Broadband Best Practices in Greater Minnesota


Published on

Community leaders are faced with navigating a whirlwind of dynamic technologies, policy discussions at the federal and state level, and funding through the ARRA stimulus programs as they wrestle with the the challenge of ensuring world-class broadband infrastructure and services and motivating the adoption of new technologies by businesses, institutions and citizens. This session will provide an overview of community best practices for network deployment and broadband-based economic development. By Bill Coleman for the Blandin Foundation

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Lafayette LA – no speed limit in town.
    This is not necessarily a publicly owned network.
    School districts are way ahead in this with regional networks.
    Dakota, Scott and Carver Counties. Dakota County moving to 10 Gb
    Differentiate between connection to the network and connection to the Internet
  • Get data from Jack studies and Pew
  • Business is clear.
    Health car
  • Broadband Best Practices in Greater Minnesota

    1. 1. Blandin Foundation Webinar Broadband Best Practices Bill Coleman Community Technology Advisors October 20, 2009
    2. 2. Discussion What broadband changes are you struggling to make happen in your community?
    3. 3. Providers Home users Business & Institutions •Network •Ubiquity •Bandwidth •Adoption rates •Local content •Ability to pay •Rural residents •Applications •Community connections •Remote and mobile users •Tech Support
    4. 4. Networks and Services Sophisti cated Users Broad- band Vitality
    5. 5. Defining broadband Ensuring 100% Availability Providing big bandwidth for business, education, health care and government Stimulating Network Investment Infrastructure and Services
    6. 6. Private Sector  Qwest  Regional carriers like Zayo and Enventis  Independent telephone companies  Cable television companies  CLECs  National carriers  Cellular carriers Public Sector  State of Minnesota (mostly leased)  Public safety wireless  School districts (owned and leased)  Counties and municipalities  I-Nets  ISPs/Triple play
    7. 7. 0 200,000,000 400,000,000 600,000,000 800,000,000 1,000,000,000 Broadband FCC MN Task Force Austraiia California 786k 10 Mb 100 Mb 1 Gb
    8. 8.  According to Connected Nation, 96% of Minnesotans have access to broadband at 786k download or better  Almost all without broadband connection options are in rural areas  80/20 rule of deployment costs  What is the situation in your community?  How does your ubiquity change as the bandwidth standard goes up?  Is broadband ubiquitous if it is beyond the financial reach of many citizens?
    9. 9.  Internet Connection Costs  100 Mb at the Minneapolis NAP = $4-$8/Mb  100 Mb to greater MN locations = $65- $88/Mb  Within a network  Operational costs of bandwidth flowing within a network are very low.  State BB task force recommends that providers make efforts to keep more network traffic in MN rather than pay to send it to Chicago and back
    10. 10. •Suppliers and customers •County, state and federal •Regional hospitals, data centers and insurers •Regional and higher education Schools Health Care BusinessGovernment
    11. 11. Stimulating Network Investment Private • Build and demonstrate demand • Aggregate demand • Provide financing • Threaten public investment Public • Municipal or joint venture with other public sector entities • Aggregate demand Private Public Partnership • Aggregate demand • Provide financing • Contribute rights of way and/or pole attachments
    12. 12. Best Practices
    13. 13.  Partnering in Brainerd Lakes Area to use school district fiber ring investment to jumpstart CLEC activities in Brainerd, Baxter and Nisswa – filling the “black hole” and stimulating competitive response from Qwest and Charter.  Partnering in Staples to build community fiber ring connecting key institutions and deploying wireless technology to serve the greater Staples area.
    14. 14. ECMECC (East Central MN Education Cable Cooperative)  Cooperative connects 13 school districts throughout east central region with high capacity fiber  Fiber provided by US Cable and SGI Cable companies  Companies leveraged fiber investment to bring broadband to small communities within the region
    15. 15.  High capacity fiber network investment in partnership with private sector to link all Scott County facilities and communities  Partnerships with Dakota and Blue Earth Counties and Minnesota State University-Mankato to add redundancy and value  Enables easier entry for competitive broadband services throughout the county
    16. 16.  Committed municipal effort to build FTTH  TDS competitive response with FTTH  Is this really a best practice case study?  Double investment in fiber capacity  Huge legal fees by city and TDS  Lost time before deployment  Community energy
    17. 17. Emerging Projects  Southwest Fiber Project – extension of Windom city network to surrounding rural communities  Cook County – countywide FTTP network  Lake County – countywide FTTP network  Lac qui Parle County – county partnership with Farmers Telephone to explore 100% FTTH  Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe
    18. 18.  The most important connections are within your own community  The network value accelerates with more people connected  Tech-centered companies want high-capacity, low-cost, redundant networks  Entrepreneurs want connectivity in the places where they want to live which may be outside of the community
    19. 19. Discussion How is your network treating your community?
    20. 20. Increasing # of subscribers Increasing sophistication of users Ensuring tech support services Identifying and supporting technology champions Users
    21. 21. Most Businesses •Manufacturers •Agriculture •Tourism •Professionals Residents •High income •People with children •Young adults Who subscribes Business •Main Street •Agriculture with no access Residents •Older adults •Low income •People of color Who does not?
    22. 22. Online Presence Transactions Interactions
    23. 23. Growing Sector Sophistication Health Online Appointments E-Visits Real time consultation Education Online records Online curriculum Real time via video to the home Business Web site Transactions Shared database and online collaboration Government Web site Transactions and streaming video Real time video interaction with citizens
    24. 24. End- users Net work ing Web Masters
    25. 25. Technology Investments Show community support Leverage tech investments Leverage network availability Increase sector and cross-sector linkages
    26. 26. Best Practices
    27. 27. Best Practices - Subscription  Education of targeted groups through tech classes, tech fairs  Recycling of used computers to those without them, especially tied to classes  Increase access at libraries, schools, senior centers and other places
    28. 28. Best Practices - Sophistication  Web site and other technology training, especially for small businesses, non-profits and community organizations  Web site assessment services, especially for small businesses, non-profits, community organizations  Web site development subsidies for small businesses  Facilitated discussions about community web site linking strategies, especially Web 2.0 applications
    29. 29. Best Practices – Tech Support  Add capacity to existing tech support companies through training  Bundle demand for tech support via joint purchasing and by vetting quality  Attract tech support companies to your community through attraction and entrepreneurial support
    30. 30. Create and Support Tech Champions  Identify those with tech vision in schools, government, health care and business  Bring tech visionaries together to discuss plans and collaboration opportunities  Use community communication vehicles like web sites, newspapers, newsletters and cafes to promote technology  Support technology investments
    31. 31. Discussion What are the barriers to technology adoption in your community?
    32. 32. Bill Coleman