In our experience, just about every community considering building a community network considers open access. They want to enable new choices for services and often would prefer the local government avoid directly competing with existing service providers, for a variety of reasons. However, we are only tracking 30 open access networks on our just-released Open Access resource page.

Many of the communities that start off enthusiastic about open access ultimately decide to have a single service provider (themselves or a contractor) to have more certainty over the revenues needed to pay operating expenses and debt. We believe this will change as the technology matures and more communities embrace software-defined networks (SDN) -- but before tackling that topic, we think it is important to discuss the meaning of open access.

On a regular basis, I get an email from one deep-thinking person or another that says, "That network isn't really open access." They almost always make good points. The problem is that different people embrace open access for different reasons - they often have different expectations of outcomes. Understanding that is key to evaluating open access.

How Many ISPs?

One of the key questions centers on how many providers a household is likely to be able to choose from. Various factors, including the network architecture and economics of becoming a service provider, will influence this outcome.

Some communities simply seek to avoid a monopoly network - they are focused on the idea of potential competition. For instance, we believe Huntsville's model and agreement with Google can be considered open access because any party could lease fiber from the utility to compete with Google. However, we believe the costs of doing so by using that network architecture make robust competition unlikely.

If Google is a strong competitor in Huntsville, they will likely not face significant competition from other ISPs on the utility fiber though AT&T and Comcast will still use their networks to compete. But in the event that Google is not a strong competitor, the door will be open to other ISPs to give people a better choice. It is extremely unlikely that this arrangement would give residents many choices for Internet access...

A key problem in improving Internet access has been ensuring residents and local businesses have high quality services. One means of ensuring high quality is via competition – if people can switch away from their Internet Service Provider, the ISP has an incentive to provide better services. However, the high cost of building networks is a barrier for new ISPs to enter the market - limiting the number of options for communities. Open access provides a solution: multiple providers sharing the same physical network.

Publicly owned, open access networks can create a vibrant and innovative market for telecommunications services. Municipalities build the physical infrastructure (fiber-optic lines, wireless access points, etc.) and independent Internet Service Providers (ISPs) operate in a competitive market using the same physical network. In this competitive marketplace, ISPs compete for customers and have incentives to innovate rather than...

At the end of March, city leaders across the state of Connecticut converged on a conference to discuss the deficiencies of Internet access and ways to move forward such as a regional network, municipal networks, and public private partnerships. Over the past year, the communities of New Haven, Hartford, and Manchester, have explored several of these possibilities. What pathway they choose depends in part on the outcome of the conference.

The Conference: A Long Time Coming

The conference High-Speed Broadband Infrastructure: A Toolbox for Municipalities took place the state capital Hartford, Connecticut, on March 23, 2016. The presenters, featuring the mayors of New Haven and Hartford, addressed the diverse needs of Connecticut’s communities.

And those needs are many. The Office of Consumer Counsel just released two reports on Connecticut’s connectivity. The first report describes the deficiencies of Internet access in Connecticut. It narrates many of the struggles small, local institutions face in trying to receive adequate Internet service from incumbent providers. The second report recommends a matching grant program for pilot projects based on lessons learned from other states’ programs. 

The conference and reports came out of an initiative called the CT Gig Project. Based out of the Offices of the Consumer Counsel and the Comptroller, the CT Gig Project encouraged communities to coordinate Requests for Qualifications (RFQ) to generate information from private providers about building a statewide, open access, gigabit network. (Chris spoke about the details of the CT Gig Project with Connecticut’s Consumer Counsel Elin Katz and the State Broadband Policy Coordinator Bill Vallee in Community Broadband Bits Episode #118.) In 2014, more than 40 communities joined the initiative that New Haven and Hartford spearheaded. The process ultimately brought the towns together, setting the stage for the conference, but it would...

Back in June 2015, Santa Cruz announced a municipal fiber project with Cruzio, a local company that offers Internet access, colocation services, and a range of other data solutions. After finalizing details of the partnership, the city is officially moving forward with the plan. 

This past December, the Santa Cruz City Council voted unanimously to begin the $45 million fiber network. Cruzio intends to complete the project in the next 3 years, bringing next-generation, high-speed Internet access to the home of the UCSC banana slugs.

International Excitement

With the network given the green light, the city was abuzz. The open access Fiber-to-the-Home (FTTH) network will provide new opportunities for entrepreneurship throughout the city. The Santa Cruz Sentinel reported that the project is drawing interest from across the globe:

“Already, we haven’t even built the fiber network and people are already excited to work with us,” said Economic Development Director Bonnie Lipscomb, adding that a delegation from Beijing, China, visited Santa Cruz last week to discuss the project.

The Financial Plan

Through the partnership with Cruzio, the city will take out a financing bond that will be repaid by Cruzio’s customers on the network. Any funding gaps will be paid for 80% by Cruzio and 20% by the city. In the end, the city will own the infrastructure that Cruzio will manage. 

The decision to create the network has not been taken lightly. The Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce CEO Bill Tysseling, spoke to the years of consideration and deliberation before this decision:

“It feels good to [have it] be passed, we had this conversation several decades actually.”