Building the Untethered Nation II

a strategy paper from

Building the Untethered Nation II:Understanding the Vital Role of Local Governments in Wireless Broadband Implementations

Building the Untethered Nation II

�

I. AbouttheGuide..................................................................................................................3

II. Introduction .........................................................................................................................4III.TheGreatUntethering:TheCampaignThusFar .........................................................5 TheStateofSupplyandDemand...............................................................................................5 WirelessBroadband—MissionOne,PublicSafety..................................................................... .6 PublicHealthandSocialServices................................................................................................7 BridgingtheDigitalDivide..........................................................................................................8

IV.TheRoleofGovernment:APublicorPrivateInvestment? ......................................10 TheChoices:Build,BuyorBroker.............................................................................................10 AChecklistofQuestionstobeAnswered...................................................................................11 Governance:SumminguptheFight..........................................................................................12 BusinessModels:FeeorFree-for-All?........................................................................................13

V. TechnologyandtheMarket:Cellvs.IEEEWireless ....................................................15 TheIndustryShakeOut............................................................................................................15 WiMAXStandardization..........................................................................................................15 Innovation...............................................................................................................................16

VI.TheNewInfrastructure:Yours,TheirsandOurs .......................................................17 Security..................................................................................................................................17 Hybridity................................................................................................................................17 QualityofService.....................................................................................................................17 LicensedandUnlicensedSpectrum...........................................................................................18 Stand-aloneWirelessorIntegrationwiththeNetworkBackbone.................................................18 End-userTestingandTraining...................................................................................................19 ContractManagement............................................................................................................19

VII.Conclusion .......................................................................................................................20

“Mobile Internet … will not just be a way to do old things while moving. It will be a way to do things that couldn’t be done before.”

— Howard rHeingold, Author, Smart mobS

Table of Contents

Building the Untethered Nation II:Understanding the Vital Role of Local Governments in Wireless Broadband Implementations

A Strategy Paper fromThe CeNTeR foR DIGITaL GoVeRNmeNT

�

I. about the Guide

When the Center for Digital gov-

ernment coined the phrase Untethered

Nation through the release of an origi-

nal wireless strategic planning guide in

2005, the paper served as recognition

that broadband wireless extended the

value of public networks. moreover, the

guide was based on the modest proposi-

tion that broadband landline and wireless

networks have earned a position along-

side roads, bridges and ports as key public

infrastructures that support commerce,

education, recreation and government in

communities across the nation.

the Center’s intention with the origi-

nal guide was to capture pioneering local

governments’ emerging practices for the

benefit of those jurisdictions that follow

their lead. some success factors from the

original UntetheredNation include:

• Coming to terms with a public entity’s

responsibility for ensuring success.

• Understanding the responsibility of a

provider (including fiscal stability).

• Committing to a long-term view of

wireless deployment.

• Deciding whether public entities will

be providers (utility), brokers or cus-

tomers of wireless infrastructure.

• reflecting infrastructure choice in

architecture.

• pursuing meaningful pilots in limited

geography.

• reviewing and learning from proof of

concepts.

• Developing a funding model that

accounts for vendor solvency and fiscal

sustainability of wireless deployment.

• Building out full deployment based on

newly earned and learned competence.

the original release was, and continues

to be, one of the most popular downloads

from the Center’s white paper repository.

over time, readers have asked for follow-

up work to address issues that were beyond

the scope of the original, particularly in the

area of when, whether and how to invest

in this new public infrastructure.

enter BuildingtheUntetheredNationII:

UnderstandingtheVitalRoleofLocalGov-

ernmentsinWirelessBroadbandImplemen-

tations, the second paper in the series. It

begins by exploring the “great Untether-

ing,” discussing the campaign thus far and

looking for answers about where we are

going. the paper examines widely diver-

gent opinions regarding the role govern-

ments should play in enabling wireless

broadband, from the municipal utility

builder to a broker or buyer of wireless

broadband. In that context, the sequel

guide discusses:

• the major role public safety plays and

will play as the government’s wireless

anchor tenant.

• Business models that may be most

appropriate for governments to pursue.

• Competing technologies and standards,

and what’s on the horizon for wireless.

this paper concludes with a series of

caveats or admonitions about security,

hybridism, quality of service, the relative

advantages of licensed and unlicensed

spectrum, the dangers of standalone wire-

less solutions, and finally, a brief discussion

about training and contract management.


�

II. Introduction: extending the Network to Where the Public’s Work Gets Done

a new platform is under construction.

this build-out is leading to an untether-

ing of activities that had long been place-

bound due to the physically connected

network cable. the rise of the mobile

Internet extends the reach and value of

the nation’s network infrastructure. It

brings the promise of fulfilling marshal

mcLuhan’s famous 40-year-old prediction

about the network becoming an exten-

sion of us and how we live.1 the new

infrastructure will contribute to more

mobility, and to a more interconnected

network — more denseness than has

previously existed. the clarion call of

“chips everywhere” is made more fea-

sible with the addition of a broadband

wireless infrastructure. Like the brain,

these denser pathways with greater con-

nections can support a vast expansion of

new knowledge across all human activity.

the untethering will connect a vast swath

of the nation’s information and human

resources. It will also wirelessly connect

hard assets such as roads, buses, police

and emergency vehicles, and military

equipment. Ultimately, it has the potential

to lessen the impact of catastrophes and

to save lives.

examples of new uses for this chip-

embedded and wirelessly connected

infrastructure are already emerging. recall

for a moment that brisk thanksgiving

evening in 2005. about 20 minutes from

downtown Chicago, a westbound com-

muter train approached the elmwood

park crossing. Unable to stop, the train

plowed into five vehicles, creating a chain

reaction with 17 cars, standing some cars

on end before the train came to a final

stop. all told, 16 people were injured,

leaving three in critical condition. But what

seems to be only another example of an

all too-common event, and a reminder of

the danger of cars attempting to race the

light and getting caught inside the crossing

gates, this particular occurrence contains a

twist. a remote strongbox-encased cam-

era — recently purchased with home-

land security grant funds and connected

to Cook County, Ill.’s new wireless net-

work — captured the scene on video as

the event unfolded.2 the video became a

prime piece of evidence in a subsequent

transportation safety investigation that

cleared the train’s engineer of any wrong-

doing.3 Cook County’s wireless remote

security camera infrastructure platform is

apparently already earning its keep.

Interestingly, the construction of a wire-

less broadband platform harkens back to

a brilliant though costly military campaign

waged more than 60 years ago. the pri-

mary author of this guide recently had the

opportunity to stand at another kind of

ground zero, in another place and from

another era. the ghosts remain at arro-

manches on the wide beaches of Nor-

mandy, where the remnants of mulberry

Harbor pay tribute to British engineering

ingenuity. mothballed British vessels were

assembled and limped their way across

the english Channel completely under

their own steam. they were anchored

and sunk to form the first components

of an artificial harbor just off the coast

of france. along with caissons, floating

quays, moorings, floating roadways and

docks, the harbor became a platform,

without which the D-Day landings at

omaha and Utah beaches could never

have been successfully executed. as D-

Day — a campaign that changed the face

of europe forever — began, likewise, the

mobile broadband infrastructure will form

the technology platform that will support

vast opportunities. New uses will emerge

and new users will be attracted as the

great untethering campaign unfolds.

still, as the mobile Internet flows into

both major aspects and minor niches of

human culture, it would be unrealistically

optimistic to expect it will deploy seam-

lessly, without fits and starts. Wireless

broadband deployment is complicated by

a highly volatile technology environment

as higher speed cell phone, Wi-fi, WimaX

and satellite technologies compete for

market niche and market dominance.

the discussion that follows focuses

on the great untethering campaign as it

presently exists: examining governments’

roles as builders, buyers and brokers; the

state of the industry and its solutions; the

shape and the elements of the emerging

infrastructure.


�

III. The Great Untethering: The Campaign Thus far

TheStateofSupplyandDemand

Both the supply of and demand for

wireless is expanding. Customers and

providers are extending service delivery

by extending the network. In a 2005

report, aBI research estimated that

municipal Wi-fi networks covered only

about 1,500 square miles worldwide.

By 2010, that coverage is anticipated

to increase to 126,000 square miles,

or roughly the area of the state of New

mexico. most of the growth will occur

in North america and asia. more than

1 million wireless mesh routers will be

shipped by that time and manufacturing

revenues from those shipments alone will

exceed $1.2 billion.4

What is now clearly a digital majority is

racing to adopt a third screen — the pDa/

cell phone, which joins the tV and com-

puter as it competes for the attention of a

new sector of “viewers.” Demand is accel-

erating (even though the uptake rate in the

United states lags behind europe and asia

in this technology adoption). according to

an april 2006 survey, there are more than

178 million wireless subscribers in the

United states — a number projected to

grow to 233.5 million by 2009.5

even greater adoption of the third

screen is already occurring among young

people who represent a larger share of

the 7 to 9 percent of americans who do

not have home phone lines, using cell

phones as primary phones. Just under half

(48 percent) of cell-only respondents are

under 30 years old, while 35 percent are

30 to 49 years of age.6

this unprecedented demand — “the

largest one-year addition of new sub-

scribers since 1983 — when commercial

wireless services were first offered…”

— shows no signs of abating. six-month

revenues have doubled over a five-year

period. this trend also did not take into

account the latter half of 2005, which

included the Christmas shopping season

and also coincidentally coincides with local

government It year-end spending cycles,

at a time when tax revenues at state and

local government are on the rebound.7

this year was good to the wireless industry, which reported the largest one-year addition of new subscribers since 1983 — when commercial wireless service was first offered.

source: CtIa — the Wireless association

118.4

134.6

148.1

169.5

194.6

$41.4

$49.3

$55.7

$36.7

$30.9first half 2001

first half 2002

first half 2003

first half 2004

first half 2005

total revenues shown in billions

total subscribers shown in millions

Figure1:WirelessUsage


�

Local governments and cities in par-

ticular are increasingly taking the lead.

Wireless mobility easily figures into com-

munity strategies, for everything from

reducing the digital divide to expanding

economic development. the build-out

of city wireless infrastructures is closely

watched, widely celebrated in many

quarters and decried in others, but still

— all in all — nascent when considering

wireless availability in communities from

coast to coast. figure 2 provides a high

level view of what remains as an uneven

deployment pattern across the country.

public wireless availability, coupled with

dedicated-use wireless networks, provide

a wireless broadband platform for doing

the public’s business. and chief among

the myriad uses is public safety.

WirelessBroadband—

MissionOne,PublicSafety

Local government chief information

officers (CIos) from across the country

express genuine excitement about real

progress improving the day to day opera-

tions of police, fire and emergency health

personnel. Clearly public safety is priority

one for municipal wireless uses.

CIo richard aldridge explains how

wireless technology is making emergency

medical technicians (emts) more efficient in

Charles County, maryland. “the emts got

their application online for ambulance track-

ing and ambulance transport, so when they

pull into the hospital they just key everything

in and press a button. and the hospital’s got

the transport information which made it

really, really nice,” says aldridge.

CIo Cathy maras o’Leary is helping

Cook County, Illinois build a dedicated

use or private wireless network to sup-

port multi-jurisdictional homeland security

efforts, using $50 million in federal funds

(shared with the City of Chicago) to aug-

ment the county-wide area network and

their legacy radio system. o’Leary has

ambitious plans to link the county, the city

of Chicago and all the suburbs into a web

of interoperability. Wireless connections

are being installed in every suburb and an

802.11 antenna is being added to eigh-

teen 300-foot, 800 megahertz radio tow-

ers. o’Leary says that when the installation

is complete, they will equip every police

car to be connected to a hotspot on the

expanded network.

“When you are in the hot spot,”

o’Leary explains, “you are at 30 frames

per second [of streaming video]. one

reason for the increasing demand for

streaming video technology is the pro-

liferation of security cameras installed at

various sites such as shopping malls, con-

vention centers, and schools…[a]reas

where people [congregate].” o’Leary

predicts increasing demand for more

cameras since video has been made rela-

tively inexpensive and efficient. “[W]e are

literally using off the shelf systems and the

secret of our video is the compression

that we are using…we don’t want to use

all of our bandwidth [on video].”

alisoun K. moore, the chief information

officer for montgomery County, md., says

her county is also heavily committed to

wireless broadband. Under montgomery

County’s ambitious plan, moore says that

all police and fire vehicles have broadband

wireless data communications in addition

to voice. officers complete all incident

reports wirelessly from their patrol cars,

which are then seamlessly uploaded to the

record management system.

moore explained that montgomery

County built what she refers to as the

“wireless lifeline infrastructure,” which

is seamlessly integrated with their fiber

optic infrastructure and connects to more

than 100 facilities.

New york City is also an equal partici-

pant in the wireless game. their wireless

expansion plans call for up to a $500

million wireless investment over the next

five years. and similar to Cook County

and Chicago, mission one is public safety.

the NypD is finishing its migration away

from a “sneaker net” to support its new,

real-time Crime Center (rtCC).

on July 18, 2005, the rtCC opened

for business 24 hours a day, seven days a

week. Its initial focus has been to provide

direct, real-time support for field investi-

gators working high-profile cases. In the

30,000-74,999

75,000-124,999

125,000-249,999

250,000-or more

Avg.

available in public facilities (libraries, airports, government offices and schools)

20% 27% 41% 38% 32%

available in downtown business district, commercial areas and enterprise zones

12% 22% 24% 36% 24%

available in residential areas 12% 10% 7% 11% 10%

available across the entire city 20% 16% 17% 16% 17%

source: Center for Digital government, DigitalCitiesSurvey, 2005

Figure2:PublicWirelessAvailability


�

eight months since its initial launch, the

rtCC has provided investigative support

for more than 2,500 incidents, and has

been credited with important contribu-

tions to efficiency, effectiveness and suc-

cessful case resolution. this real-time

access to information increases the effec-

tiveness of the investigators in critical initial

stages of the canvas, and correspondingly

increases officer safety. the rtCC Data

marts contain data with very specific foci,

such as arrest, complaint, domestic vio-

lence, criminal summons, stop and frisk,

investigator cards (iCards), parole, pro-

bation and warrants. marts are updated

immediately upon availability of source

data, with geo-coding attached. Links

among incidents are created automati-

cally. the marts underpin extensive ana-

lytic and ad hoc reporting capabilities of

the rtCC and provide useful and timely

access to incident history, thus supporting

real-time crime investigations.8

other examples of public safety-focused

initiatives span the United states, from both

coasts to the heartland and into the south:

• Wireless laptops in patrol cars extend

and enhance finite police human

resources in oakland, Calif., everett,

Wash. and Cisco, texas.

• a wireless infrastructure streamlines

emergency response in the states of

North Carolina and Washington.

• Wireless field support allows a seven-

member coroner’s staff to handle

2,500 cases per year, cutting wait

times for police and families from days

to hours in Kane County, Ill.9

yet progress is uneven across the

country and not all stories from the field

are positive. public safety and emergency

health entities also have an opportunity to

capitalize on the trend of expanding cell

phone use by providing improved emer-

gency response with the e911 program.

Under the e911 program, satellites and

cell towers can communicate a customer’s

location to a dispatcher. as envisioned, the

dispatcher can then immediately notify

emergency responders to the general

location of the call. While an advance in

public safety, progress in some states can

be patchy and slow.

Unfortunately, such disadvantages can

cost lives. Consider the death of a Utah

man named scott aston in october

2004. Dispatchers could not pinpoint the

exact location of the call and emts ended

up at the wrong place, even though the

call was placed from a cell phone. In fact,

police in provo, Utah were unable to

locate aston’s body until four days later.

additionally, other states and localities

are quite far behind: alabama, arizona,

Idaho, Illinois and Wisconsin. those five

states have all indicated to the federal

government accounting office (gao)

that they may never be able to imple-

ment the e-911 service.10

Unfortunately, shifting political priorities

and the desire to trim spending, particu-

larly in election years, can lead to gov-

ernments neglecting tested and proven

technologies. these issues will remain a

key challenge for the foreseeable future.

as issues related to wireless availability,

functionality and reliability consume indus-

try efforts and the public sector information

technology (It) community, public agencies

have begun to imagine how mission-criti-

cal work can be completed and improved

using this new wireless platform.

Despite political and financial hurdles,

wireless deployments in non-public safe-

ty service areas are also expanding. the

current landscape includes:

PublicHealthandSocialServices

Wireless technologies are being

deployed to monitor, detect and respond

to public health threats, such as:

• West Nile Virus in pennsylvania

• restaurant Inspections

• mosquito-borne diseases in Harris

Co., texas

• radiation and environmental toxins in

New york, N.y.11

PropertyAssessmentandInspection

• economic development building in-

spectors and tax assessors visit sites,

work with clients, and upload and

download data, reports, graphs and

photos.

• philadelphia will reevaluate all 600,000

land parcels within its boundaries by

2007 — an early deployment prior-

ity for the Wireless philadelphia infra-

structure.12

PublicWorksandEnforcement

Wireless technologies are heavily involved

in the support and management of:

• fleets of police, fire and animal

control vehicles, street cleaners and

garbage trucks in sacramento, Calif.

