cable alive. i dont get y wont the states roll out fiber and then rent the lines to any isp.. then the telcos and cable can offer better service. | |
| |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| Re: no tax? We don't technically need a vote in Batavia or STC, but Geneva is a non-home rule community and to run a cable TV utility there must be a referendum. The reason there needs to be what I am deeming an "opinion poll" is because the question was asked in April 2003 and the cities do not want to go against the "will of the people" in Nov. 2004. Therefore, they want to ask the question again. Well, THEY don't want to ask it again so soon after the April 2003 vote, but we feel the only time IS now for various reasons. You may visit our web site.
They are scared politically and will not go ahead with this without knowing if there are now more than 50% of the people in favor of this. I can see their point. But had they (all the politicians)simply stood up and smacked down all SBC's and Comcast's lies and misinformation before the last referendum vote we wouldn't even be discussing this now because this would've passed with flying colors! We know the Tri-Cities need this for our economic development etc... and we can run this utility just as efficiently as we do all 3 electric utilities out here in the 3 cities. (and for prices lower than what would be competition). Our electric prices are 30% lower than Com Ed prices as it is.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| 
ravital
Just Another Pesky Independent Nh Voter
Premium
join:2001-07-19
Merrimack, NH
|  Go Tri-Cities
"Broadband supporters said the new question is different than last year's plan because it asks voters to allow the cities to create the service, but not use tax-backed financing. Last year's question allowed for such financing."
The previous attempt relied on General Obligation Bonds to fund the project. General Obligation - or "GO" bonds are guaranteed by tax revenue. If the project flops, the taxpayers bail out the town. This is going to be funded by private money - possibly by Revenue bonds, which are a completely different type of bond that municipalities are allowed to sell. This would put the risk entirely on investors, not on taxpayers.
Last year the incumbents were able to play on the bogus claims of taxpayer liability by falsifying figures as to the success/failure rates of muni-owned broadband services, as well as, excuse me but there is no other way to say it, lie about the entire plan with idiotic ads like "do you want your tax to pay for delivery of porn to your children" and other such nonsense. All indications where that there would have been three or four times more subscribers than necessary for the town to pay the obligation and still offer a cheaper and better service (which is why the incubent's claims were bogus), but the disinformation campaign by the incumbents succeeded. One thing the story doesn't tell you - sure, 60% voted against it, but about 10% of the electorate bothered to vote at all, in an April election in an off-year.
This time, it's an election year, the funding is private, the incumbents will have to try harder to come up with a different lie.
Putting this question up to a vote is a smart move, because in the end, the town will be running the service, and it pays to know what kind of support they will get before they start.
But the bottom line is that two of the three towns involved are large enough for Home Rule, which means that they don't even need voter consent to go ahead with the project anyway.
I wish them the best of luck in sending SBC/Comcast packing. | |
| 
nunya
SEE ROCK CITY 475 MILES
Premium,MVM
join:2000-12-23
O Fallon, MO
clubs:
 ·AT&T CallVantage
| Better Looks like they are going about it in a better way this time. Previous attempts to use tax payer funding were ridiculous. Considering less than half the population even gives a rats ass about broadband, I find it hard to believe that such a small populous and geographic area would be able to support three providers. Basically it will come down to who can hold their breath the longest. The obvious answer will be the telco or cableco.
--
I am leaving, but the fighter still remains.----Fight terrorists »www.e85fuel.com/ | |
| 
whamel
Premium
join:2002-05-09
Clarendon Hills, IL
 ·RCN CABLE
 ·Verizon BroadbandA..
| This needs to happen... ...because of the many reasons that are obvious like; 1.) increased competition which will a.) lower prices and b.) give more choice for broadband. Anything that increases competition is good for the consumer and if this were to pass, then maybe it would set a precedent for other communities. I live relatively close to these cities and would love to have a municipal broadband facility wherever i lived. I hope this passes and then one day maybe all of chicagoland will have a municipally run broadband service.
Bill | |
| 
mocycler
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Naperville, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
edit:
June 13th, @11:43PM
| This idea smells Absolutely zero tax dollars used or placed at risk? Nada, nothing as Tri-Cities website proclaims?
That would normally be fine with me, but if it's really the case then why does the issue need to be on the ballot? Why don't the "private investors" simply incorporate themselves and have at it like any other business?
If the purpose of the voting is to determine public mandate, then by merely being on the ballot this deal violates TCBB's "no tax money" claim right from square one. The investors should hire a private market research firm and pay for the data themselves.
The website also has absolutely no mention of a business plan or how this operation would actually work. But I'll let the "private investors" sweat that detail since, after all, it is their money at risk (wink, wink).
Anyone who believes a special-interest group that says "Just vote for this...it won't cost you anything," deserves to get screwed.
Are these "private investors" going to reimburse taxpayers the $130,000+ already spent on studies and consultants?
Sounds like Comcast's spin doctors got bought out and are now working for Tri-Cities (j/k). That may well prove out to be the best move TCBB ever made...but (seriously) it does not make their cause more worthy and I don't believe TCBB is being completely candid about this.
Private investors are always free to start a company and offer goods and services. Let the market, not the electorate, decide if the idea is solid. This issue should be voted down.
Peace,
mocycler
--
"Government is not the answer to our problem. Government is our problem." --Ronald Reagan.
»www.lp.org | |
| | 
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
edit:
June 14th, @12:06AM
| Re: This idea smells Jesus Mo:
Ask and you shall receive.
TCBB does not have any responsibility to develop a business plan. They (not the cities) shopped around, found several takers will to back the entire thing with private funding. Those providing funding (private investors) have a responsibility to do their research. Most of them have found the previous feasibility study proof enough of concept. Will the the numbers be updated? Sure..by those putting together the private financing.
Notice Mo, this is a citizen group.
Notice Mo, the cities aren't putting this on the ballot.
Notice Mo, in order to get this on the ballot, TCBB will have to collect signatures in the communities.
Notice what the issue truly is...Citizen backed...citizen researched...
Ask what the referendum question is going to be....Last I heard it went something like this..."shall the cities be granted the authority to create a broadband service, with all the bells and whistles, finance it any damn well they please, specifically excluding G.O. bonds as last year, or any other tax backed funding." If it can't be done this way, then no dice. Ballot question is invalid.
Of course it costs something.....finance charges, just like a mortgage. Yes, last years G.O. Bond model was cheaper, but was perceived as putting property owners on the hook. Getting private investors will cost more in long term financing. If the private sector will back the whole damn plant, what's your problem?
Give up on this $130,000 dollar crap. If this doesn't go through, and nothing is built, then you're right....the money is gone. If it does, the cities certainly stand a great chance of making back the cash...
Please, Mo, ask any damn question you like. Cut this insinuation garbage...it's tiresome. Your gripes have consistently been with "tax payer dollars backing it".
Now that's taken away, and you're still griping. Geez......
By the way, this has to go on the ballot because:
1. The elected officials want it that way. They want a true opinion poll of the matter.
2. Geneva, being non home rule, has a legal requirement to ask for the authority of its citizens to provide such a service. St. Charles (home rule) and Batavia (soon to be home rule) do not have such a requirement.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | |
mocycler
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Naperville, IL
·AT&T Midwest
edit:
June 14th, @12:59AM
| Re: This idea smells batageek, my position has not budged one inch. It's you (not me) that is moving away from the normally civil tone between us.
"My problem" is that if TCBB "shopped around, found several takers..." and the current data persuades them, why bother checking in with voters? You already have your data and your private financing. The city leaders support you, so you should have few hassles getting permits, zoning variances, etc. Start building your network tomorrow and let the world know when you are ready to sign on customers.
