Digital Inclusion
Roundtable Meeting
1-31-05
Present:
Amanuel Godefa-PUC Brian Coyle Center
Corky Wiseman-Minneapolis Park Board
Stephen Lu-Asian Media Access
Tim Salo
Sarah Koschinska-PPL
Marcela Sanchez- United Way
David Greene
Damaris Fredell-SeniorNet
Jason Prock
Ken Nelson-Teaming for Technology
Linda Shoemaker-CTEP
Amelia Hansa-CTEP
Kateri Kormann-CTEP
Russ Adams-Alliance
Mahi Palanisami-Alliance
Rosa Maria de la Cueva Peterson-St.Paul E-democracy
Xan Cassiel-West Bank Community Coalition
John Richard-PUC Waite House
Kurt Kimber
Lauree Stolarcyzk-CTEP
Benjamin Kimmel-Phyllis Wheatley/Mpls. Public Schools
Jeremy Iggers-Twin Cities Media Alliance
Mary Ann Van Cura-Minneapolis Public Library
Catherine Settanni, Community Computer Access Network
Updates from Jim Farstad the broadband consultant to Minneapolis
Jim talked about the city's history with broadband, and their plan for city services. The city is interested in improving their communication for city services such as police cars and ambulances. The primary purpose of the pilot sites is for the city to test these city services. The city is still determining how the public will access the pilots. Some ideas that Jim mentioned included open access for everyone or certain centers and areas will have free access. Jim said the pilot build-out will start in March and run from 30 to 60 days until mid-March. During the pilot sessions the city will continue contract negotiations. Jim said that by the end of late winter in 2007 all 59.5 sq. miles of Minneapolis will have the technology.
Rosa Maria was concerned about internet service being available to all residents in all geographic areas of Minneapolis regardless of its economic standing. Rosa Maria said that money from the vendor should be distributed in relation to the economic geography of Minneapolis. Jim explained that most neighborhoods will get this service at about the same time, with a proposed launch date around the 2nd quarter of 2007.
Jim emphasized that solving the digital divide, for example is not possible through the city alone, but must be done with the help of CBOs, corporate partners, and grants from other foundations.
Jim said that ideas regarding community benefits and bridging the digital divide are being brought up to the vendors, and the vendors are deciding on what community benefits they can provide. He also said that the city is not managing content during the Pilot phase, and it is undetermined what the city requirements will be regarding home page, portal or walled garden content when the network launches. This should be part of our proposed community benefit list if we are concerned about content (which we are!).
Jim said that the city may not negotiate a CBA directly with the vendors, but the vendor could on its own initiative decide to add in community benefits as part of their plan. This could include earmarking some revenue towards a fund for community technology needs. The example he provided was the city's contract with Time Warner Cable, which requires Time Warner to pay 5% of their revenues to the City, which results in $2million/year for the city.
Surveys
Sarah from PPL said that a survey asking people about Minneapolis wi-fi is ready for use. The survey is available in English, Hmong, Spanish, and Somali. There is also a 1 page explanation of wi-fi available in English and Spanish. The survey and information sheet can be obtained from Mahi.
Ken showed a box that can be used to collect the surveys. The surveys will be collected at the next roundtable on Feb. 15.
Content Control
David asked about static IP addresses. Static IP addresses are needed to run servers. Jim replied that IP addresses have nothing to do with the vendors. A point of contention resulted in understanding who will be controlling IP addresses. We will try to understand this question better, and respond to it if relevant to the community benefits process.
Actions Ahead
Feb. 15 meeting @ PPL @ 5:30p.m.
Agenda will include a discussion about how money from any resulting Digital Inclusion-type fund should be managed and eventually distributed.
A community foundation?
A private foundation?
A new non-profit?
A city agency?
What kind of board would be best? (Board make-up)
How to decide funding priorities?
How to insure community control or oversight?
We’d like community input on this matter before approaching the City or vendors with ideas…
Minutes submitted by Mahi Palanisami