• News
  • Job Opportunities
  • eNewsletters
  • 2021
  • 2022
  • 2023
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012

Social Media:

Invitation for Connecticut Municipalities to Join Major Broadband Infrastructure Initiative

10/24/2014

INVITATION FOR CONNECTICUT MUNICIPALITIES TO JOIN

MAJOR BROADBAND INFRASTRUCTURE INITIATIVE

 WHEN:   Friday, October 31, 2014, 10:30 am

Speakers will include:

• Comptroller Kevin Lembo (invited)

• Senator Beth Bye (invited)

• New Haven Mayor Toni Harp

• Connecticut Consumer Counsel Elin Katz

• Connecticut Broadband Policy Coordinator Bill Vallee

  • (contact for info: William.vallee@ct.gov, 860-827-2905)

 On September 15, 2014, New Haven Mayor Toni Harp, West Hartford Deputy Mayor Shari Cantor, Stamford Mayor David R. Martin, along with Senator Beth Bye, Comptroller Kevin Lembo, and Consumer Counsel Elin Katz, announced a joint initiative seeking to increase access to ultra-high-speed Gigabit networks in their cities and throughout Connecticut, while reducing the cost of such networks for businesses, high-tech industry, universities, and homeowners.

• A collaboration of Connecticut municipalities led by Stamford, West Hartford, and New Haven issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) soliciting information and partnerships with potential providers to create Gig networks in their communities.
• Any interested municipality may join the RFQ by submitting a Municipal Addendum. The RFQ, with instructions for submitting a municipal addendum that expressly addresses the investment interests of potential Internet service provider respondents to the RFQ, is available online at http://www.cityofnewhaven.com/PurchasingBureauOnline/index.asp

   (Note that a user may sign on with a phone number in lieu of a tax ID number).

• Relevant documents, including the RFQ, Addendums of the three cities, a press release, and recent news articles, can also be viewed at the Office of Consumer Counsel’s website at www.ct.gov/occ
• The RFQ expressly states that this process does not involve any legal or financial commitment on the part of a municipality. The municipalities intend to be infrastructure and policy partners only, contributing in-kind assets and support, and do not intend to act as retail service providers or network operators.   
  

Guidance is provided below as to what information should be provided by a municipality in an addendum filed with the RFQ that might be useful to potential Internet service providers considering building in Connecticut.

• See: the RFQ, at APPENDIX B – Profile of RE Municipality, for detailed suggestions.

• The Google Fiber City Checklist is a collection of best practices for municipalities based on guidelines from Gig.U, Fiber to the Home Council, and the U.S. Conference of Mayors.  https://fiber.storage.googleapis.com/legal/googlefibercitychecklist2-24-14.pdf

• Samples of Macquarie questions to municipalities, submitted October 15, 2014:

  • Do the REs intend to aggregate their current spend to increase purchasing power? If so, would anchor institutions such as higher education facilities and public libraries be considered as sister agencies that the REs intend to partner with and would their spending also be aggregated through a single entity?

  • Please provide details on the existing RE programs facilitating broadband access for low income users?

  • The RFQ notes that the REs are willing to provide access to assets and in-kind support. Can respondents assume this includes rent-free access to public easements and sites for cabinets, huts, and other network infrastructure?

  • Are the discretionary tax incentives available to the REs consistent across all REs? Please provide a full list of potential incentives and the REs in which those incentives are available.

• Samples of Veloz Broadband questions to municipalities, submitted October 15, 2014:

  • How do the Requesting Entities define low-income or disadvantaged resident for purposes of the Request for Qualifications and subsequent Request for Proposals?

  • Do the Requesting Entities have specific Census tracts identified as low-income or disadvantaged?

  • Do the Requesting Entities have an estimate of the number of households that would be designated as low-income or disadvantaged?

  • Do the Requesting Entities anticipate all households within a given Census tract to be designated as low-income or disadvantaged?

  • Do the Requesting Entities propose gigabit fiber deployment strictly within the city limit or extended to county boundary encompassing city?

  • Do the Requesting Entities have an estimated number of households and utility poles to be served to meet the 99.9% accessibility objective?

  • Do the Requesting Entities have an estimated number of street miles to be served to meet the 99.9% accessibility objective?

  • Can the Requesting Entities provide service maps in .gis, .shp or other appropriate geospatial file format?

  • Can the Requesting Entities provide a service map in .gis, .shp or other appropriate geospatial file format for the Nutmeg Network?

  • Will the Requesting Entities provide technical assistance, engineering support, municipal personnel to aid in the speed and cost of pole attachment?