Is internet accessible in Worcester? Should broadband be in the hands of the private sector? These are questions wrestled with and answered in a new report from the Worcester Regional Research Bureau released Tuesday afternoon.
The latest report from the Bureau, “Broadening Broadband: Considering Municipal Ownership as a Solution to Worcester’s Internet Challenges,” claims that communities that treat internet access as a core service, and not a luxury, have seen both economic and quality of life benefits.
The COVID-19 pandemic, the Bureau argues, has exposed many of the challenges Worcester faces in regards to internet — access, price and speed — and that those issues have been exacerbated due to a “regional monopoly, lack of infrastructure investment and a prioritization of profits over service.”
The answer? Municipal broadband, says the Bureau.
Citing Glasgow, Kentucky as the first city to start their own Internet Service Provider (ISP) system, the report posits that municipalities with their own ISP provide more access and better speed and reliability than private options.
Access to internet in Worcester was an issue before COVID-19, the report points out, citing the U.S. Census Bureau which determined around 67% of city households had a broadband internet subscription, and 18% had no internet access at all.
As far as a choice of internet providers in Worcester, there really isn’t one, the report finds.
“In Worcester, 99.9 percent of the population has one choice for a wired broadband provider, according to the FCC,” the report reads.
For nearly all residents in Worcester that choice is Charter Communications, which offers Spectrum as their internet service.
“Regional monopolies are common – 60 percent of the U.S. population and 49 percent of Massachusetts residents have one or zero options for cable or fiber broadband providers, according to FCC,” the Bureau writes.
Beyond choice, there are instances where municipal government is responsible for connecting people to the internet as well, says the Bureau.
“The COVID-19 pandemic forced students into an online learning model, even though thousands of students did not live in internet-connected households,” the Bureau writes. “This created a hardware problem, since many students did not possess a device that could connect to the internet and allow them to complete schoolwork, and a connection problem, since even after WPS delivered Chromebooks to affected families, many students did not have a Charter subscription, and the company’s proposed rates were expensive enough to create a barrier families could not solve on their own.”
The WPS responded by signing a $500,000 contract with Verizon for Wifi hotspots to be delivered to 3,500 families. Another 1,500 hotspots will be retained through August and the start of the new school year, according to the Bureau.
There is no better need for municipal broadband than now, the Bureau argues.
“The benefits of municipal broadband are undeniable – local control over an increasingly essential service, broader reach resulting in more equity in terms of which city residents deserve to have an internet connection and a commitment to speed and service that is not guaranteed from a for-profit entity.”
The Bureau does, however, point out the looming cost of infrastructure investment a municipal broadband would incur.
“While many municipal broadband networks turn a profit, communities must look beyond a simple ‘return on investment’ financial analysis,” the Bureau writes. “Internet access has an indirect impact on a city’s finances by creating an economic development incentive, as outlined by the Worcester Chamber and many national groups, but also has an impact on educational equity, quality of life and many other aspects of city living that will not show up on a balance sheet. Municipal broadband is an as much a foundational element as parks or libraries, one that communities must evaluate on financial and non-financial grounds.”
And while the report points out that internet accessibility has provoked the mayor, city manager and WPS superintendent to collectively ask Charter to explore ways to expand internet accessibility in Worcester, the Bureau suggests the city seek outside funding to expand internet accessibility.
“An information technology bond bill that has been passed by the Massachusetts Legislature includes $20 Million for a competitive matching grant program to ‘assist municipalities with the construction of fiber broadband infrastructure and related projects.‘ Through that program, as well as proposals under Congressional consideration as a part of the ongoing pandemic response, Worcester could have access to outside funding to explore potential means to expand internet accessibility,” the Bureau writes.
In conclusion, the reports proposes the following recommendations to the City of Worcester:
- The City of Worcester should take concrete steps to explore the possibility of a municipal broadband network, starting with a detailed cost estimate.
- Any exploration of such a network should include all operational options, including a public-private partnership or neighborhood-by -neighborhood buildouts to defray costs. This should also include an examination of the plans, partners, and progress of other Massachusetts communities moving forward with municipal broadband networks.
- Worcester leaders should, to the extent possible, use any federal and state grant programs and make clear the local justification for additional support. They should also continue to explore any and all means of encouraging Charter, as the city’s incumbent ISP, to strengthen and expand service to users.
- The ultimate goal of a network should be a fiber to the home system that delivers more affordable and faster internet options to both businesses and residents.
Related Content:
