PLAYING A RIFF: City of Mesa "Takes First Steps" to Bridge The Digital Divide?

Yep there's "a first time" for everything, if we want to understand any given infrastructure, we need to unfold both the political and ethical, as well as the social choices that were done throughout its development. When we talk about the work of an infrastructure, we should always talk about “relations’, not just components of a network.

H

Press Release from the City of Mesa's newsroom

Mesa Takes First Steps to Bridge the Digital Divide

February 3, 2022 at 7:24 am
Mesa is taking the first steps to bring digital access to all its residents and businesses. The City launched a Request for Information (RFI) to learn more about companies that can install and operate an open-access fiber network across Mesa. The ambitious digital plan would connect 264-thousand city premises and 2,470 street miles, providing citywide access to the fastest internet speeds. The project would take years to complete, but the City believes it is necessary to reduce the digital divide and propel Mesa into the future.

"In an increasingly virtual world, access to high-speed internet is a key to success for individuals, families and businesses," said Mesa Mayor John Giles. "I'm thrilled we're taking this step toward bridging the digital divide, ultimately creating greater access to education, career and social connection for all who call Mesa home."
Mesa has widespread internet connectivity, and 75 percent of its residents have access to some form of landline broadband. According to a 2021 City of Mesa household survey, 17 percent of participants didn't have internet, with affordability being the barrier preventing them from accessing the web.

The City already plans to deploy Wi-Fi and Mobile Broadband infrastructure to the 10 square miles of qualified census tract in west Mesa that showed the greatest need for connectivity at the height of the pandemic, per Mesa Public Schools surveys.

 

Mesa has also started upgrading to Wi-Fi 6, the current network in downtown, City parks, pools and libraries, and is testing a Citizen Broadband Radio System (CBRS) tower at Country Club and Broadway.

[...] The City is looking to identify potential partners to bring open fiber access to Mesa through the RFI. Ideal bidders would be able to offer free or affordable high-speed internet service to qualifying households across the network to bridge the digital divide.

They will also look at companies interested in growing and investing in Mesa as new neighborhoods emerge across the City.

"We use data and technology to understand the needs of our citizens and better serve them. For Mesa to be a Smart City, we need all our residents to be engaged and connected," said Mesa's Chief Information Officer, Travis Cutright. "We are looking for partners that can help us deliver on that promise."

The due date for the RFI is Tuesday, March 15 at 3 p.m. local Arizona Time.

Mesa will host a pre-response conference on Feb. 9.

Please visit https://vendor.mesaaz.gov/ and reference proposal #2022117 for details.

For more information or to schedule interviews, please contact Kevin.Christopher@mesaaz.gov.

Contact: Kevin Christopher
(480) 644.4699
Kevin.Christopher@mesaaz.gov 

 

RELATED CONTENT Post on this blog from October 2021

THE DIGITAL DIVIDE: We're not even beginning to ask the right questions, much less acknowledge the real origins of the problem

Introduction:

The 'Digital Divide' Didn't Just Show Up One Day. It's The Direct Result Of Telecom Monopolization

Broadband

from the can't-fix-what-you-don't-acknowledge dept

Fri, Oct 1st 2021 6:14am — Karl Bode

 

Insert: "We've noted for a while that the entirety of DC has a blind spot when it comes to discussing the U.S. broadband problem. As in, U.S. broadband is plagued by regional monopolies that literally pay Congress to pretend the problem isn't happening.

That's not an opinion.

U.S. broadband is slow, expensive, patchy, with terrible customer service due to two clear things:

(1) regional monopolization (aka market failure), and

(2) state and federal regulatory capture (aka corruption).

That the telecom industry employs an entire cottage industry of think tankers, consultants, and policy wonks to pretend this isn't true doesn't change reality.

But notice when regulators, politicians, and many news outlets discuss the problem, it's usually framed in this nebulous, causation free way. About 90% of the time, the problem is dubbed the "digital divide." But the cause of this broadband divide is always left utterly nebulous and causation free. It's almost pathological.

Seriously, look at any news story about the "digital divide" in the last three months and try to find one that clearly points out that the direct cause of the problem is regional telecom monopolies and the corruption that protects them. You won't find it.

This phenomenon again showed up this week in a CNET interview with Jessica Rosenworcel, who appears to be the top candidate in the Biden Administration's glacial pursuit of a permanent FCC boss. In the article, CNET talks repeatedly about the U.S. broadband problem without once mentioning that telecom monopolies exist, and are the primary reason U.S. broadband is painfully mediocre:

"According to a study last year by the New America Foundation's Open Technology Institute, the US has the highest average monthly internet prices when compared to other countries in North America, Europe and Asia. On average, the monthly bill in the US is $84.37, which includes $68.38 for internet service and $15.99 for equipment rental fees.

"What's become clear is that affordability is a really big issue in the digital divide," she said. "And we're going to need programs like the EBB to help solve it."

> Again, please notice how expensive, shitty broadband is just this thing that exists for some nebulous reason. That Comcast, Charter, Verizon, and AT&T have lobbied for thirty years to create a favorable policy environment that harms competition and prioritizes their bloated revenues doesn't even get a sentence. It's just this bizarre act of omission driven by, you'd have to imagine, a fear of upsetting sources and advertisers. Or in the case of politicians and regulators, powerful telecom lobbyists that can make or break your career.

Please notice the word "competition" isn't even used once in an interview with a top U.S. telecom regulator about the state of U.S. broadband, where the primary issue remains a lack of competition. The article almost acknowledges the U.S. telecom monopoly problem when it discusses "digital redlining," or the documented tendency of regional telecom monopolies like AT&T to refuse to upgrade low income or minority neighborhoods (while simultaneously lobbying for laws preventing them from building their own broadband networks).

But even here the problem is addressed in this causation-free, nebulous way:

I think the fact that we're having a conversation about digital redlining is a good thing. We've got communities in this country that for too long have been overserved or underserved and overlooked. We've got to figure out how to address that.

Clearly and accurately calling out regional telecom monopolies is just viewed as...impolite in DC and much of the "he said, she said," access-motivated U.S. press.

But you can't fix a problem you refuse to even acknowledge. And when it comes to regional telecom monopolization and the corruption that protects it, we're not even beginning to ask the right questions, much less acknowledge the real origins of the problem. . ."

Reference: https://mesazona.blogspot.com/2021/10/the-digital-divide-were-not-even.html