Oh BTW, $130,000 may be "crap" to you. But to everyone else it's $130,000 (which is a generously low estimate). If this data is useful to your "takers," then it's only fair they pay for it. Your smug attitude is typical of someone who thinks my money is everyone's money.
Notice bat, I'm questioning why this needs to be on a ballot in the first place.
Notice bat, that last time TCBB claimed this would not involve tax money. Now you all are backpedaling, really, this time we promise...no tax money. You got one heckofa credibility problem.
"Because the elected officials want it that way" is not a legitimate reason. Let the public vote with their dollars. What more do you want? You now have non-tax-based funding...stop yakking and start building. Say what you want about SBC and Comcast, but at least they did not get to where they are by issuing press releases. Your spin would do them proud.
The home rule excuse is equally lame. Same deal. Take your private money and get to work. What does home rule have to do with it? Do these communities need majority voter approval for every flower shop and pizza place that wants to open?
I'll stop griping when the headline is, "We won't put it on the ballot because this is a private company funded with private money and it's none of the the taxpayers' business. We'll let you know when you can sign up for our fantastic deals."
If you are fishing for votes, it's disingenuous of you to think it should not be challenged. And shame on you for thinking any different.
I didn't hardly expected you to agree, but your comments disappoint me.
mocycler
--
"Government is not the answer to our problem. Government is our problem." --Ronald Reagan.
»www.lp.org | |
| | | |
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
edit:
June 14th, @11:07AM
| Re: This idea smells Mo:
I am moving away from the civil tone, because no matter what argument I put out there for you, you still don't care. I'll grant you the concern with G.O. Bonds and public versus private last year. But this year, the potential tax backing is gone, and it is essentially a public/private model.
As a refresher to last year:
Funded by G.O. Bonds that, according to the feasibility study done, would be paid back ONLY by those that actually took service. Comcast & SBC played up the fact that, yes, should the entire thing tank and fall into the ocean, the property owners could be on the hook for portions unpaid for. TCBB has always said this upfront.
This year:
Funded by private investment groups. Those groups have looked at the previous numbers, and because they're private, have decided that, yes, in fact, this does look like something that will make cash. If they want to pay for a full blown, new study so be it. That's part of their due diligence to see if they want to invest. Do I have the right to question your investment in Stock XYZ? That's your job.
Private investors get this because they realize, that just like SBC, Comcast, AT&T, McDonalds, the City (or TriCities) is a brand. It's an existing entity, with a strong past and established market share, that the private sector knows can sell.
As to the ballot issue.....The elected officials of the TriCities got burned last year. They didn't believe the amount of crap SBC & Comcast threw their way and frankly, as true politicians, are also interested (surprise) in staying in office. So they'll make TCBB prove the point that there is support by getting signatures. If TCBB succeeds in getting the signatures, the politicos will jump on board, loud and proud. Remember, the cities still have to form the broadband entity and make it happen. They still have to run the day to day operations. This is not someone coming in and handing a turn key system to the cities.
Home rule is law, Mo. Lame as it may be, the City of Geneva can not legally offer CATV services without a binding referendum allowing them to do so. The issue legally is not cash but the authority from the citizens to "own, operate, and construct."
My smug attitude about the $130,000 is that the money is gone...right now. Money I've paid for as a TriCity taxpayer. TCBB / Fiber For Our Future (remember citizen group here) could stop their push right now and the money is still gone. TCBB / Fiber For Our Future is not spending your tax dollars. The TriCities are still stuck with half assed, sub par services from Comcast & SBC. At least with local ownership and service, a TriCity Broadband plant would be serving the specific needs of the TriCities.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | | 
hbarbrey
T6Broadband
join:2000-03-19
Kirkland, IL
| Re: This idea smells
Still no information about how many years it will take to connect the first residential user to the system if one is ever created.
Still no information about how many city employees will be used to string the fiber on the poles or dig the trenches if one is ever created.
Still no information about how many people will be employed full time as $125,000 per year supervisors or how many full time employees at $35.00 per hour if one is ever created.
