« November 2005 | Main | January 2006 »
San Francisco shows world how not to do Muni Wi-Fi
"San Francisco's TechConnect venture has done something hitherto thought impossible, and united progressives and conservatives in the city in mutual concern about the venture."
Mayor proposes WiFi in Public Housing closer to Monster Park : SF Bay Area Indymedia
Mayor Gavin Newsom proposes free WiFi in Public Housing at Double Rock with used, cold, old computers to permit poor folks have free access to WiFi provided by Google and a few connected cronies that are very dubious in nature - have got millions of dollars but did not say a word at the Public Meetings - OneEconomy in particular and another entity at 200 Paul Avenue.
City of San Francisco's DTIS/SFPUC Departments released the Municipal Wireless TechConnect RFP without Needs Analysis, Feasibility Study, Financial Analysis and Inclusionary Process as requested by LAFCO
Multiple requests by interested parties to help shape the RFP were blocked by DTIS, SFPUC and City Attorney.
An initial review of the RFP appears written for the benefit of a Vendor who can finance the solution based on the privacy of the Public (targeted advertising).
It has opened-ended questions about Privacy rather than setting minimal standards (unlike the minimal security requirements).
It has no minium Bandwidth standards for the Free Basic Service portion, it just asks the Vendor to povide something.
Unfortunately, DTIS allows that they may waive criteria stated in the proposal during contract negotiations.
The RFP has no serious provisions for Disaster-Proof communications for the general public
Oddly there is no Pre-Proposal Conference planned for the RFP.
(From draft LAFCO minutes 12/16/05)
"Chairperson Commissioner Mirkarimi moved, seconded by Commissioner McGoldrick, to request that the Executive Officer send a letter to the Mayor, Board of Supervisors and Department of Telecommunications and Information Services indicating SF LAFCO's interest in pursuing a municipally-owned WIFI system and addressing issues, including but not limited to, a feasibility study, financial, and inclusionary process, and needs analysis, etc"
See RFP: Here
More coverage at: sfist.com Leftinsf.com
Stop the backroom deal.
Library/Bank-like privacy and security, disaster-proof communications for all, cell-phone-like coverage.
Chris Vein, acting Director of DTIS got his hat handed to him, watch the fireworks
here 142 mins windows media, select the top item on 12/16/05
"The city should be driving ... if it is going to give out a virtual monopoly."
San Francisco Bay Guardian- WiFi: Who's in control? 12/21/05
you can see it here (7 pages)
The city only considered the 5 Turnkey proposals (Google, Earthlink, HP, MetroFi, Skytel/MCI), there has been a strong desire by the City to quickly implement a solution, (the mayor discussed this over a year ago at his State of the City speech).
This desire for speed is shown by the Direct Decision timeline.
The last public hearing is tomorrow:
Friday 12/16 2pm PST GMT-8 City Hall Room 263 LAFCO
If you want to speak up about the process or solution, they may be your last chance - you can watch it online too and live chat http://www.webnetic.net/2005/12/what_we_thought_san_francisco_1.html
We thought TechConnect would be Wireless Internet for all that closed the Digital Divide and which:
+ Worked as well as your Cell Phone service
+ Had Library/Bank-like privacy and security
+ Was Disaster-proof so that the Public can communicate when they really need to, not just Public Safety.
The leaked draft RFP lacks or only partially has these features.
Anyone can speak for three mintues: Come tell the three Supervisor's McGoldrick, Ammiano and Mirkarimi (he called the hearing) why this is unacceptable. (the selected Vendor will most likely be using City Light Poles, Power, Buildings and possibly fiber)
Ask for Transparency and Accountability in the whole RFP process - in the drafting, due dilligence and selection process. As it stands, while DTIS has been embarassed, they are still writing the RFP to exclude Public Participation.
Fri Dec 16th, 2 PM, (PST GMT -8) City Hall, Room 263 (across from chambers), LAFCO SFGTV2 called by Sup. Mirkarimi
http://sfgov.org/site/lafco_page.asp?id=36018
(you can watch it online from home or work too on SFGTV2 live internet streaming or LIVE on cable channel 78 on Comcast & cable channel 28 on RCN):
http://sfgov.org/site/sfgtv_index.asp?id=11463
Live chat (active now - free - no download - enable popups - works on public or library computers)
irc://irc.indymedia.org/techconnect
server irc.indymedia.org the channel is #techconnect
For Live chat help:
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Sysadmin/IrcHowTo#New_users_Connect_quickly_using
Online Trip Planner for Public Transit
http://transit.511.org/tripplanner/index.asp
City Hall driving and parking information
http://www.sfgov.org/site/cityhall_index.asp?id=5244
Google map to City Hall
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=1+Carlton+B+Goodlett+Pl,+San+Francisco,+CA+94102&iwloc=A&hl=en
So the concrete results are that DTIS was beat up. They'll now have to pay lip service to gathering Community input - before the RFP is released to bid. Of course, DTIS in the leaked RFP explicitly excludes the Public from reviewing the Proposals submitted during the RFP - DTIS is allowed to view them with no Public Input and to contract with whomever they like. Oh and the RFI/C submittals continue to stay secret too. Watch online here
Something like: They're real sorry, just a miscommunication, they won't do it again and they weren't being secret at all. But they get to keep all of their allowance.