• train stations and airports in san

francisco

• Water and waste water infrastructure

in edgecombe County, N.C.

• Detection of illegal dumping in Doña

ana, N.m.

• fire hydrants in elsinore, s.C.

• road signs in Boulder, Colo.

• electrical substations in Laurens, s.C.

• Weed abatement in riverside,

Calif.13

to be clear, there is no single pattern

in wireless deployments. many jurisdic-


�

tions “layer” the wireless infrastructure,

bifurcating between dedicated, secure

capacity for public safety and other layers

to support the other functions of govern-

ment. However, some jurisdictions choose

to deploy separate networks — one for

public safety, another for everything else

— out of caution or a very conservative

reading of security-related mandates. the

duplicate network approach brings advan-

tages in terms of disaster recovery and

business continuity. While public safety

traffic runs on a dedicated network, the

second network can serve as a readily

available backup during times of emer-

gency or disruption to the primary public

safety wireless network.

BridgingtheDigitalDivide

In addition to montgomery County’s

public safety initiative previously dis-

cussed, CIo alisoun moore explains

how the county is bridging the digital

divide. Currently, montgomery County

libraries are equipped with Wi-fi. moore

can barely contain her excitement when

she describes this high-value citizen ser-

vice: “they are actually building a library

with a concession stand that we think

will be owned and operated by a coffee

shop. people just enjoy their libraries.

they like to go there with the kids; they

like to hook up with not just our librar-

ies but some of our more public facilities

with Wi-fi access as well. Like the sec-

ond floor where our county executive is

— he gets so many visitors; they all have

public access as well. so in that case, we

are definitely providers to our citizens.”

other low- or no-cost broadband

wireless services bridge the digital divide

and support vital public services in:

• philadelphia: When completed, earth-

Link will offer broadband from $10

per month.

• san francisco and mountain View,

Calif.: google built a Wi-fi network in

mountain View, Calif., and won a bid

with earthLink, Inc. to build another

network in san francisco.

• New orleans: the city began service

to residents after Katrina damaged

landline infrastructure.

• tempe, ariz.: the city launched a net-

work in february through mobilepro.

• Walla Walla, Wash.: County-wide

outdoor wireless is provided through

the public utility district.

• macedonia: the first country to

establish a border-to-border wireless

“cloud.”

• fredericton, New Brunswick: this

Canadian city provides free border-

to-border Wi-fi to all.

this eclectic mix of deployments

reflects a continuing evolution and cus-

tomization in the fit between wireless

broadband and the communities it is

deployed in. Broadband can be a cata-

lyst for economic development in rural,

geographically isolated or economically

disadvantaged regions. such regions’

wireless infrastructures bring the potential

of new jobs, while also helping to retain

jobs. Indeed, in an economy increasingly

reliant on off-shoring, such “rural shoring”

holds promise of taking advantage of rural

america’s benefits: lower costs (including

affordable housing) and desirable quality

of life (improved air quality, safer streets,

better schools and freedom from traffic

congestion) can attract college grads (who

demographers remind us have different

work and life values than earlier genera-

tions), and retired professionals (who are

looking for a second career or just want or

need to work another five to 10 years).

to compete in today’s economy,

small- and medium-sized businesses

need access to data and clients in real

time. With a wireless infrastructure,

there is nothing to prevent even the

most remote communities from provid-

ing easier, low-cost hosts for the virtual

operation of any company that relies on

staff who work from home.

a final word on the seeming inevita-

bility of ubiquitous wireless: increasingly,

we are all living and working in ways that

make personal area networks (paNs)

necessary. paNs are popping up to con-

nect formerly discrete computing devic-

es (including cell phones and personal

digital assistants) that surround a single

person. paNs typically have a reach of a

few meters and serve as an aggregation

point for local devices to access both local

resources (printers, scanners and the like)

as well as larger networks. put another

way, all our nomadic devices use paNs as

the digital equivalent of oxygen.


�

Figure3:AQuickReferenceGuidetoUnderstandingCurrentandEmergingWirelessProtocols

It is critically important to match traffic

(voice, data and video) with the protocols

that best carry them. the following is a list

of protocol definitions and explanations:

1) Wi-Fi – “Wi-fi” is short hand for

“Wireless fidelity.” Wi-fi-certified

products are tested and approved for

interoperability. the Institute of elec-

trical and electronics engineers (Ieee)

developed what is referred to as

802.11™ standards. all Wi-fi prod-

ucts — including hotspots (the receiv-

er or base station) found in homes,

airports, hotels, parks, Internet cafes

and other locations and their clients,

the device cards or chips (transmit-

ters) — all operate on radio frequen-

cies of either 2.4 gHz (802.11b or

g) or 5 gHz radio frequency band

(802.11 a). speed or throughput of

these various devices are measured

in megabits per second (mbps) and

802.11a run at more than twice the

speed of 802.11g and nearly five

times the speed of 802.11b.14 range

will vary based on obstruction, but is

generally about 300 feet.

2) WiMAX – WimaX, or Worldwide

Interoperability for microwave access

protocol, was developed in 2002 and

is emerging as a new wireless technol-

ogy. Like Wi-fi, the standard was pro-

mulgated by Ieee and is referred to as

802.16. WimaX has some advantages

over Wi-fi, mainly because it has a range

of up to 30 miles and also has the abil-

ity to license spectrum. the advantage

of licensed spectrum is that it minimizes

the chance of interference because oth-

ers cannot broadcast on frequencies that

a provider controls. WimaX transmits

in the licensed 10 gHz and 66 gHz

range and between the 2 gHz and 11

gHz, which offers both licensed and

unlicensed frequencies. WimaX uses

what is referred to as the media access

Control Layer (maC). the purpose of

this communications protocol is to pre-

vent signals from different stations collid-

ing and thus garbling the message.15

3) UMTS – Universal mobile telecom-

munications system (Umts) is a third

generation, sometimes referred to as

3.5 g, broadband wireless technology

delivering voice, data, and video over

a digital network at speeds far superior

to currently popular but much slower

cellular technologies. although more

expensive than Wi-fi, the advantage

(along with other 3g deployments)

is that it has a greater coverage area

because it relies on established wireless

provider networks. It is estimated that

Umts will represent a $2 billion indus-

try by 2010.16

4) EV-DO–evolution-Data optimized,

or eV-Do, is a wireless third genera-

tion data standard currently available

in the U.s. cellular market. It has one

of the highest data transfer rates cur-

rently available in the United states at

2.4 mbps. Like Umts, the advantage

is the availability of coverage plus the

ability to work in moving vehicles. eV-

Do is more widely deployed than

Umts. It is not capable of competing

in the throughput arena, with Wi-fi

transfer rates of up to 54 mbps.17

5) HSDPA – High speed Downlink

packet access (HsDpa) is another of the

alphabet soups of 3g providers. some

also refer to this at 3.5 g technology

and as the next evolution of Umts.

Latest claims by wireless providers indi-

cate throughput of 10 mbps.18

matching competing wireless solutions and

the web of emerging standards can be a

challenge in an environment characterized

more by change than stability. Webopedia

offers a good description of wireless stan-

dards for those trying to better understand

which standard might fit best for their par-

ticular problem and solution.19


10

IV. The Role of Government: a Public or Private Investment?

Clearly, local governments are becom-

ing deeply involved in wireless broad-

band, yet have significantly divergent

opinions when it comes to thinking about

and determining what role or roles they

will play. Understandably, municipal lead-

ers are struggling with the value propo-

sitions of building, buying or brokering

wireless services. In reality, many local

governments do a little of each, mostly

using hybrids that fit with the community’s

unique histories, priorities and politics.

for this reason, the authors broached this

discussion directly with those involved in

daily wireless considerations, interview-

ing a cross section of municipal leaders in

early 2006.20

When CIos and other county leaders

think about wireless, deployment runs

along a broad continuum – from legacy

wireless voice systems (such as an 800

megahertz radio system for first respond-

ers) to extensive Wi-fi coverage through-

out their jurisdictions. according to a

recent survey by the Center for Digital

government, governments lack consen-

sus about which role is best to assume

when involved in broadband, whether

in wired or wireless deployments, as the

chart below demonstrates.

still, governments and their leaders

exist to make decisions and each govern-

ment needs to decide what its primary

role will be. these decisions will be driven

by weighing cost against potential reward

and scientific feasibility. the decision will,

in the end, be determined within the con-

text of each community’s values.

TheChoices:Build,BuyorBroker

public entities are faced with three main

role choices, although hybrids are likely to

proliferate as infrastructure development

moves from conceptual to the concrete.