Still no information about union or non union employees if this system is ever created.
Still no information about proposed charges to the residents or commercial interests for this internet service if this system is ever created.
If a private group is going to form a private company utilizing private financing to provide internet service in the tri cities to private citizens and privately owned companies then why is it necessary to have it included on the ballot and have the approval of the tax payers. Seems awfully fishy and smelly to me.
It is still NO on the ballot for me. | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| Re: This idea smells Thanks Jhboricua! This is exactly the type of propoganda Mr. Barbrey and others send to the local papers in care of the Letters to the Editor in hopes of stirring up false doubts and questions about this referendum and what it will be asking of voters.
We have the answers. Asked and answered. Last year the incumbents screamed 'DON'T GAMBLE WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS!" Fine, we won't. Not even the slightest risk (which was next to nothing in the first place!). We, Fiber For Our Future, will ensure the Cities can only secure financing that is not tax-backed. They cannot use GO bonds.
Are you going to argue something else now Mr. Barbrey? Nothing else is up to the citizen's group. We can't make public policy except to get enough signatures to get a question on the ballot. We CAN help create competition and get lower prices for everyone if a new utility is created. THAT is a reality.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | | | 
Jon Zahm
@chcg.cgcil01r18
| LOL....
If you are going to slam TCBB with your BS mis-information, AT LEAST try to get the statement right...
Fiber to the Home
not Fiber to the Door.
The latter has been used by Comcast SBC, NOT TCBB. I guess we know whose ring is in Hbarbers nose!
Aren't you the same one who said in a certain newspaper that "Fiber to the Door" folks were calling your home bothering your sick wife? And kept up that speil even AFTER it was shown that it was NOT TCBB members doing so?
Geez.... | |
| | | | | |
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
edit:
June 14th, @03:25PM
| Another naysayer that has done no homework.
Every single question you've asked has been answered, and last year no less.
Read the last years study. You'll get the answers you ask for. I think Geneva still has it on their site at »www.geneva.il.us/bb/faq.htm. If the FAQ doesn't answer your questions, the study will. Granted, the financing model has changed to private, and the level of services provided (1.5 meg internet ain't going to cut it anymore) will obviously have to change.
Just for the heck of it, I'll get your questions a brief swing.
1. First customers (last year) were to be hooked up within 1 year. If I remember correctly, coverage called for half of the potential customers in the first year, with the remainder being covered within two years. This is in last year's study.
2. As an all new build out, I would assume the cities would use a contractor(s) to roll out a system of this size. This issue was not defined last year because there had been no decision to go ahead.
3. Last year's model envisioned 45 employees in the TriCities, from billing to linemen. Salaries and employees counts were included in the study.
4. If the outside plant is to be maintained by existing electric crews, then obviously the linemen would be union employees (IBEW I believe). Most of the TriCity electric linemen (all union) are trained to troubleshoot and splice fiber already do to the existence of the municipal fiber backbone serving city, school, and county buildings.
5. The costs for services were up last year when this was taking place. Obviously, those cost would be updated to compete in the existing marketplace. Included again in last year's study.
Let me clarify again:
Private sector funds public build, ownership, and operation. Private sector makes return from interest on loan (ex. Mortgage, "lease to own"). City owns plant at end of payments. Advantage to investors comes from strong local brand - "TriCity Municipal Broadband, Inc."
Company is still municipally run, just like electric and water, but funded entirely with private sector investment. In the event of unlikely core meltdown, private investors can repo the entire system and resell, say to Cox or Charter or AT&T. Either wasy, TriCity residents would still enjoy true, facilities based, competition.
