A newly formed group is advocating a cooperative and somewhat novel approach among local communities that want to build out broadband infrastructure. Saying it wants to remain neutral from a technological and political perspective, the Community Telestructure Initiative is pushing the idea that broadband infrastructure should be treated no differently than municipal water or transportation systems and that local governments have a responsibility to provide it through a variety of measures.

“We're not getting involved in the specific policy or business model debates,” said Don Means, founder and principal of Digital Village Associates and facilitator of the CTI. “We're saying it's as important as these other infrastructures. It's almost an apple pie issue, but the implications trigger a responsibility to take action.”

Municipal networks, which have been around for more than a decade, bubbled to the surface as a hot political issue last year after Philadelphia's city government proposed building a citywide Wi-Fi network. The move drew a rapid response from Verizon, which helped push a bill through the Pennsylvania legislature to give telecom carriers right of first refusal to build such projects. CTI, however, maintains that creating macro-level laws doesn't address the real issue of increasing broadband penetration.

“What we see is that communities are all unique profiles,” Means said. “Even a state framework will only deal with part of the issue. Even if you have two communities that look alike in population and density, they'll have different policy values.”

CTI already has the endorsement of TechNet, the Public Technologies Institute and the Information Technology Association of America. Also, similar organizations to CTI — but more focused on specific technology platforms — have been growing rapidly. Earlier this month, the Fiber Optic Communities of the United States (FOCUS), a non-profit organization representing municipalities and others with fiber networks, said that it has added 13 more members. The actual number of operational municipal fiber networks, however, remains relatively small (see figure).

Regardless, CTI, like FOCUS, will likely face opposition from incumbent carriers. The U.S. Telecom Association isn't categorically against government entities building networks but believes carriers are better equipped to handle the task, said David Cohen, vice president of policy for USTA.

“We certainly have problems with government networks when they get unfair benefits by being owned by governments,” he said, reeling off a list that includes tax-exempt bond financing and being regulated by the same entity that owns the network. “We don't think government networks should be banned. We just think there should be a presumption that private industry can do it more efficiently.”

One potential compromise is the neutral hosted model under which communities (or, in some cases, carriers) build the infrastructure but open it to other service providers. Such an approach is being tested in Europe, said Lee Tsao, Worldwide Solutions Director for Wi-Fi vendor Pronto Networks.

“It's like a road system,” he said. “If you're going to build a super highway, why would you allow only city trucks to drive on it?”

CTI, however, says it is only trying to stay out of the fray and is only interested in getting all parties in the same room and talking to each other.

“The U.S. is 13th in the world of broadband penetration and falling,” Means said. “That's a good enough evidence to say that we're not doing something right.”

MUNICIPAL FIBER NETWORKS IN OPERATION