MuniWireless interviewed Joanne Hovis, founder of Columbia Telecommunications Corporation, an engineering and consulting company.

They produced a Wi-Fi feasibility study for Tucson, Arizona (pdf) and a fiber to the premises study for San Francisco (pdf).

Here’s a taste of that interview:

Is muni Wi-Fi dead, as some mainstream press articles are saying? If it’s not dead, then how is it evolving?

The only thing that is dead is EarthLink’s wireless business. Simply put, EarthLink misjudged the market, the technology, and its own staying power and is now withdrawing from its commitments–that is not an unusual story in the history of any industry and I’m sure we’ll hear it again in the history of community broadband. The significant point here is that it is EarthLink that failed, not Wi-Fi, and not local government.

Hundreds of communities around the country identified and quantified their needs for broadband over the past few years, and many of them are following up with projects tailored to meet that need. Numerous projects are underway that do not rely on the private sector to supply all the capital or all the operational capabilities.

The mainstream press has not recognized the multiplicity of muni broadband approaches because it is enamored of the simple storyline: during the hype phase, the story was of Google building a “free” network in San Francisco; now, the story is that there is no business case for muni Wi-Fi. Neither of these was or is true.

Is it just hysteria - all the problems can be laid on the doorstep of one provider’s shaky financial situation (EarthLink)? Can cities just put out the same old RFPs (asking a provider to bear all costs) and hoping that someone else will bid (i.e. an EarthLink replacement). Or do they have to fundamentally change the model?

EarthLink’s failure has one benefit—it hopefully erases the idea that local government can address its broadband concerns for free. I’ve never believed that most cities, towns, and counties could just put out RFPs and expect the private sector to build these networks.

Now, as in the past, a community that is serious about expanding its broadband options needs to do some hard analysis in advance of putting out an RFP. It should evaluate the needs for broadband, the potential market for various services at various prices, and the costs of deployment. This analysis, if realistic, will point to a realistic business model.

Any advice you would give a city that’s currently thinking of deploying a citywide network?

Just a few simple things to get started:

First, take heart that the hype bubble has burst, and you are working in a more realistic environment.

Second, recognize that this is not going to be easy or free—you are going to have to invest energy, time, and likely funds in the project – as you would in any other municipal project.

Third, let your needs drive the project, rather than the technological flavor-of-the-month. In other words, don’t start by selecting the technology–start by broadly assessing your communications needs, both of your government and your public. This analysis should point you to particular technologies, strategies, and business models.

It should be noted that the Columbia Telecommunications Corporation is an engineering and consulting company and should not be confused with the Community Technology Center. Community Technology Center is a national membership network of community technology centers (CTCs) and other non-profits, united in their commitment to provide technology access and education to underserved communities.

First published in 1997, their CTC Center Start-Up Manual is widely recognized as a principal guide for establishing Community Technology Centers and serves as an organized patchwork of CTC experiences. The CTC Resource Center has a wide array of templates, best practices, and forms currently used in the field.

BTW, I’m posting this article from my apartment in downtown Portland Oregon, using MetroFi’s FREE municipal wireless network. After some initial frustration due to lack of service, it’s now working great.

Did I mention it was FREE? Is this a great country, or what?

Matt Lampe, Portland’s CTO, deserves a lot of credit for believing in the concept and sheparding it through Portland’s bureaucracy. Seattle and San Francisco . . . we laugh in your general direction.

Posted by Sam Churchill on Thursday, September 6th, 2007 at 9:35 am.