Build– an entity owns and builds the

infrastructure and delivers wireless ser-

vices across the network.

Buy – these governments mainly con-

sume services from third parties for inter-

nal operations, leaving citizen provision of

wireless broadband to the myriad of pri-

vate sector providers that decide where,

when and if they will offer services within

various geographic sub-regions.

Broker – governments acting as bro-

kers may enter into agreement or contract

with one or more wireless service provid-

ers to ensure service provision within their

jurisdiction. these may also be referred to

as public-private partnerships.

Below, figure 4 represents one view of

the role of the public and private sectors

in information technology deployments,

but it also applies to the specific case of

wireless.

In a tradition that traces back to New

Deal-era rural electrification, a consider-

able amount of people see government’s

role as an agency that helps bring broad-

band to rural, poor and underserved

consumer markets where private sec-

tor development lags. this role selection

involves a delicate dance, and at times,

pitched battles with local incumbent tele-

com providers. Despite appearances, such

RoleofPrivateProviders:Deliver broadly available tele-communication services that are priced competitively as commodities or at some other optimal price point.

TransitionRoles:as marketplace dynamics and technologies change, some public services should be transitioned to the private providers. other services not broadly available or affordable are made available through the public service entity.

RoleofPublicServiceEntity:Deliver education, govern-ment service, telemedicine, and other services that are not broadly available or affordable, and serve as a research and development test bed.

Figure4:BalancingPublicandPrivateRoles

source: richard Varn, “emerged, Converged, and Connected: the Wireless american Landscape,” southeast Wireless Conference, 2005.


11

conflicts are not governed by deliberate con-

frontational politics and mean-spiritedness,

but arise based on the specific characteristics

of the user community and the impact on

private sector business models.

AChecklistofQuestionstobe

Answered

Because of these differences, there are

several important questions which merit

careful consideration before a municipal-

ity or local government embarks on a

wireless broadband initiative:

1) Why is a wireless strategy necessary to

pursue? for a more detailed explana-

tion on this topic, see the companion

strategic guide to this paper entitled

BuildingtheUntetheredNation.21 the

companion paper makes a convincing

general business case that must then

be made operational and tailored to

the community in question.

2) What are the proposed boundar-

ies and the location of the rollout?

are the communities urban, rural, a

city, municipalities within a county, a

regional deployment, or a statewide

infrastructure?

3) How is the initial build-out and subse-

quent maintenance paid for, and what

entities will pay for it?

CIo moore indicates that montgom-

ery County is quite comfortable playing

all three roles: builder, buyer and broker.

moore is convinced of the importance of

the broker role in supporting Wi-fi access

in municipal areas, but she also under-

stands the political implications of step-

ping into roles that have traditionally been

filled by private sector providers. accord-

ing to moore:

[I]tdidn’tmakeanysenseforustopro-

videwirelessInternetaccess[everywhere],

butwedidwantto[offer] ittoourdown-

town business district, to people who are

outsidethe[publictransportationtrains]or

insomeofourparkareasandareaswhere

thereisalotofoutsidedining…Inorderto

avoidanycontroversy,weissuedarequest

forspecialintereststothecarriercommu-

nityand[askedifthey]wouldliketopartner

with… the county [to]…advertise ser-

vicestocertaindowntowndistricts.

this partnership would be a pro bono

arrangement, and is how a provider was

selected. the county provided some of

the infrastructure, including servers and

buildings on which to mount antennas.

the county worked closely with the

community associations to choose service

locations. according to moore, it worked

out well in the end, and for a minimal

amount of money.

the montgomery example is instruc-

tional because it underscores the impor-

tance of understanding and tapping into an

increasingly popular business model; the

advent of google and other new entrants

may yield some advantages to counties

considering similar public-private partner-

ships. But out of necessity and curiosity,

the question becomes why the private

sector would partner in such a way with

the public sector. Here is moore’s specu-

lative response to the question:

Why would the private sector do this?

ThisparticularproviderwasanInternetser-

vice provider (ISP)who is actually located

in thatarea,and they got freemarketing

forpressreleases;wehavepamphletsand

nameplatesupallaroundplaceswithinthe

Wi-Fiarea.Oncetheygotthatnamerec-

ognition—becauseagain,thisisanurban

area—guesswhathappened?Apartment

owners, residential business building own-

ers,realestatefolks…[and]peoplethat

owned properties quickly contacted [the

ISP]andsaid, ‘Hey,we’d liketooutfitour

buildingwiththisaccess.’Sincethey[part-

neredwithus,theISPhas]hadtheirbest

monthever.

montgomery County’s Wi-fi access

was implemented with an initial county

investment of $20,000, followed by

$1,000 to $1,500 per year. the mont-

gomery County model demonstrates

what can be done with some creativity,

ingenuity and “stick-to-it-iveness,” com-

bined with a pinch of political realism.

TheRoleofGovernanceinWireless

BroadbandInitiatives

another key ingredient in a successful

wireless broadband initiative is identifying

a good place to start. the best start to a

local government initiative comes with a

shared vision of the community leaders’

role. this vision can then lead to funda-

mental questions that must be answered

before moving forward. should the local

government primarily be a consumer,

whose job it is to create a “government-

only cloud”? Within the narrow role of

consumer, government can either deliver

or broker those services — but only to

that government itself.

other governments have taken a dif-

ferent approach and view of emerging

communications infrastructure, whether

untethered or wired, in a more holistic

manner. this view is broad. such govern-

ments have taken action to promote uni-

versal broadband access and have looked

to wireless opportunities to increase the

speed of the build-out at a significantly

lower cost. they see the world through

the lens of the municipal utility. yet as gov-

ernments will soon discover, duplication of

infrastructure serves no one’s interests.


1�

for example, in jurisdictions where cur-

rent penetration rates for Internet connec-

tivity exceed 90 percent, municipal leaders

claim they did not need to build their own

wireless infrastructure for public broadband

because it would be duplicative of existing

private sector infrastructures.22

another variable affecting governance

roles was reported by counties that have

large urban cities within their bounds. these

counties were often specifically prohib-

ited by statute from providing emergency

services such as police and fire. these enti-

ties tended to house lower consumers of

wireless because they were not primary

providers of emergency services.

still other counties that cover very

wide geographic regions report they

have encountered difficulty from a cost

standpoint deploying universal wireless

broadband, even when it is badly need-

ed. However, even in these counties

we are beginning to see some innova-

tive and targeted Wi-fi projects and, in

some instances, emergency services have

became anchor tenants for more ambi-

tious wireless deployments.23

Governance:SummingUptheFight

If local governments do decide to own

and control a broadband municipal utility,

this direction requires delicate balancing

of cost against economic opportunity.

Clearly, managing the expectations of pri-

vate sector providers, legislatures and the

courts becomes a major challenge. as was

touched upon earlier, some counties have

large coverage areas. In these instances,

the goal of public, universal wireless

broadband appears to be less attractive

from a cost perspective. Due to extensive

lobbying efforts by influential telecommu-

nications providers, 14 states have already

placed some restrictions on municipalities

from building their own wireless or wired

broadband networks, adding a number of

implementation barriers.24

Nevertheless, governments are often

wrested into setting up their own net-

works as a response to complaints from

constituents who say they are ignored

by their incumbent telecom company,

which they claim provides poor, little or

no broadband service in their geographic

location. telecom providers often respond

by saying they do provide this service, but

customer demand is low, thereby increas-

ing their cost. Customers respond saying

they refuse to purchase broadband servic-

es for as high a price as incumbents offer,

particularly if the company is unresponsive

from a customer service standpoint. pro-

viders then argue that although there are

some areas where coverage is not provid-

ed, this is simply a temporary situation and

the market will work this out over time.

this argument is, of course, of little sol-

ace to businesses, which are relocating or

opening new businesses and don’t have

time to wait for the market to catch up.

many public officials can recall angry calls

from businesses claiming they were being

forced to relocate or lose their business

because they were unable to get the ser-

vice they needed when they needed it. yet

these same providers have taken their case

to state legislatures and argued convincingly

that local municipalities put the taxpayer at

risk by carrying unsustainable, long-term

debt. furthermore, they argue that since

technology is changing so quickly, localities

will soon be saddled for years with out-

dated technology infrastructures. the point

is that such infrastructures will drive citizens

to abandon subscriptions with local govern-

ment entities in favor of the nimble, private

sector, advanced technologies.

