[1st-mile-nm] Census-NM-Broadband-Report

Tue Dec 25 13:50:36 PST 2018

Fortunately, 5g is going to solve everything.  (Kidding!)

On Tue, Dec 25, 2018, 2:33 PM John Brown <john at citylinkfiber.com> wrote:

> +1 to Christopher's comments.
>
> In addition you have local (eg City) and State regulations, or lack of
> regulation in some cases, that are barriers to entry.
> Yes sometimes we actually need regulation to create a level playing
> field, especially when it comes to using community
> resources like rights of way.
>
> For example:  The City of Albuquerque see's no reason to be involved
> in helping with pole attachment rights.
> Even when those poles are located within the rights of way of the
> City.  Rights of way that are "owned by the citizens"
> of Albuquerque.  City leadership will spew that they want to see more
> broadband, but when it comes down to actively
> helping with deployment, they stop short. IMHO, The City should go
> back to pole owners and inform them that they are
> required to share the poles with all Broadband providers, or face
> serious issues with the City.  City has no guts!
>
> Look at the millions wasted on the City's ART project.  More than a
> year later the City still has not provided any access
> to the dark fiber that was built as part of that project.  The City
> held out to its citizens that this would be a Open Access / Neutral
> dark fiber infra-structure along Route 66.  Yet today, providers still
> can't connect.  Citizens are frustrated.
>
> Another example: City of Albuquerque is going to pay hundreds of
> thousands of dollars, to millions of dollars to Comcast
> for the continued right to use dark fiber it has already paid for.
> The City is willing to spend citizen money with Comcast on
> a CLOSED fiber network instead of an Open Access fiber network project
> that was proposed several years ago.  A project
> that would have been completed and paid for by now.
>
> At the State level.  Our State is not willing to create a single stop
> shop for Rights of Way access, nor is our State willing
> to create a state level / state wide set of Pole Attachment rules.
> This allows for pole owners like CenturyLink, PNM and others to
> create high cost barriers to the poles, preventing further fiber or
> wireless adoption by local companies.
>
> Another example:  City of Santa Fe.  City of Santa Fe awarded a RFP to
> a Santa Fe company to build a fiber network.
> this fiber network was suppose to be open access.  Yet a google search
> today for "Santa Fe Fiber" the name of the
> company didn't turn up any results on how a "qualified provider" could
> access this "wholesale" only network.
>
> Our leaders talk about wanting to get better broadband, but when the
> tire hits the pavement and they have to do things
> that go against the desires of the incumbents, they crater and it just
> becomes talk.
>
> I've found its far easier to build internet in other countries than it
> is here in New Mexico.  New Mexico needs to seriously
> wake up and be willing to go against the money of the incumbents.
>
> Having built a multi-national ISP business, I find it is easier and
> lower cost to provide service in say London, UK than
> it is here in Albuquerque, NM!
>
> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 12:44 PM Christopher Mitchell
> <christopher at ilsr.org> wrote:
> >
> > The Santa Fe Chamber of Commerce is the one that made the remark about
> slow adopters. This is a necessary frame for them.
> >
> > Chambers of commerce are notoriously beholden to the largest members -
> which are often firms like Comcast and CenturyLink in the case here. The
> Chamber has to say something that will not make its members look bad  so he
> blames poor access in the state on the people of the state rather than the
> big corporations that put food on this table. No shock there - this is how
> the game is played.
> >
> > Organizations - like chambers of commerce - that are corrupted by
> Comcast and CenturyLink money are extremely unlikely to support real
> solutions that reduce the monopoly power of the big chamber members ...
> even if that monopoly power is harming the vast majority of chamber
> members. Again... this is just how the game is played.
> >
> > Christopher Mitchell
> > Director, Community Broadband Networks
> > Institute for Local Self-Reliance
> >
> > MuniNetworks.org
> > @communitynets
> > 612-545-5185
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 25, 2018 at 1:32 PM Doug Orr <doug.orr at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Slow adopters??? That's not a likely reason why infrastructure
> improvements and distribution are lacking.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 25, 2018, 10:04 AM Richard Lowenberg <rl at 1st-mile.org>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Census: N.M. struggling for a good connection
> >>>
> >>> By Teya Vitu | tvitu at sfnewmexican.com  Dec 24, 2018
> >>>
> >>>
> http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/census-n-m-struggling-for-a-good-connection/article_7ef18278-008e-5396-8250-8c8c52847c4f.html
> >>>
> >>> New U.S. Census Bureau data released earlier this month says New Mexico
> >>> is among the least connected states to broadband in the nation.