Ballot issue - "home rule vs. non home rule" - explained previously above.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| AuroraJock
join:2003-04-02
Chicago, IL
| tax issue As someone who followed this issue before, I sort of agree with Mocycler here. I remember all the advocates of this network before saying that subscribers pay back the bonds and there was no risk to taxpayers. Now, there's REALLY no risk to taxpayers. It does sound fishy. I have a question... if private investors are paying for this, why is the local gov't running it? Why not have private enterprise run it? I must say, the advocates for this network seem to be overly consumed by this issue - almost to the point of "Fiber for our Future" coming off as some type of obsessive cult. This group seems to be a handful of people who all want this network, meanwhile the bulk of the voters didn't show up last time to care about it. If I had to guess, I'd say that voter turnout next time around will be just as bad as last time - and as an above poster said, most people just don't give a rats ass. Sometimes I wish people would devote this type of time and energy to something more worthwhile, like cleaning up the environment. | |
| |
Stan Ashcroft
@chcg.cgcil01r18
| Re: tax issue Because a private company is still concerned primarily with making a profit even if they have to scarifice customer service and product quality. Muni is not. Which means lower prices for consumers rather than just another Comca$h or SBC trying to get citizens to bend over and grab their ankles at every opportunity.
We know what private enterprise in the telecommunications industry has brought us... high prices, crappy customer service, limited choice, and low-quality service. It's time to try something new as opposed to just accepting the crap service these providers pawn off on us currently. | |
| | | AuroraJock
join:2003-04-02
Chicago, IL
| Re: tax issue Muni or not, there is no guarantee that customer service will be any better. As far as the product, it'll still be the same crappy channel lineup the rest of America already has access to on either satellite or cable. For phone service, any call made outside of Tricities will still suffer from the poor quality of the ILEC copper phone line on the other end - so you'll still have a horseshit phone call. The only benefit then is internet, and from the article reads, SBC has near 100% coverage for their $26 internet. So what's the benefit then? Don't say luring business, because we all know that businesses are moving to India and Central America at a record pace - not to a rich, overpriced Chicago suburb. And to insinuate that a business would move to Tricities to save $5 a month on DSL is insane.
What really concerns me about this network is the muni negotiating their TV buyrates. Didn't Viacom pull the plug on Dish a few months back over some pricing squables? Didn't Comcast try to buy Disney? Once these corporate titans control not only the delivery method but the content as well, the small muni, while maintaining a superior network, could be unable to offer services at a competitive rate.
The real purpose of this citizen group is the outrage of having slow DSL and cable modem deployment and having their rates go up. The way to combat these corporate giants is with your wallet - cancel your service. | |
| | | | | | | | | AuroraJock
join:2003-04-02
Chicago, IL | Re: tax issue How does this coop service bring anything to the table if the muni is forced to purchase programming from a competitor such as Comcast or DirecTV? | |
| | | | | |
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
edit:
June 14th, @05:51PM
| Re: tax issue You buy the content from them directly. The negotiate the deals, not the muni.
"What is the NCTC
»www.cabletvcoop.org/membership_b···stheNCTC
The National Cable Television Cooperative is a not-for-profit, member-operated purchasing organization. The Co-op's mission is to reduce the operating costs of its member cable companies. The Co-op negotiates and administers master affiliation agreements with cable television programming networks, cable hardware and equipment manufacturers and other service providers on behalf of its member companies.
Through joint purchasing and negotiation, the NCTC functions similar to a multi-system operator (MSO), taking advantage of volume discounts offered by programming networks, hardware manufacturers, and other providers. This results in significant cost savings for members on the purchase of these products and services.
In 1984, the Co-op opened its doors with 12 member companies and began helping small- and medium-sized cable operators. Today, the NCTC has more than 1,000 member companies that serve more than 14 million subscribers. The Co-op is proud to say that its members operate more than half the franchised cable systems throughout the United States.