While the debate continues, some cit-

ies and counties have chosen to build,

maintain and operate municipal wireless

networks themselves. they obtain the

necessary funds, perhaps through issuing

bonds or seeking lines of credit, to build

the network, then act as an Isp by selling

Internet access at various speeds to inter-

ested residents.

other cities and counties have cre-

ated partnerships. GovernmentTechnology

associate editor shane peterson describes

such partnerships in this way:

In one popular arrangement, a private-

sectorcompanyassumestheupfrontcosts

of deploying the necessary network infra-

structure, such as antennas and access

points,andthemunicipalityallowsthecom-

panies free access to streetlights or traffic

lightsinthemunicipalrightofwaytomount

theequipment.Establishedtelephonecom-

paniesraisetheloudestoppositiontothese

municipalmaneuversbecause thecompa-

nieshavethemosttolose.Nomatterifthe

municipalitybuildsandownsthenetworkor

strikesadealwithaprivate-sectorpartner

togetthenetworkofftheground,anestab-

lishedtelephonecompanycouldlosemany

customerstothenewserviceandlosingcus-

tomersmeanslosingmoney.25

Irrespective of whether a government

assumes the build, buy or broker role, the

one role that government cannot afford to

assume is that of no involvement. the role

of government-as-anchor-tenant is crucial

to the build-out of outdoor broadband.

for example, customer applications such as

video, a natural for broadband, are still in

search of a driver on the citizen side. yet

as we have discovered from the Center’s

discussions with CIos, a security camera

infrastructure for public safety is a major


1�

driver on the governmental side. By being

an anchor tenant for video, governments

help set up an infrastructure and know-how

that can be utilized as the potential for citi-

zen video as applications become available

and proliferate. Certainly, location-based

advertising may be one option for using and

funding wireless broadband, particularly in

high-traffic areas in the city core.

BusinessModels:

FeeorFree-for-All?

It is not surprising that “free” or “free-

for-all” is an attractive concept when it

comes to wireless connectivity, as it is

for many other things we do in life. free

music in the parks sounds pretty good as

compared to events such as home shows

that charge the consumer an entrance

fee simply to sell you a product. In fact,

“free” sounds downright democratic (with

a small “d”). free is, of course, a good way

to hook interest. still, municipalities consid-

ering establishing free wireless broadband

relationships with citizens or vendors must

also consider the costs of “free” and think

hard about what free really means. In the

wireless broadband space, “free” comes

in two main categories: taxpayer-funded

models and self-funded models.

TheTaxpayer-fundedModel

We don’t normally expect people to build

and repair the street they live on, nor the

water and sewer systems that run beneath

them, but we do expect them to buy natu-

ral gas from a private provider. the debate

over what services ought to be provided by

the government and what the government

has no business being involved in is peren-

nial. few services are funded solely with

tax dollars. even libraries charge fines and

fees for lost and overdue books. In the case

of taxpayer-funded Wi-fi, for instance, this

service is paid for by the municipality with-

out extra charges for use by any individual

who wishes to log on to the network. this

does not mean that the local government

does not use private providers to offer part

or all of the service, it simply means that the

cost is not passed along to the consumer

through a fee structure.

In other instances, however, the local

government does own the wireless net-

work. It may appropriate development

and maintenance costs from the county

or city general fund or through bonding.

AdvantagesandDisadvantagesofthe

Taxpayer-fundedModel

there are several advantages and dis-

advantages to keep in mind with this kind

of “free” service.

advantages include:

1) EconomicAccess — Wireless broadband

would be available to a far larger share of

the population because it is less expen-

sive over time to own a laptop than to

pay a monthly subscription charge. It

lowers the economic barrier to access.

2) Economic Development — Increased

access is an advantage to local busi-

nesses that can benefit from more

potential customers knowing about

their business through location-based

portals, or simply by drawing foot traf-

fic to Wi-fi locations.

3) ConvenientAccess — If a fee is associ-

ated with using a wireless service, an

individual must register and pay with

a credit or debit card to set up ser-

vice. often such access is granted for a

24-hour period. Without having to col-

lect fees, the ability to log on and access

the Internet is seamless with modern

computer technology. Without it, one

confronts the “hassle factor.”

Disadvantages include:

1) Bonding — If the municipality bonds

for this service it raises taxpayers’ cost,

who will have to pay service on the

debt for many years into the future.

2) SupportandMaintenance — respon-

sibilities associated with support and

maintenance need to be anticipated

because the municipality owns the

infrastructure.

3) Economic Cycles — economic cycles

drive municipality revenues, and what

seems like a good investment in flush

economic times can be an albatross

during a recession. Downturns are

also the least palatable times for gov-

ernment tax increases.

4) RefreshRates — Wireless technologies

are in a state of disruption and instability.

the technology and standards are rap-

idly evolving in a market of stiff competi-

tion. Wireless providers must continually

upgrade offerings to remain competitive.

government-owned technology can

quickly become obsolete, causing users

to abandon a government-run wireless

project for private sector alternatives. In

turn, public support may wane without

high levels of government investment to

refresh the technology.

5) LackofStatistics — few studies exist

on the true cost of municipal wireless

broadband, making it difficult to budget

and plan. one such study estimates

that “the average cost of building and

maintaining a municipal wireless net-

work is $150,000 per square mile

over five years.” the report also states

that “roughly 50 percent of current

initiatives will fail to break even if the

benefit of the initiative is assumed to

be $25 per user, per month.”26


1�

Self-fundedModels

this “free” model means service is

free to the end-user. the private entity

pays for the up-front investment. a vari-

ety of self-funded government models

have existed for a number of years. one

currently popular model is the advertis-

ing-supported model, promoted by large

search portal providers such as google

and yahoo!. for example, google is

offering universal Wi-fi to san francisco

within the city limits at no cost to the city

or consumers. In this proposal, google

teamed up with earthLink. the proposed

free services will run at a slower speed

(256 kilobits per second (kbps) up to 384

kbps) and a paid, citywide higher-speed

service will be offered at one megabit

per second (mbps), both upstream and

down. although such proposals are often

vague, many industry analysts predict that

google will use san francisco as a test

bed for potential national service offerings

and tools. also, other analysts conjecture

that location-based advertisements will

help fund the free service.27

AdvantagesandDisadvantagesof

Self-fundedModels

advantages include:

1) LowerCostsandFinancialRisks — a pri-

vate company, through shareholders

or angel investors,28 funds the project.

this reduces the need for bonding

or a taxpayer-funded infrastructure.

advocates believe this significantly

lowers both costs and financial risks.

2) LowerRiskofObsoleteTechnology — for

a company to remain competitive, it will

likely need to upgrade infrastructure and

equipment more often than the public

sector, so the risk of becoming obsolete

sooner is lower.

3) Reduced Risk of Changing Political

Climate — Long-term contracts can

span elections, thereby reducing the

effect political upheavals have on service.

Disadvantages include:

1) Picking the Wrong Vendor — Not all

vendors are created equal. as with

any outsourced arrangement, gov-

ernment stands the risk that the cho-

sen vendor will not or cannot deliver

what was promised. a company must

be financially stable enough to assume

the risk. a thorough review of the

company’s finances and positioning in

the marketplace is an essential part of

a proposal review process, needed to

reduce the risk of a potential failure.

2) Shifting Business Climate, Mergers

and Acquisitions — the direction of

a private sector partner may change

due to an unfavorable business cli-

mate, mergers, acquisitions or events

beyond company control. Continuing

investment in a wireless network may

not be advantageous to the company,

despite its value to the customer.

3) Just Remember: “The First One’s

Free!”— reduced fees or free services

are the hallmark of many companies’

early attempts to gain market share.

Nevertheless, free service may not be

sustainable over the long haul. early

success of community efforts to pro-

mote wireless broadband can lead to

dependency on the “free” infrastruc-

ture. When the contract comes up for

renewal the terms may change from

free to subscription-based pricing, and

soon the governmental entity may find

itself “over a barrel,” caught between

the demands of the company and the

public.

one final point must be made before

leaving the business model discussion.

“fee” or “free” expands or contracts

funding choices, and ultimately govern-

ments must decide the answers to at least

two key questions:

• Whopays?the customer, the ratepayer,

the taxpayer, or the shareholder?

• Whereisthemoneycomingfrom? taxes,

telecommunication provider deduc-

tions, credits or penalties, business

user deductions or credits, consumer

deductions or credits, appropriations,

grants, venture capital, loans and/or

universal service funds?

Ultimately, access to the network may

be “free” — through deliberate political,

policy or business choices — but some-

one has to pay to put in the plumbing.

as mentioned earlier, “the average cost of

building and maintaining a municipal Wi-

fi mesh network is $150,000 per square

mile over five years.” to break even on

the investment, the investor “would need

an average revenue per user (arpU) of

more than $30 per month.”29

regardless of the choices made, match-

ing technology investments with practical

and sustainable business models that yield

positive, long-term roIs are the goal.