> >>>
> >>> New Mexico ranks No. 48, just ahead of Arkansas and Mississippi and one
> >>> notch below West Virginia, with percentage of households with broadband
> >>> Internet subscriptions in 2016.
> >>>
> >>> The Census determined 73.7 percent of New Mexico household had
> broadband
> >>> connections; the U.S. average was 81.4 percent. Washington state led
> the
> >>> nation at 87.4 percent.
> >>>
> >>> “Low broadband internet subscription rates were found in many counties
> >>> in the upper Plains, the Southwest and South,” the Census wrote in its
> >>> report.
> >>>
> >>> The highspeedinternet.com website determined 91 percent of New
> Mexicans
> >>> can get broadband internet. The broadbandnow.com website has 81
> percent
> >>> of New Mexico covered by broadband.
> >>>
> >>> The gap between broadband availability and customer subscriptions
> >>> reflects other Census findings that singled out Deming and Gallup among
> >>> the half-dozen or so U.S. micropolitan areas (fewer than 50,000
> >>> residents) with the lowest income and highest poverty, respectively.
> >>>
> >>> New Mexico’s issues with poverty and low income are evident throughout
> >>> the state. Only Los Alamos County has less than 10 percent poverty.
> >>> Otherwise, the state falls alongside Arizona, South Carolina and
> >>> Delaware as the only states with no counties with less than 10 percent
> >>> poverty.
> >>>
> >>> On the broadband front, only Bernalillo, Sandoval, Santa Fe and Eddy
> >>> counties have 75 to 85 percent of households with broadband
> >>> subscriptions. Counties with broadband rates below 55 percent include
> >>> Doña Ana, Socorro, Cibola, McKinley, Rio Arriba, Guadalupe, San Miguel,
> >>> Mora and Harding — most with poverty rates between 26 and 37 percent.
> >>>
> >>> “Generally, we are slow adapters,” said Simon Brackley, CEO of the
> Santa
> >>> Fe Chamber of Commerce, whose economic development committee focuses on
> >>> broadband connectivity. “It takes us a little longer to catch up. There
> >>> is increased commitment by the state to increase Internet speed. I
> think
> >>> some people who live in rural areas are not interested in broadband.”
> >>>
> >>> However, the Albuquerque-based child advocacy organization New Mexico
> >>> Voices for Children does not believe low incomes and poverty are the
> >>> reason for New Mexico’s low broadband subscription rate.
> >>>
> >>> “That’s an excuse, not a reason,” said James Jimenez, the group’s
> >>> executive director. “One thing we have seen around the state, even in
> >>> low-income communities, a lot of people still have a phone (despite the
> >>> cost). Companies find a way of providing service people can afford.”
> >>>
> >>> Jimenez said Voices is seeking greater state investment in bringing
> >>> broadband to rural areas, equating broadband as infrastructure that is
> >>> no different from highways — items a community may not be able to do
> >>> alone.
> >>>
> >>> “I would say there is a great opportunity with the state surplus to use
> >>> those resources to invest in broadband infrastructure for rural
> >>> communities,” Jimenez said. “We have a hollowing out of rural
> >>> communities. One of the reasons for that is the lack of economic
> >>> opportunities. One of the things the state can and should do is provide
> >>> basic infrastructure.”
> >>>
> >>> CenturyLink, among the largest Internet providers in New Mexico, did
> not
> >>> talk specifics in the Census Bureau report but said the company “is on
> >>> track to have enabled more than 15,000 locations in FCC-designated,
> >>> high-cost census blocks in New Mexico by the end of this year,”
> >>> referring to where the cost of service is higher than can be supported
> a
> >>> user rates alone.
> >>>
> >>> Earlier this month, Gov.-elect Michelle Lujan Grisham, an outgoing
> >>> member of the U.S. House of Representatives, lauded the inclusion in
> the
> >>> Farm Bill of $500 million for a Community Connects Program, a broadband
> >>> grant program to support construction of broadband infrastructure in
> >>> communities private companies may not deem economically viable.
> >>>
> >>> Lujan Grisham in a statement the program will help rural areas of New
> >>> Mexico.
> >>>
> >>> “Expanding broadband access will grow New Mexico’s economy, create
> jobs,
> >>> boost wages, improve health outcomes, support small business growth,
> >>> help our students learn, increase crop yields, and so much more,” she
> >>> said.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Richard Lowenberg, Executive Director
> >>> 1st-Mile Institute     505-603-5200
> >>> Box 8001, Santa Fe, NM 87504,
> >>> rl at 1st-mile.org     www.1st-mile.org
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
> >>> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> >>> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 1st-mile-nm mailing list
> >> 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> >> http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 1st-mile-nm mailing list
> > 1st-mile-nm at mailman.dcn.org
> > http://www2.dcn.org/mailman/listinfo/1st-mile-nm
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www2.dcn.org/pipermail/1st-mile-nm/attachments/20181225/d7ba4c0c/attachment.html>