• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Observers Say Citywide Madison, Wis., WiFi Project Will, Eventually, Succeed

Posted on: Friday, 30 September 2005, 21:00 CDT

By Ben Fischer, The Wisconsin State Journal

Oct. 1--Madison mayor Dave Cieslewicz has called his idea to blanket downtown Madison with wireless Internet access a "major step forward" for his economic development plans.

But the project is stalled and months behind schedule, more than two years after Cieslewicz first directed his staff to draw up plans for a city-sponsored wireless network.

If there's any solace for Madison, it's that the city is not alone.

At least 122 cities and towns nationwide have attempted to start WiFi networks that provide wireless Internet access, and so far, most of them are still in the early stages or facing substantial roadblocks.

The most ardent proponents of wireless Internet projects envision it one day becoming like electricity, water or sewers -- a public utility residents can simply count on to be there. But there's no clear path for cities to get to that point.

The ones that have succeeded are rural towns or small suburbs like Sun Prairie, which have far simpler infrastructure needs. Larger cities like Madison and Philadelphia face a daunting mix of political, legal and economic challenges.

Nevertheless, the cities -- including Madison -- will eventually succeed, said industry observer Esme Vos, the founder of www.muniwire-less.com, a Web site that compiles news and research about WiFi projects. If for no other reason, she said, there's money to be made.

"I think what's happening is there's a very strong movement or more knowledge in the community among private companies that can make money in this space," said Vos, who is based in Amsterdam.

With technology companies enthusiastic, it's only a matter of time before the kinks are worked out, Vos said.

Madison's plan took a major hit in August when America Online, the lead contractor, pulled out of the project at the height of legal negotiations. Now the city is mulling whether to go back to another contractor that bid against AOL, or open up a new competition.

George Twigg, spokesman for Cieslewicz, said a decision could come next week.

While AOL said its decision to pull out was not related to any problems in Madison, the wrangling over how exactly the public-private partnership would work took months longer than expected.

"There's no model out there to work from," Twigg said in August. "It's a constantly shifting legal and technological landscape and it takes a lot of time."

Virtually every city has a unique business plan for their networks, Vos said, making it particularly difficult to latch on to one successful model.

For example, Portland, Ore., hopes to build its own network and let any company then sell the access to customers. Meanwhile, Philadelphia has created a city-run nonprofit to oversee its project.

Many smaller cities simply built onto their existing utility assets, like Sun Prairie, which set wireless transmitters on its water towers.

The lack of a proven blueprint, combined with a patchwork of state, local and federal regulations on telecommunications, make for slow going.

"Most of these telecom companies have to have one lawyer for every engineer," said UW-Madison communications professor Barry Orton.

Only two other companies wanted Madison's contract when it was offered last winter, prompting Orton to say providers are more dubious than they let on.

"Conceptually, it's attractive, but as a money-making business model, it's still pretty fuzzy," said Orton, who theorized that private wireless "hot spots," are so widespread in urban areas that demand for government-sponsored ones might lag.

Vos called that "baloney," and indeed, any hesitation on the part of technology companies is apparently gone. In the wake of AOL's decision, a slew of companies have contacted city and industry sources about bidding on Madison's project, officials and observers said.

State and federal lawmakers, working on behalf of large Internet providers, have introduced bills to ban local governments from providing networks if the private sector already does.

Wisconsin did not impose an outright ban, but did enact a law in 2004 that placed a series of restrictions and guidelines a municipality must fulfill.

The law doesn't affect Madison's current plan because it doesn't require any new city money, but it does limit officials' choices as they decide how to proceed.

"We don't want peoples' property taxes paying for someone else's Internet," said Todd Stuart, an aide to Sen. Robert Cowles, R-Green Bay.

Cieslewicz still supports the fundamental business plan behind a public-private partnership, Twigg said.

The Madison Community Wireless Advocates, a coalition of city residents, is asking the city to reconsider, however, and move closer to a community-based utility model and depend less on for-profit technology companies.

Twigg has said that Cieslewicz and the city's experts want to get WiFi right, and will be deliberate in doing so.

But there is some sense of urgency -- Congress could take up broad changes to federal telecommunications law next spring, which could alter the regulatory environment.

Also, Vos predicted in a report she released this week that spending on municipal wireless will double annually until 2007, threatening to leave behind cities that are too deliberate.

Said Orton, "Nobody wants to be the place where some visiting CEO of some company that's going to locate there can't get connected and says, This is a hick town' and leave."

-----

To see more of The Wisconsin State Journal, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.wisconsinstatejournal.com.

Copyright (c) 2005, The Wisconsin State Journal

Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune Business News.

For information on republishing this content, contact us at (800) 661-2511 (U.S.), (213) 237-4914 (worldwide), fax (213) 237-6515, or e-mail reprints@krtinfo.com.

TWX,

Source: The Wisconsin State Journal

More News in this Category