Unfortunately, the Supervisors declined to actually exercise any legislative authority. They treated it more as an interesting intellectual discussion.
This isn't over yet - DTIS messed up so badly there is Another hearing Friday 12/16 by Another group of upset Supervisors - even if you spoke on Monday, you should speak again because these guys need to hear what you have to say:
Fri Dec 16th, 2 PM, (PST GMT -8) City Hall, Room 263 (across from chambers), LAFCO SFGTV2 called by Sup. Mirkarimi
http://sfgov.org/site/lafco_page.asp?id=36018
(you can watch it online from home or work too on SFGTV2 live internet streaming or LIVE on cable channel 78 on Comcast & cable channel 28 on RCN):
http://sfgov.org/site/sfgtv_index.asp?id=11463
At least thirty people spoke from a interesting collection of organizations at Public Comment (that's a lot) and many had excellent points. While Chris Vein of DTIS claimed that DTIS wasn't being secret, almost everyone that spoke complained that the process had not been open to community input. By the end, Supervisor's Peskin and Daly (2 of 3) openly agreed that the Community needed to be part of the plan.
We point out that we have no evidence that DTIS has announced the Public Hearing at LAFCO on Friday and it is not on their special TechConnect site. So much for Open Government.
We have received what appears to be a Draft RFP for San Francisco's Techconnect Wireless Internet Initiative, dated 12/8/05. View 30 pages (flickr.com)
Due to worldwide interest in Google's Free Wireless Internet offer to San Francisco and ongoing complaints about the lack of community buy-in and Open Government processes, we will summarize some discussion points of the apparent draft RFP to provide insight into the City's current thinking.
Since this is a draft RFP, the Community still has a chance to influence the process.
Attend the hearings in San Francisco or Watch them Live online. Mon 12/12 1pm room 263 and Friday 12/16 2pm room 263 (PST GMT-8) details
There are many excellent ideas with San Francisco's Techconnect and the concept of Ubiquitous Wireless Internet; Below are some of the issues that the Community has raised that may require additional Community discussion:
1) How will this help to close the Digital Divide? What does Free Wireless Internet mean to me?
Unclear. The City has removed the minimal standards they had in the RFI/C. High density dwellings are in trouble.
The RFP now asks the Vendor to propose something wireless and free. And the Vendor is asked to suggest their own performance and coverage standards (page 3 2.1b Business Model).
Previously, the minimal standards in the RFI/C were:
1MB Avg. symmetric, 95% Outdoors, 90% indoors (1st & 2nd floor and only street facing units, inside units on all floors and anything above the 2nd floor are not covered). Stated goal of 100% in-building coverage.
2) How is my privacy protected?
Unclear. City asks vendors to address these concerns with Open Ended Questions (pages 9-10 2.11 Privacy).
Interestingly, The document shows the City setting some harder standards and then striking them out and asking Open Ended Questions instead. Typically open ended questions are used in the nonbinding RFI/C to get information on how to set standards for the RFP.
ACLU, EFF and EPIC West submitted a combined brief regarding privacy issues. (This has not been posted online by the City - unlike other briefs and comments).
3) What is the Business Model? Does the City own the Network?
Owned and Run privately, at no cost to the City (page 3 2.1a Business Model).
4) Is San Francisco seriously looking at a wireless solution that is disaster-proof for everyone (not just Public Safety), so that people can communicate if the power is out, phone lines are down, and cell towers overloaded (like what happened after 9/11 and Katrina)?
No. Even with reports in the Washington Post (Crisis Communications Remain Flawed 12/10/05), the City only asks two Open Ended Questions - (page 7 2.8h-i Network Infrastructure).
5) Can the Public see the Vendor proposals to provide input on them during the RFP due diligence period?
No. While San Francisco has a broad Open Government Sunshine Ordinance, the RFP attempts to assure Vendors that their submissions in Whole will be kept secret (page 17 Sunshine Ordinance).
This prevents Community input on what will soon be regarded as Public Infrastructure monopoly. While the RFI/C completed 11/8/05. The City continues to prevent release of these submissions as well.
6) Does it support Network Neutrality?
Unclear, depends on how you define it 1 2 Only one Network Operator, but Open Access to transport. It gives the Vendor access to City light poles, power and buildings for what some characterize as a defacto monopoly (page 3 2.1a Business Model)
From an initial perusal of the document - it reads more like a 'window dressing' RFP rather than a serious attempt at a standard RFP process.