NCTC member companies range in size from frewer than 100 subscribers to more than 1 million. Despite this variety, the Co-op's bylaws allow for "one-class" of member. Regardless of size, every member company has access to the same services and pays the same price for programming and hardware. "
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | | | | AuroraJock
join:2003-04-02
Chicago, IL
| Re: tax issue OK, so I'll ask again... What happens to this coops negotiating power if Comcast or DirecTV controls the content? Comcast has made it clear that they desire to control content. If they control it, do you think price will go up for the non-Comcast buyrate? | |
| | | | | | | |
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
| Re: tax issue Of course the price will go up, and I suppose the Co-op will have to pay whatever price Comcast wants to charge. It's not a perfect world.
But Comcast & Dish have said consistently, the cost increases in cable and dish come from the programming. If the cost to the co-op goes up, so should the cost to Comcast and Dish/DirecTV right? Because this is the line they use to the customers every day to explain rate increases, right?
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | | | | | | AuroraJock
join:2003-04-02
Chicago, IL
| Re: tax issue Right, the cost increases in cable and dish come from the programming. And if Comcast desires to own the programming (as they've demonstrated a desire to do so by bidding on it), they control not only their retail subscription rates, but also the wholesale buyrates that munis and other competitors are forced to pay. As Comcast has demonstrated, they're quick to raise rates to maintain their margins. One would expect that they'd be quick to raise wholesale buyrates as well. Then, they have the luxury to charge whatever they want to the munis (or coops). Furthermore, this whole muni network has now relied on the bargaining power of a third party not-for-profit organization to control costs. There is no way that a muni can guarantee cheaper costs if they do not directly maintain control of their own wholesale buyrates. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
| Re: tax issue I give up. We should just quit and go home.
The value of the very same network is not just for cable internet and phone. There is the value to the existing utilities as well. There is the economic development angle. There is the telemedicine angle. There are countless others. If you limit your view to just cable internet and phone, you really aren't grasping the big picture to the communities.
Yes, I suppose programming cost could (and will) go up.
Either way, with the newer model, the taxpayer won't be on the hook and true facilities based competition will exist.
Amen.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | GetOffMyLawn3
join:2004-06-14
Batavia, IL
| You miss the bigger picture.
When service sucks with Comcast or SBC... who ya gonna call? Who ya gonna talk to? Do you think they REALLY give a rat's ass about you?
NOPE.
Muni... I walk over to the city complex and talk to the tech-geek. Or I have my alderman bring it up on record at a city council meeting.
It's called... say it with me folks... "ACCOUNTABILITY".
That's right.. I knew you could!
OH.... and I HAVE canceled my service at home. No more landline phone, no more internet service, no more cable TV.
And now EVERY DAY I get doorhangers and mailings from SBC and Comcast offering me lower limited time rates to try to intice me back. They CAN give you the lower rates... they just would rather you bend over and take it with a smile after your $29.99 rates expire in three months. | |
| | | | | AuroraJock
join:2003-04-02
Chicago, IL
| Re: tax issue I don't know about the tricities, but in my town there is a Comcast office. I don't subscribe to Comcast, but I know the woman who works there. She is a neighbor of mine. Is this not accountability?? Assuming that the tricities can do it better is assuming.
What law is there to prevent Comcast or SBC from offering you low rates to come back? Is this not done by credit card companies offering 1 year low interest only to screw you after the first year?? It's common practice. It's done everyday by companies everywhere. NO interest for a year for furniture. No Payments until 2007 for a new car, etc. Anyone who doesn't understand this shouldn't be buying it. Besides, I'd be willing to bet that SBC can probably do it cheaper than muni now anyway. The orignal proposal that the 3 towns did were based on low bandwidth DSL, prior to the incumbents raising their standard speeds. The standard now from SBC is 1.5mb. Comcast is 3.0mb. If memory serves, the proposal was based on pricing for 384 -768k only. | |
| | | | | |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| Re: tax issue All pricing would be updated and the phone service offering would change to VoIP.
No law against competition my friend....Customers will WIN with low prices all around! Who doesn't understand this? Let SBC and Comcast bring on all their LOW LOW prices and erase the 2-3 price hikes they gave us since April 2003! It'll be great!!! Of course they will still have their crummy old copper system and slow speeds and we will have a state of the art fiber to the home and fiber to the business system with practically limitless speeds and uses for our residents....
