Guest Editorial

The municipal wireless phenomenon was born within a paradigm shift fueled by two elements. The first involves a desperate need from government officials to solve real problems and the second has to do with the arrival of the right technology. The intersection of these two elements has resulted in an exciting market which seems to have doubled in momentum since last year and is fueled by the ability to deliver more efficient government services and foster economic prosperity.

When I first stumbled onto the municipal wireless field in late 2003, I mistakenly saw it only as an alternative to access. If you are familiar with Intel's Digital Community initiative and the great companies who foster this initiative, you know that it has little to do with access, but instead promotes solutions. Solutions for example, which enable mobile workers, provide life saving capabilities for first responders, and enable device monitoring and control which enable greater efficiencies for local government. In almost all cases, the visionaries and project managers behind these wireless initiatives are leveraging the network asset to achieve broader economic and community benefits which extend to citizens and local business. But enough talk about the initiative. There are four topics which have occupied my thoughts recently.

About broadband
2005 was an amazing year and one accomplishment that I thought we had all made was to recognize that truly sustainable business models involve cash flows which support marketing, network operations and customer support. As more communities announce RFP's and wireless projects, I am hearing the call for "free access" with increased frequency. Worldwide broadband rankings have nothing to do with free access but instead have everything to do with sustainable business models which foster affordability, ubiquity and higher speeds. Regarding the increased favor toward "Free Access" models, I would encourage caution given two biases.

The burden of free models in limiting profit opportunities: There are hundreds of cities who want to partner with service providers and deploy networks but currently only a handful of service providers with capital to engage. This lopsided situation can be remedied by investors showing a profit which should encourage additional investment. The service providers partnering with cities should be given the freedom to explore all revenue models. As the term public-private partnership becomes commonplace, let us remember that a partnership implies equal risk and equal opportunity for upside. The upside for local government in these projects is derived from the cash savings, enabling mobile workers, implementation of device monitoring and through extending rich data to our first responders. Without private sector profitability, the downside risk involves the possibility of a dismantled network or even worse, a constricted market.

The implications of human nature: Fresh out of college, I worked for several years in a county public health facility as a clinical case manager. I had an opportunity to learn from some of the best councilors and administrators in the field and a chance to learn a little bit about poverty, the digital divide and human dignity. I worked with a variety of people, including people who suffered from mental disabilities, drug and alcohol addictions, some who were homeless, some elderly and the categories go on. These clients were often unable to afford service but services were never provided for free, instead there were payment plans and sliding fee schedules. I learned that services rendered for "free" would always hinder an individual from achieving life-affirming change. I learned that a hand out of an item or service with real value can shame a person, while an intelligent plan can enable a person to hold their head high with dignity. As we look to extinguish the digital divide, we should focus our resources