1�

V. Technology and the market: Cell vs. Ieee Wireless

TheIndustryShakeOut

as stated earlier, the wireless broadband

industry is consumed by competition, yet

cooperation around standards is growing,

and each technology and standard has its

advocates. While a proponent of wireless

broadband over the long haul, san Diego

CIo mike moore says that given the func-

tional requirements of the current genera-

tion of wireless applications, government

must confront the reality that broadband

cellular can not be dismissed.

moreover, incumbent cellular carriers

have an installed cellular base that has a

footprint larger than Wi-fi and other non-

cellular forms of wireless – and it is turf

they are prepared to defend. the reach

of the three major cellular players cover

more than 80 percent of the U.s. popu-

lation – meaning that at least 220 million

americans and 6,500 cities and towns30

have a minimum of three choices for cel-

lular access. the cellular footprint dwarfs

broadband deployments at this point, and

may be indicative of a looming industry

shake out and reinvention of the Beta

versus VHs confrontation.

WiMAXStandardization

If you are betting the farm on WimaX,

you may be a little early to the party. yet

when WimaX does arrive, it will be a for-

midable contender to cellular and other

forms of Ieee wireless. south Korea has

already commercially deployed WimaX

and proven its viability. still, as this paper

goes to print, not a single U.s. carrier is

deploying WimaX in 2006. However,

regional service provider arialink is work-

ing with samsung. they are vying to be

the first to deploy a commercial mobile

WimaX network in North america. ari-

alink hopes to launch WimaX in muske-

gon County, mich. in early 2007.31

toward the end of the year, mini

pCmCIa cards (portable computer

cards) should become available for lap-

tops with built-in WimaX functionality.

personal Digital assistants (pDas) and

smart phones will be introduced to the

market at a later stage. 802.16e function-

ality will increase with time in parallel with

the widening selection of different form

factors for user devices.

the WimaX forum32 expects that initial

products will support only simple mobil-

ity, which uses hard handoffs and does not

support real-time applications. as demand

for more advanced forms of mobility is

fueled by the introduction of pDas and

smart phones, certified products will

include support for soft handoffs, mobile

VoIp (Voice over Internet protocol), and

real-time applications.

although this discussion only whets the

appetite for a more detailed explanation of

evolving wireless technologies, there are

some preliminary caveats for technologists

and program directors seeking to deploy

solutions. Clearly, Wi-fi is a growing presence

in the hybrid mobile mix. David Hughes, Brit-

ish telecom (Bt) director of mobility, states

Wi-fi’s strengths succinctly when he says, “at

the moment, it looks like Wi-fi is one-tenth

the price of 3g (higher speed cellular), and

four times as fast.”33 Likewise, Utah’s tele-

communication open Infrastructure agency

(UtopIa) project seems to suggest a hybrid

mix of a fiberoptic ring while making the last

mile wireless.34

for the foreseeable future, it is likely that

we will see the wireless hybrid mix pre-

vail as one technology seeks to disrupt the

other and gain market share. Near-term

border-to-border Wi-fi will prevail in a

few cities but will remain a small, signifi-

cant minority of total deployments. Wi-fi

Figure5:WiMAXForumTimelineforProductCertification

source: the WimaX forum

2005 2006 2007

802.16-2004 lab opens

air protocol certification – outdoor

service certification – outdoor

Indoor certification

802-16e lab opens

802-16e first certification


1�

for special purpose use in high-traffic areas

such as restaurants, parks, libraries and

downtown business districts will be com-

monplace. public safety Wi-fi has already

been shown as viable, although many

municipalities do not have universal cover-

age. patrol cars still need to stop and sit in

hotspots in most cities. Cellular is becom-

ing highly competitive as data transfer rates

increase, and WimaX penetration based

on the Korean example is expected to be

significant in the future.

all forms of provision for broadband

will exist, including government municipal

utilities, local exchange carriers, Internet

service providers, long distance carriers,

cable tV, power companies, converged

carriers and other wireless carriers. CIos

will need to continually scan and monitor

wireless technology trends in an ever-

changing landscape.

Innovation

trend spotters may find themselves

looking to the regional Bell telephone

companies to sidestep a number of tech-

nological obstacles and make significant

progress on Ip (Internet protocol) multi-

media subsystems, wireless broadband

and fiber-based video initiatives over the

next year — a sign that compelling new

business and consumer services are immi-

nent. this innovation will be enabled by

Ims standard setting. Ims is an architecture

that takes the place of traditional circuit-

switched telephone networks, separating

services from the underlying networks

that carry them.35

another area to watch is the recent

deployment of mobile satellite broadband

service that deployed this year. this is a

first of a kind initiative to provide global

broadband service to 98 percent of the

world’s population in 85 percent of the

world’s landmass.36 Voice and data ser-

vices are now available as the market

seeks to understand whether this excit-

ing technology will have the appropriate

price-to-performance ratios to disrupt

and overtake competitors as the wireless

broadband race heats up.


1�

VI. The New Infrastructure: Yours, Theirs and ours

Security

stealing personal information, surrepti-

tiously installing spyware and launching

denial-of-service attacks against Web sites

has become commonplace. a greater

focus of It resources and attention must

be paid to wireless security. When dealing

with wireless technology, one must under-

stand that it is inherently more insecure

than a wired infrastructure. Nevertheless,

it can be effectively protected. security

is, particularly on a new public safety and

emergency infrastructure, a high prior-

ity. for instance, montgomery and Cook

Counties are both very serious about

protecting traffic traversing their network.

alisoun K. moore, CIo for montgomery

County, md., explains. “all messages com-

ing across county airwaves are encrypted,

secure and seamlessly integrated within

a fiber optic infrastructure.” CIo Cathy

o’Leary from Cook County, Ill. adds, “It’s

very secure. We are using three levels of

military [security], and what we’re finding

[is that] really the technology is there.”

security precautions will vary based

on customers’ needs. for example, if a

customer base is populated with mostly

teleworkers using laptops or desktops that

must be connected to data residing inside

the government firewall, the security

and bandwidth needs for these workers

increase. Conversely, a citizen who sim-

ply wants to report a pothole has a much

lower security need.

as part of security precautions, a profes-

sionally staffed It security team, operating

within the discipline of a well-formulated

security plan, is a must for governments

that handle sensitive and highly confiden-

tial personal information on a daily basis.

for a more thorough treatment about

the ways governments can secure their

networks, see the Center for Digital gov-

ernment publication, GettingBackOnline

byGoingOfftheBeatenPath:APractical

GuidetoProtectingYourInformationAssets

andTenThingsYouWishedYouKnewBefore

theDisasterStruck.37

Hybridity

Local governments have an important

choice to make between radios that deliv-

er voice only or the host of multi-media

mobile devices including cell phones,

pDas, tablet pCs, laptops, and “walkie

talkies.” Choosing which endpoint devices

will be supported on the future network

will inform and impinge upon the decisions

about what components are necessary in

the access and transport layers.

It is also important to develop a clear

understanding of how these devices will

primarily be used in the field. project man-

agement, requirements analysis and other

traditional It approaches apply here.

for example, a police officer who needs

a radio that is interoperable with fire, emts

and the local health department is very dif-

ferent than a police officer conducting a

suspect’s background check on a laptop in

his car. With adequate bandwidth, an officer

could do fingerprint matching in the field.

QualityofService

to paraphrase an incumbent cellular

carrier’s popular ad campaign, “Can you

hear me now?,” the question here is, “Can

I connect from here?”

Wireless networks, particularly Wi-fi,

struggle to maintain a high quality of ser-

vice (Qos) level. the goal is to deploy a

network that delivers the highest data trans-

fer rates possible while still maintaining the

integrity of messages traversing the net-

work. In contrast to the wired world, the

key challenge here is that we are talking

about radio technology — some of which

traverses unlicensed spectrum domain.

there are several components to assur-

ing Qos: meeting the user’s needs, select-

ing the right technology, achieving optimal

coverage and throughput, and optimizing

cost while extending the reach of network

resources to nomadic devices.38

LicensedandUnlicensedSpectrum

to those who are new to the wire-

less broadband arena, Wi-fi may seem

like a natural fit. It is inexpensive because

the spectrum is unlicensed and free. fur-

thermore, Wi-fi gear has a mass market,

also factoring into the low cost. there are,

however, limitations to Wi-fi. Because

the spectrum is unlicensed, Wi-fi signals

are subject to interference. In addition to

interference from other Wi-fi signals, 2.4

gHz cordless phones, microwave ovens

and full-spectrum lighting systems are a few

additional sources of interference. also, the

technology is not designed nor engineered

to perform over long distances.