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | | |
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
| Dude:
Local accountability by Comcast? Please get real. Do their policies stem from here? By following the past examples of TriCity utilities and other muni broadband plants around the country, the model for better service has been proven over and over again.
It's a FTTH system. It has the capability to bury anything Comcast or SBC can throw your way. Obviously, the offerings and services would be updated to go head to head and exceed the offerings of Comcast & SBC. But the build is the same.
No law to prevent the incumbents to offer whatever the hell they like. The cities would have to match as best they can. Either way, you benefit. Lower muni rates, lower SBC & Comcast rates, with no tax based repercussions for the citizen. How is this bad?
The referendum question specifically excludes the cities from using "tax backed funding" and "general obligation bonds".
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | | | GetOffMyLawn3
join:2004-06-14
Batavia, IL
| "I don't know about the tricities, but in my town there is a Comcast office. I don't subscribe to Comcast, but I know the woman who works there. She is a neighbor of mine. Is this not accountability??"
So what your saying is this office has full credit and responsibility for any and all customer service issues, correct? I mean, if your cable TV is snowy, this individual at that location will be out to your home to fix it, right?
Or is it really just a bill payment and service sales center? Nah..... nevermind, I already know the answer.
"Assuming that the tricities can do it better is assuming."
It IS assuming.. but I trust my neighbors more than somebody across the country who has no real accountability to myself. I DO assume they can do better... becuase my experience with Comcast has been that they couldn't POSSIBLY do any worse! 
"What law is there to prevent Comcast or SBC from offering you low rates to come back? "
Of course, there is none, but you have completely missed the point (or get the point but it doesn't fit into your argument). They can offer the low rate... why aren't they? Why did I pay, as a regular existing customer more than $10 above and beyond what other communities pay for the EXACT same service, simply because they have competition and we here in Batavia do not?
"Besides, I'd be willing to bet that SBC can probably do it cheaper than muni now anyway."
If that is so, I ask you.. WHY AREN"T THEY???? If they can do it cheaper, why have they not passed some of those savings onto the consumer, but instead have choosen to jack up the price for the exact same (dismal) service.
I know why... can you say "no competition"??? I KNEW YOU COULD!!!!!
"If memory serves, the proposal was based on pricing for 384 -768k only. "
Key word... "BASED". Meaning that was used as a comparison benchmark. Please show me where it said those would be the only speeds offered......... | |
| |
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
Batavia, IL
edit:
June 14th, @07:06PM
| I can only say what the study last time projected: All bonds would be paid off entirely by the project user fees and projected take rates. The cities paid a consultant to check for viability. The consultant said, yes it can be done this way. The cities did not even research private sector funding last time because they were shooting for the lowest cost option to finance the project: G.O. Bonds.
This time, the citizens group is the one behind the wheel, not the cities. The question was asked, "Why did this tank last time out?" The resounding answer was the perceived tax payer risk. Notice, not expected risk but what could happen in a worst case scenario. Comcast & SBC played up this angle to no end. See ads like this (»www.tricitybroadband.com/PDF%20f···icks.pdf) and this (»www.tricitybroadband.com/PDF%20f···stad.pdf ).
The citizen group started shopping around for other ways to do this. They found that there were indeed ways to make this happen with private funding, while still maintaining local control and operation. Granted, a private funding model will probably cost more in financing costs, but at least the cities taxpayers are entirely off the hook. It fails (as Comcast & SBC would assure you, it will) only the private investors are left with the tab.
