|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 19, 2013 15:39:18 GMT -6
I appreciate what has been done, but think we could have been and can be doing a lot more. I do not see a $138,000.00 value for citizens in a fountain, just my opinion though. I have confidence that a trained person working full time would be able to bring more results to the community. I don't see it as being such a big risk. I did not call it a savior to all. It was a suggestion that you asked for as a way that I think the money could been better spent, again just my opinion. Since it will be up and running to the institutions as provided for in the grant by the end of the year, I really don't think that it is putting the cart before the horse starting discussion about it and researching it now. Maybe someone from our City should attend this conference in November, "Economic Impact of Advanced Broadband Networks". bbcmag.com/chicago/index.html Everyone really should do a little bit of research as to the types of economic development that have followed the installation of fiber optic networks. I think it really should be started here sooner rather than later. That's OK, I already knew the answer to how much we have invested into bringing it here.
|
|
|
Post by bleedinbuck on Sept 19, 2013 16:13:46 GMT -6
At least with it spent on the fountain the overall project is done for the park, we've improved quality of life (even a lil bit) and it last indefinitely. If it lasts indefinitely,Then what are we spending $138,000 to repair??
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 19, 2013 16:56:47 GMT -6
Since it will be up and running to the institutions as provided for in the grant by the end of the year, I really don't think that it is putting the cart before the horse starting discussion about it and researching it now. Maybe someone from our City should attend this conference in November, "Economic Impact of Advanced Broadband Networks". bbcmag.com/chicago/index.html Everyone really should do a little bit of research as to the types of economic development that have followed the installation of fiber optic networks. I think it really should be started here sooner rather than later. That's OK, I already knew the answer to how much we have invested into bringing it here. Do some research and create a proposal. It might be worth my time and money to get in on the ground level and invest in something like this if it as lucrative as you say. PM me when you have something for me to look at.
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 19, 2013 17:08:51 GMT -6
A couple years of an economic development person could very well create enough extra revenue to keep that position going. The majority of the current council has been there for years and has had plenty of opportunity to put more resources towards bringing more jobs here. Using your "couple years" statement as a yardstick, after that amount of time, what would you consider a good performance by the economic development person that would satisfy your statement of "we can be doing more"? You must have a number in your head in terms of either jobs created or businesses opened. 10 jobs a year? a 100? 500? 1000? 1 new business? 10? 20? 50?
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 19, 2013 17:33:56 GMT -6
I am more interested in seeing it be a municipally owned network; I am convinced that would end up providing much more for the community. Here's why:
1. More consumer choices could be provided for internet, TV, and voice services, providing lower rates and other benefits of competitive markets to the residents.
2. Revenue could be provided from leasing fibers to ISPs to pay for the network and then possibly create a future revenue stream.
3. Lower operating costs for all businesses could also result from the competitive marketplace.
4. Being able to offer larger employers even more competitive rates to lease dark fibers or individual channels of a lit fiber could be a factor to entice them into coming here.
5. Control of the network.
My yardstick for having done enough is to have more people moving here instead of leaving, and rising property values instead of declining.
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 19, 2013 18:12:25 GMT -6
I am more interested in seeing it be a municipally owned network; I am convinced that would end up providing much more for the community. Here's why: 1. More consumer choices could be provided for internet, TV, and voice services, providing lower rates and other benefits of competitive markets to the residents. 2. Revenue could be provided from leasing fibers to ISPs to pay for the network and then possibly create a future revenue stream. 3. Lower operating costs for all businesses could also result from the competitive marketplace. 4. Being able to offer larger employers even more competitive rates to lease dark fibers or individual channels of a lit fiber could be a factor to entice them into coming here. 5. Control of the network. My yardstick for having done enough is to have more people moving here instead of leaving, and rising property values instead of declining. This article is older but I think it has relevance to our discussion. It was written in Aug 2012: EPB of Chattanooga, the municipally-owned electricity company, branched out into telecoms service a little over a decade ago and soon afterwards decided to modernise the city’s power grid. Starting in 2008, with the help of $111.5m in federal stimulus funds and another $169m raised through bonds, EPB laid over 6,000 miles of fibre-optic cable. The network became fully operational last spring; it covers EPB’s full service area, roughly 170,000 homes and businesses in urban, suburban and rural areas, and it delivers video and telephone service as well. But even though in practice someone in a trailer park on the side of a mountain could enjoy Palo-Alto-like internet speeds, relatively few Chattanoogans subscribe to the full gigabit service. EPB estimates that nine residents and two businesses pay the hefty $350-per-month charge. Most use a 30-megabit-per-second (mps) connection, which is still far faster than the American average of 6.7mps. In such a big area with roughly 170,000 homes and businesses,only 9 residents and 2 businesses took advantage of the extremely fast speeds. With grant money included, it cost them about $275 million to supply access to the entire town, similar to what you are proposing. Now just doing some rough math, if you figure around 5000 homes and businesses in this area, and you adjust the expenditure to a similar level, you would probably be looking at around $8-10 million for the city of Streator to have to lay out of their own pockets to build this network assuming no grants were available to use. It would probably be even more since the company was already in charge of the electricity and had some of the infrastucture already in place. They spent all this money to provide extremely fast connectivity and only 11 out of 170,000 took advantage of it. Are you suggesting we spend that kind of money to make to build a fiber optic network on the hope that it will attract new business that actually have the need for it?