Licensed spectrum can initially be more

costly, but it is more reliable. as cell phone

and other licensed spectrum equipment

usage expands, the costs per unit will inevi-

tably decline. for example, free (subsidized)

cell phones have been commonplace for

several years. yet current speeds for cellu-

lar service will not overtake Wi-fi anytime


1�

soon, causing cellular to be plagued in the

near term by lower data transfer rates.

still, each technology has found a role

to play. Wi-fi, for instance, appears well

suited for wireless LaNs in private homes

and small businesses. It is also a boon

for high-density locations such as airport

lounges, hotel and public office building

lobbies, libraries, and coffee shops. Low-

cost Wi-fi cards or chips, which often

come as standard equipment in laptops,

make the technology highly desirable.

Licensed spectrum works well with appli-

cations that require greater security, quality of

service (Qos), mobility, or those that require

converged voice and data services.

Stand-alone Wireless or Integra-

tionwiththeNetworkBackbone

governments planning a wireless imple-

mentation should avoid the standalone

wireless trap and deliberate more carefully

and thoroughly about how to take advan-

tage of an existing network, transport and

physical layers. the figure below provides

a good view of these layers.39

Unfortunately, some “consultants”

or vendors will recommend to poten-

tial government partners a “one-off”

wireless solution to support a specific

business function developed without

particular regard for existing local or

state-controlled enterprise voice and data

networks. these networks then become

the unfortunate recipients of unexpected

traffic that affect latency and data transfer

rates due to bandwidth issues.

to avoid such problems, it is important

to work closely and communicate often

with the Isp (Internet service provider)

partner — whether public or private

— before, during and after a wireless

deployment. furthermore, such provid-

ers often have research and development

groups that can advise local governments

and their contractors how to take advan-

tage of the trends occurring in the move

toward the telecommunications indus-

try convergence. Unfortunately, it is too

late to begin this discussion once the

equipment has been purchased or the

contracts with the service provider let.

maintaining an intense level of produc-

tive and well-informed communication

may be the single action that can ensure

project success or failure. otherwise,

increasing long-term costs coupled with

poor performance becomes the down-

stream legacy of such projects that will be

inherited by the next CIo.

one final note: a true converged and

brokered network (meaning getting the

right traffic at the right level of quality in

the right way to the right device in the

most cost-effective manner) must seam-

lessly switch between kinds and qualities

of various wire and wireless technologies

and services to send and receive digital

messages (voice, data and video). thus

the wireless deployment should be physi-

cally or virtually integrated, or as Jack Vega,

information technology director for John-

son County, Kan., puts it: “Wireless always

has to hit a wire somewhere.”40

some organizations installed wireless

hotspots for one purpose and then dis-

covered how they can extend the value of

the network by adding other high-demand

applications. for example, in Johnson

County, Kan., the courts wanted an e-filing

application option for claims and petitions.

Now people can file remotely or come

into the courthouse. once Wi-fi was avail-

able, potential jurors became aware of

it and started bringing their laptops to the

courthouse. anyone that has been part of

a jury pool quickly realized that potential

jurors can spend many hours waiting to

find out whether they have been selected

or dismissed. also, many employers com-

Figure6:The7LayersofOSI(OperatingSystemInterconnection)

application layer

presentation layer

session layer

transport layer

network layer

data link layer

physical layer

physical link

TransmitData

ReceiveDataUser

http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/1998_school/networking_presentation/page6.html


1�

pensate employees for their time spent at

the courthouse. to employees it can mean

increased stress, and for employers, lost

productivity. according to Jack Vega, Wi-

fi service has been advantageous for both

employers and employees because poten-

tial jurors continue to work during the

jury selection process. this is simply one

example of how governments can encour-

age civic participation while reducing the

unnecessary burdens associated with it.

End-userTestingandTraining

Wireless broadband deployments, like

other aspects of government services

delivery, require effective end-user testing

and training to achieve a smooth and suc-

cessful deployment, particularly for new

services or devices. It is also key to the

successful long-term adoption and use of

the technology.

In addition to user training, a process

for customer support and troubleshoot-

ing should be developed and com-

municated. most mobile workers, for

instance, are mobile only part of the

time. If they rely on desktops at a home

base, synching data from a pDa or cell

phone can be troublesome. Different

versions of applications and operating

systems often become problematic if

not carefully implemented when mov-

ing across stationary to mobile platforms

and vice-versa. some governments are

moving away from the desktop/mobile

device interfaces and replacing them

with server side solutions. this option

helps governments avoid the variability

of some agency desktop configurations.

either way, chronic problems can be

avoided by thorough user testing prior

to full deployment. failure to do so can

result in portable devices that are pur-

chased but seldom used.

ContractManagement

In the municipal wireless world of build,

buy and broker, a contract manager some-

times faces a web of complex relationships.

Before building out wireless broadband,

the final steps toward deployment begin

with an effective procurement process. In

the best cases, the process will end in suc-

cessful and long-term relationships with

private sector partners, if desired.

governments can take action to reduce

contract risk in the following ways:

• The RFI – Consider taking the extra

step of doing a request for Informa-

tion (rfI) prior to conducting requests

for proposals (rfps) or bids. this extra

step may add time to the procurement

process initially, but can save enormous

amounts of time at the back-end, while

decreasing risk for vendor and govern-

ment alike. an rfI is particularly useful

in developing a project where govern-

ment staff may not have sufficient inter-

nal expertise to correctly scope an rfp.

a poorly-scoped or vague rfp can be

quite risky for both vendor and govern-

ment. an rfI can bring useful informa-

tion to the rfp crafting process, making

it more specific and properly scoped.

• In-source Oversight and Governance–

one reason governments move

quickly to an outsourced solution is lack

of appropriate skill sets among internal

staff. In large projects, there is often

the expectation that a private sector

partner will manage all It and some-

times non-It aspects of a project. yet

consortia of private contractors must

be carefully monitored, as handoffs

between carriers, equipment provid-

ers, software solutions and professional

services contractors are not always as

well coordinated among the parties as

a government might hope. this is par-

ticularly problematic with large-ticket,

multi-year contracts. such contracts

can be challenging to get into, and later

can pose a greater challenge to get

out of if relationships and projects go

south. Using an existing or hired skilled

contract manager, independent of the

private partner, is essential. When out-

sourcing has gone awry, it has not sim-

ply been the failure of the private sector

partner to perform their responsibilities

— it has been the government’s ability

to lead when governance and oversight

is needed and required. these respon-

sibilities are often full-time jobs, not to

be simply added on to an overloaded

program manager’s priority list. pro-

fessional, full-time project and contract

management is the prudent way to

move wireless broadband projects suc-

cessfully toward fruition.


�0

VII. Conclusion: Public Services and the Third Screen

In 1971, starbucks founder Howard

schultz envisioned a global network of

coffee shops as “the third place” — that

is, third only to home and work — where

people choose to gather. three decades

later, the postage stamp-sized displays on

cell phones, pDas and a myriad of other

nomadic devices have emerged as the third

screen, next to television and computers.

a growing critical mass of individuals and

institutions have chosen to be connected

but untethered. they use a wireless sec-

ond (laptop) or third (nomadic) screen

from the third place — any third place

— of their choosing. Indeed, it is the way

work gets done. and it is supported by the

wireless extensions of the network. as

detailed here and in the original installment

of the Center’s wireless guide, untethering

is both a process and a destination.

the age of the mobile Internet is upon

us, expanding the reach and density of our

current networks far beyond anything we

have ever seen. New users will be recruit-

ed and new uses found, but one thing is

certain – as author Howard rheingold

reminds us, “it will not just be a way to do

old things while moving. It will be a way to

do things that couldn’t be done before.”

Navigating an environment rife with

disruptive technologies and companies

competing for a dominant foothold in the

untethered world is a challenge that local

governments are destined to address. Will

governments stumble, saddling citizens

with long-term debilitating debt, or will

they bring a wave of economic prosper-

ity and valuable services to their com-

munities? Clear vision, creative ingenuity,

access to accurate and reliable informa-

tion, impeccable timing and skillful execu-

tion are attributes that governments need

from their new leaders at the dawn of the

mobile Internet. risky pitfalls, as well as

enormous opportunities to contribute to

public service, lie ahead for those willing

to meet the challenge.


�1

BertJarreau

Chief Information officer

National association of Counties

RichardAldridge


Charles County, md.

PhillipL.Balke


Lake County, Ill.

JackClegg

Director of Information technology services

Johnson County, Kan.

JimHamlin

District Clerk

Dallas County, texas

RandyJohnson

Commissioner

Hennepin County, minn.

WarrenLee

emergency management Director

New Hanover County, Del.