As to voter turnout, God help us all if the voter turnout is exactly the same for a Presidential election.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| No one is stopping you from forming a group to clean up the environment if that is your passion. And it would be admirable. People say if you don't like how things are done then stand up and change it! Well, we are standing up and trying to change the monopoly here. We just recently had a group called PURE who stood up against Com Ed who didn't want Power Towers going down a main county road and some people's yards serving the Tri-Cities because they wouldn't "look nice" and people aren't sure about EMFs etc.... Not every cause has hundreds of people storming City Hall every other day. That doesn't mean people don't care about the issue when they get their bill or when they could have fiber running to their child's school or not (and have the school's save money using the muni's fiber).
Voter apathy is rampant in this county in general, but the April 2003 vote was a vote in an odd year in spring for issues no one either cared about or understood fully. A lot of people went on vacation and didn't bother to vote before they left (yes, the vote was during spring break too). Voter turnout will be for the Presidential election this time! Our feeling is we will either kill it big or pass it with flying colors.
Local Govt. would still run this because the investors want them to. The Cities have the trucks, the experienced union linemen, and 100 years of electric utility experience and customer service behind them. THAT is what makes the package attractive to private investors.
This topic IS worthwhile for me and other members of Fiber For Our Future to educate people about in the Tri-Cities. And as long as there are companies and others who continue to spread misinformation about what it is we are trying to do for our communities we will be out there fighting the good fight to educate everyone as to why this is important for our communities. We have done our due diligence and talked to companies who finance muni venture across the country. There are many different models out there. The argument in the Tri-Cities was "Gambling with our tax dollars". We removed it by changing the question to the residents. Now you say you don't believe it. Perhaps you need to come to one of our meetings. Email me for more information.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| |
mocycler
Premium
join:2001-01-22
Naperville, IL
·AT&T Midwest
edit:
June 14th, @07:51PM
| That kinda sums up what I have believed all along. No matter how this is structured, as long as the government has a hand in it, tax money will come into the picture in one form or another.
This plan already calls for city utility crews to to do the work...I'm being told (for the second time) that no how no way will tax dollars will not get stirred in there somewhere? C'mon! At the very least the city will have to go through the trouble and expense of hiring the extra workers plus provide them with tools, trucks, and equipment. Are the private investors going to pay for all this stuff...up front? Why is the city dabbling in the electrical contracting business to begin with?
This is not mocycler spewing Libertarian dogma. My questions and those of Aurora Jock & others are legitimate; TCBB wants my vote but they will not give my concerns ---or my money--- their respect.
The remark "Local Govt. would still run this because the investors want them to" is quite possibly the most absurd pretzel logic I've ever heard regarding this issue. The mere fact investors want government ownership is damning evidence against TCBB's claim that this plan can independently succeed without risk to taxpayers.
If TCBB really wanted to sell me on this idea, they would hire a private contractor to do the work (and there are plenty of highly skilled union technicians in the Tricities area), form a stand-alone non-profit organization to run the network, and not place the issue before the voters or involve the government even in small ways.
But they won't do that because they can't. This plan will not work unless the government is running it...and for that reason alone it should be killed.
mocycler
--
"Government is not the answer to our problem. Government is our problem." --Ronald Reagan.
»www.lp.org | |
| | |
See 29 replies to this post | |
hedyd4u
Premium
join:2003-12-16
Schenectady, NY
| Keep the gov't out How can anyone be excited about the gov't getting involved. A group of politicians who operate on the theory that the check book always has more money (yours that is). The product has no chance of being free to taxpayers. Just look at gov't history on the issue of the cost to the taxpayer. The NY thruway sold as the tolls will pay for the road then it will be free. Now the tolls keep going up, that is what a politician means when the word free is involved eventually we the tax payer can bend over. | |
| |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| Re: Keep the gov't out The Govt. here runs all of the electric and water utilities and has for 100 years with prices being , on the average, 30% lower. Trust me, we are all thrilled living here with those prices. Our City Govts. here are trusted and if we don't like what they do we throw them out of office by voting. THEY are held accountable.
You need to read up on this subject. This will be financed by private investors. How is that costing taxpayers money?
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | |
|
|
Tri-Cities Try Again