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 19, 2013 18:20:22 GMT -6
My yardstick for having done enough is to have more people moving here instead of leaving, and rising property values instead of declining. No, your yardstick is hiring a E.D. expert to attract more livable wage jobs, compared to what are current city council is doing. Before we get into people moving here and rising property values, you need to give an answer to the question. Hawk gave many examples of the city creating jobs, and you feel that those arent enough. Instead of just saying " to have more people moving here instead of leaving, and rising property values instead of declining" you need to attach some type of number to that in terms of jobs or new businesses. If you have no reasonable number in mind, then you really have no business in saying that the city isnt doing enough.
|
|
|
Post by seaturtle43 in hostile forum on Sept 19, 2013 18:55:48 GMT -6
I am more interested in seeing it be a municipally owned network; I am convinced that would end up providing much more for the community. Here's why: 1. More consumer choices could be provided for internet, TV, and voice services, providing lower rates and other benefits of competitive markets to the residents. 2. Revenue could be provided from leasing fibers to ISPs to pay for the network and then possibly create a future revenue stream. 3. Lower operating costs for all businesses could also result from the competitive marketplace. 4. Being able to offer larger employers even more competitive rates to lease dark fibers or individual channels of a lit fiber could be a factor to entice them into coming here. 5. Control of the network. My yardstick for having done enough is to have more people moving here instead of leaving, and rising property values instead of declining. This article is older but I think it has relevance to our discussion. It was written in Aug 2012: EPB of Chattanooga, the municipally-owned electricity company, branched out into telecoms service a little over a decade ago and soon afterwards decided to modernise the city’s power grid. Starting in 2008, with the help of $111.5m in federal stimulus funds and another $169m raised through bonds, EPB laid over 6,000 miles of fibre-optic cable. The network became fully operational last spring; it covers EPB’s full service area, roughly 170,000 homes and businesses in urban, suburban and rural areas, and it delivers video and telephone service as well. But even though in practice someone in a trailer park on the side of a mountain could enjoy Palo-Alto-like internet speeds, relatively few Chattanoogans subscribe to the full gigabit service. EPB estimates that nine residents and two businesses pay the hefty $350-per-month charge. Most use a 30-megabit-per-second (mps) connection, which is still far faster than the American average of 6.7mps. In such a big area with roughly 170,000 homes and businesses,only 9 residents and 2 businesses took advantage of the extremely fast speeds. With grant money included, it cost them about $275 million to supply access to the entire town, similar to what you are proposing. Now just doing some rough math, if you figure around 5000 homes and businesses in this area, and you adjust the expenditure to a similar level, you would probably be looking at around $8-10 million for the city of Streator to have to lay out of their own pockets to build this network assuming no grants were available to use. It would probably be even more since the company was already in charge of the electricity and had some of the infrastucture already in place. They spent all this money to provide extremely fast connectivity and only 11 out of 170,000 took advantage of it. Are you suggesting we spend that kind of money to make to build a fiber optic network on the hope that it will attract new business that actually have the need for it? $350 a month price tag to use it? Well no wonder.
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 19, 2013 19:13:29 GMT -6
This article is older but I think it has relevance to our discussion. It was written in Aug 2012: EPB of Chattanooga, the municipally-owned electricity company, branched out into telecoms service a little over a decade ago and soon afterwards decided to modernise the city’s power grid. Starting in 2008, with the help of $111.5m in federal stimulus funds and another $169m raised through bonds, EPB laid over 6,000 miles of fibre-optic cable. The network became fully operational last spring; it covers EPB’s full service area, roughly 170,000 homes and businesses in urban, suburban and rural areas, and it delivers video and telephone service as well. But even though in practice someone in a trailer park on the side of a mountain could enjoy Palo-Alto-like internet speeds, relatively few Chattanoogans subscribe to the full gigabit service. EPB estimates that nine residents and two businesses pay the hefty $350-per-month charge. Most use a 30-megabit-per-second (mps) connection, which is still far faster than the American average of 6.7mps. In such a big area with roughly 170,000 homes and businesses,only 9 residents and 2 businesses took advantage of the extremely fast speeds. With grant money included, it cost them about $275 million to supply access to the entire town, similar to what you are proposing. Now just doing some rough math, if you figure around 5000 homes and businesses in this area, and you adjust the expenditure to a similar level, you would probably be looking at around $8-10 million for the city of Streator to have to lay out of their own pockets to build this network assuming no grants were available to use. It would probably be even more since the company was already in charge of the electricity and had some of the infrastucture already in place. They spent all this money to provide extremely fast connectivity and only 11 out of 170,000 took advantage of it. Are you suggesting we spend that kind of money to make to build a fiber optic network on the hope that it will attract new business that actually have the need for it? $350 a month price tag to use it? Well no wonder. Thanks, that jogged my memory on another question I had for Kyle. Would you suggest to the city council that they provide that fast speed for free to any business or prospective business in Streator?