TimothyLoewenstein

supervisor

Buffalo County, Neb.

AlisounK.Moore


montgomery County, md.

CathyA.MarasO’Leary


Cook County, Ill.

VirginiaPeterman

gIs Coordinator

Howard County, md.

ShaunScholer

Wayne County gIs Department manager

Court House

richmond, Ind.

LeslieStanfield

Information technology Director

New Hanover County, N.C.

RobertTaylor


fulton County, ga.

SponsorContributions:

RizKhaliq

global Business executive,

Digital Communities

IBm public sector

MichaelE.Dillon

Director, safety, security & Community

Broadband

IBm global services Its

JimHueser

sales executive

Wireless Broadband americas group

Public Sector Participants

the Center for Digital government would like to thank the following

public sector participants for their contribution to this guide.


��

endnotes

1 marshall mcLuhan, UnderstandingMedia:ExtensionsofMan, the mIt press, 1964, reissued 1994.2 maureen o’Donnell, “metra clears engineer after re-enactment of train crash,”ChicagoSun-Times, November 28, 2005.

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4155/is_20051128/ai_n15909625 3 “train hits cars near Chicago; 16 hurt,” CNN, Wednesday, November 23, 2005.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/Us/11/23/train.crash/index.html 4 Unstrung news feed, “metro Wi-fi to soar,” Light reading, Inc., march 15, 2006.

http://www.unstrung.com/document.asp?doc_id=90833&Wt.svl=wire1_2 5 paul taylor, “the Internet Nation,” powerpoint presentation, Instat and W3C, april 20, 2006. 6 the pew research Center, the pew Internet & american Life project, the associated press, and aoL, the Cell phone Challenge

to survey research, may 16, 2006. 7 Cellular telecommunications & Internet association (CtIa) government technology supplement, MobileGovernment, 2005.8 NypD nomination to the 2006 Best of New york awards, on file with the Center for Digital government.9 “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches” by the Center for Digital government and GovernmentTechnology (Unpublished, 2006). 10 matthew D. Laplante, “Utah slow on 911 tracing, state hopes to catch up on finding cell callers,” SaltLakeTribune, march 15,

2006. also see “2006 teLeCommUNICatIoNs states’ Collection and Use of funds for Wireless enhanced 911 services,”

GovernmentAccountingOfficer, march 2006. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06338.pdf 11 op Cit., “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches.” 12 Ibid.13 Ibid.14 “802.11”, Webopedia http://www.webopedia.com/term/8/802_11.html 15 Ibid, “maC layer,” http://www.webopedia.com/term/m/maC_layer.html 16 “Umts forum forecasts sunny skies for 3g Data revenue,” by paul Quigly, may 7, 2001. Wireless Week.

http://www.wirelessweek.com/article/Ca74056.html?spacedesc=News&stt=00117 minimum transfer rates both ways (up and downstream) should be at least 350 kbps to 1 mbps, which is a more practical definition

of wireless broadband from the consumer perspective in current environment. the traditional government definition of 256Kbps is

too slow for most uses. 18 “Nokia HsDpa solution,” Nokia, 2003.

http://hsdpa-coverage.com/hsdpa-video-phones-evdo-evdv-blackberry/5-HsDpa-wcdma-nokia-umts-evdo.pdf 19 Webopedia Web site, “Wireless Networking standards,” 2006. http://www.webopedia.com/quick_ref/WLaNstandards.asp20 paul taylor and al sherwood, “a Discussion session with municipal Leaders,” 2006 National association of Counties (NaCo)

technology summit I, march 3, 2006.22 op. Cit., taylor, “the Internet Nation.” 23 op. Cit., “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches.” 24 Ibid.24 Harold feld, gregory rose, mark Cooper, Ben scott, ryan Chesley, “Connecting the public: the truth about municipal

Broadband,” Consumer federation of america, Consumers Union, media access project, free press, april 2005.

http://freepress.net/docs/mb_white_paper.pdf 25 shane peterson, “Boiling point,” GovernmentTechnology,November 4, 2005.

http://www.govtech.net/magazine/story.php?id=97156&issue=11:2005 26 “municipal Wireless: partner to spread risks and Costs While maximizing Benefit opportunities,” Jupiterresearch, Jupitermedia

Corporation.


��

27 glenn fleishman, “google, earthLink submit Joint san francisco Bid,” Wi-FiNetNews, february 21, 2006. http://wifinetnews.com/

archives/006305.html 28 an angel investor is; “…an individual who provides capital to one or more startup companies. Unlike a partner, the angel investor

is rarely involved in management. angel investors can usually add value through their contacts and expertise.” Definition of Venture

Capital terms from TheVentureCapitalGlossary, funding post, 2006. http://www.fundingpost.com/glossary/venture-glossary.asp29 op. Cit., “from a Joint aggregation of field Dispatches.” 30 Based on regulating filings from at&t, sprint pCs and t-mobile (2004) and compiled by IDg, TheUntetheredWorker, 2006.31 “plans announced for North america’s first Commercial mobile WImaX Deployment,” Science,Technology,PhysicsandSpace

News, april 14, 2006. http://www.physorg.com/news64242975.html 32 “the WimaX forum is an industry-led, non-profit corporation formed to promote and certify compatibility and interoperability of

broadband wireless products.” http://www.wimaxforum.org/home/ 33 steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, “802.11 vs. 3g,” Wi-FiPlanet,January 31, 2003

http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/1577551 34 shane peterson, “the golden egg?” GovernmentTechnology, December 8, 2005.

http://www.govtech.net/magazine/story.php?id=97502&issue=12:2005 35 the 3rd generation partnership project (3gpp) Web site, http://www.3gpp.org/ .

also see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ip_multimedia_subsystem .36 Inmarsat, “BgaN goes global with Launch across the americas,” may 15, 2006.

http://about.inmarsat.com/news/00019704.aspx?language=eN&textonly=false 37 al sherwood, paul W. taylor, ph.D., richard Varn, GettingBackOnlinebyGoingOfftheBeatenPath:APracticalGuidetoProtecting

YourInformationAssetsandTenThingsYouWishedYouKnewBeforetheDisasterStruck, Center for Digital government, 2006. http://

www.centerdigitalgov.com/center/reports.php 38 song Ci, “Link adaptation for Qos provisioning in wireless data networks,” University of Nebraska, Lincoln, 2002. student dissertation.39 Carlo fonda and fulvio postogna, “Hypertextual version of the lectures notes of the ICtp - UrsI – ItU/BDt school on the Use

of radio for Digital Communications In Developing Countries Including spectrum management,” the abdus salam International

Centre for theoretical physics programme of training and system Development on Networking and radiocommunications,

trieste, January 1998. http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~radionet/1998_school/networking_presentation/page6.html http://www.ictp.

trieste.it/~radionet/1998_school/networking_presentation/osI-layers.html#osi1 and http://webopedia.internet.com/quick_ref/

osI_Layers.asp 40 for a more detailed technical treatment on the topic of integrating wireless networks into the Internet, see rob flickenger,

“Building Wireless Community Networks: Implementing the Wireless Web,” oreilly, November 2001.

http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/wirelesscommnet/chapter/ch03.html

© 2006 e.republic, Inc. all rights reserved.100 Blue ravine road

folsom, Ca 95630916.932.1300 phone

916.932.1470 faxwww.centerdigitalgov.com

IBm is a registered trademark of International Business machinesCorporation in the United states, other countries or both.Ieee 802.11and 802.16 are registered trademarks of Ieee

Underwrittenby:

IBm is a recognized leader in the digital government evolution. We deliver value to local governments through services and technologies that meet the demands of results-oriented customers. In addition to managed opera-tions and consulting, our solutions include health and human services, safety and security, parking, revenue and fiscal management, wireless, and community networking.

Acknowledgments:

AlSherwood, senior fellow for the Center for Digital government and former deputy CIo for the state of UtahPaulW.Taylor,Ph.D., Chief strategy officer for the Center for Digital government and the Center for Digital education RichardJ.H.Varn, Ph.D., senior fellow for the Center for Digital government, former CIo for the state of Iowa and former Iowa state senator

AboutCenterforDigitalGovernment:

the Center for Digital government, a division of e.republic, Inc., is a national research and advisory institute on information technology policies and best practices in state and local government. Its advisory services, online resources and special reports provide public and private sector leaders with decision support, knowledge and opportunities to help effectively incorporate new technologies in the 21st century.

the Center’s strategy papers provide two decades of experience and insight into the most critical It topics governments are faced with today. the papers address important policy and management issues and offer strategic approaches for planning and implementing technology, funding sources and case studies from jurisdictions.

Documents

Building the Untethered Nation II