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 19, 2013 19:32:09 GMT -6
muninetworks.org/tags-135Chattanooga Cements Status as Best Network in the Nation Wed, September 18, 2013 | Posted by christopher Chattanooga's EPB Fiber, a municipal FTTH system owned by the city's electric power board, has dramatically lowered its prices for the gigabit connection and increased all Internet speed tiers. The slowest connection you can get from EPB Fiber is 100 Mbps symmetrical - and it comes at the same price that most cable tiers start at for much slower connections - $58/month. Want a gig? That is now $70/month. The Washington Post covered the story, including several quotes from me. DePriest tells me that EPB's fiber network is "a great profit center." In the four years the service has been active, the utility company has increased its mid-tier speeds three times — from 15 Mbps to 30 Mbps, from 30 Mbps to 50 Mbps and now from 50 Mbps to 100 Mbps. About 2,500 elite users will enjoy 1-gig speeds by the beginning of October. Phil Dampier has more coverage at StoptheCap.com, including an analysis of AT&T and Comcast competition. AT&T charges $65 a month for 24/3Mbps service — its fastest — with a 250GB monthly usage cap, currently not enforced. For $5 more, EPB customers get 1,000/1,000Mbps with no usage limits or overlimit fees. A recent article in the Chattanoogan noted that Chattanooga had surpassed 50,000 subscribers and was on path to surpass Comcast in subscriber base locally. Mr. DePriest said Comcast had some 122,000 customers on the EPB grid when EPB launched its rival program. He said Comcast is down to around 75,000 and will likely drop to around 60,000 next year.
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 19, 2013 19:35:33 GMT -6
www.wbir.com/news/article/197475/2/Chattanooga-fiber-attracts-Knoxville-business"In a lot of places, you can get the same kind of high speed service as Chattanooga. The difference is the price," said Dan Thompson with Knoxville-based IT company Claris Networks. "Connectivity there for us is about eight to ten times cheaper in Chattanooga than it is versus Knoxville or other cities. That's a huge deal when you're comparing $100 a month or $800 a month." Claris is rapidly expanding its business in Chattanooga due to the city's infrastructure. The fast connections allow small and mid-sized companies to move towards a computing-cloud setup with Claris.
|
|
|
Post by dog on Sept 19, 2013 20:03:03 GMT -6
www.wbir.com/news/article/197475/2/Chattanooga-fiber-attracts-Knoxville-business"In a lot of places, you can get the same kind of high speed service as Chattanooga. The difference is the price," said Dan Thompson with Knoxville-based IT company Claris Networks. "Connectivity there for us is about eight to ten times cheaper in Chattanooga than it is versus Knoxville or other cities. That's a huge deal when you're comparing $100 a month or $800 a month." Claris is rapidly expanding its business in Chattanooga due to the city's infrastructure. The fast connections allow small and mid-sized companies to move towards a computing-cloud setup with Claris. But you are sorta missing the point of my previous posts. Should the City of Streator spend the probably $8+million to fund the project? And if they do, should they provide it free to businesses in an attempt to be progressive and business friendly?
|
|
|
Post by Kyle Mitchell on Sept 19, 2013 20:11:00 GMT -6
We wouldn't have to do it all at once. I'm not saying to offer it free to business; the costs would need to be recouped. This CBS story from February talks about it bringing $400 million dollars of investment there and 6000 new jobs. www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50141906n
|
|
|
Post by father of two on Sept 19, 2013 20:41:20 GMT -6
Anything is worth looking into. We all need to look st all costs associated with this and then it needs to be determined if it is viable. A well thought out plan will better prepare us than one thrown together quickly,
|
|
|
Post by chevypower on Sept 19, 2013 22:46:31 GMT -6
I agree, they need to stop and recess and see what would be best, no plan ever goes well when its just thrown together in a heart beat.
|
|