Allegations that a backroom deal happened before even the RFI/C process started seem to still be worth considering.
You'll have three minutes to say what you like at Public Comment.
Anyone, Yes you! Can speak at these hearings, no quailifcations, age, voting status, height or technical ability required.
We are going to setup Internet for Live Blogging, They'll be televised Live on Live streamed online. There is a Live Chat Room (if you can't be there in person). You can bring your laptop for a short demo or powerpoint or for Live Chat, Live Collaborative Notetaking, and Live Blogging.
You can bring Overheads/Slides, Digital cameras for Live Blogging. Video and Audio Recorders, and Power Strips and Extension cords.
Pick one or two of your hot button issues and then
Demand transparency and accountability
For other concerns that should be addressed
EFF, ACLU, EPIC West: How Far Would You Go For Muni WiFi?
http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/archives/004078.php
The two hearings are as follows:
Mon Dec 12th, 1 PM, (PST GMT -8) City Hall, Room 263 (across from chambers), Government Audit & Oversight-GAO SFGTV called by Sup. Daly
http://sfgov.org/site/bdsupvrs_page.asp?id=29787
Fri Dec 16th, 2 PM, (PST GMT -8) City Hall, Room 263 (across from chambers), LAFCO SFGTV2 called by Sup. Mirkarimi
http://sfgov.org/site/lafco_page.asp?id=36018
SFGTV LIVE! Cable (SFGTV & SFGTV2) cable (26/78/28) Internet Streaming (Windows media)
http://sfgov.org/site/sfgtv_index.asp?id=11463
Live chat (active now - free - no download - enable popups - works on public or library computers)
irc://irc.indymedia.org/techconnect
server irc.indymedia.org the channel is #techconnect
For Live chat help:
http://docs.indymedia.org/view/Sysadmin/IrcHowTo#New_users_Connect_quickly_using
Online Trip Planner for Public Transit
http://transit.511.org/tripplanner/index.asp
City Hall driving and parking information
http://www.sfgov.org/site/cityhall_index.asp?id=5244
Google map to City Hall
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=1+Carlton+B+Goodlett+Pl,+San+Francisco,+CA+94102&iwloc=A&hl=en
Real-time Collaborative NoteTaking (active now - free - no download - enable popups - works on public or library computers)
http://www.jotlive.com/techconnect
(Pre-Plamning and contemporaneous notes during the hearings)
To meet-up 90 minutes before the hearing and after the hearing
Soluna Cafe and Lounge
272 McAllister Street (at Larkin)
San Francisco, CA 94102
http://solunasf.com/map_directions.html
More Details: kimo at sign webnetic.net
Real-time blog of San Francisco Techconnect - http://www.webnetic.net
(only for presentations) USING LAPTOP COMPUTERS: Please contact City Hall Media Services at (415) 554-4933 to coordinate the use of laptop computers for presentations at the meeting. Computers to be used are required to be tested in advance. The presenter should arrive 30 minutes prior to the meeting to connect and test their computer.
Nope. I'm just a private citizen who wanted to see the RFI/C submittals and now we are here. I don't represent anyone else. No one is paying or providing consideration to me. Apparently we are having some effect and City Hall and others are feeling the heat. Kinda cool that one guy and a blog can affect anything.
Here's QT Video
If you read the beginning of the blog and the referened SFLAN.org postings you can see i just wanted to look at what was being offered. Of course, the fact that the city has tried to stop me at every step of the way has greatly helped the case. Remember, the San Francisco Bay Guardian did two stories on this too (referenced earlier in the blog) and they would never be trying to help Verizon, SBC, PG&E or Comcast etc. Me neither.
Chris Vein, leading the Techconnect Initiative, seems to send minions to do his bidding.
Ron Vinson, DTIS, says many disturbing things on KALW's City Visions Radio show (11/28) regarding TechConnect WiFi
it's a *real disaster* for the City (Real Audio)
21:00 Ron says they are still vetting the input from the RFI/C submittals, yet the RFI/C is already done (11/8/05) with an announcement that it is going to a RFP Bid.
30:00 Ron says they want a process that is as "Transparent as Possible"
It gets much better:
31:00 Emy Tseng recounts details of an upcoming hearing - Government Audit and Oversight - GAO, Monday 12th and 1 PM Room 263 City Hall and reiterates a strong desire to include the Community in the whole process (keep this in mind)
Then, Sydney Levy (Media Alliance) calls in and talks about the hearing too (he knows about it). He then asks Ron if there will be a process for Public Comment on the draft RFP.
Ron gives a long convoluted answer, NO.
48:00 fireworks again, Talking about City Fiber, Ron says the RFP solution has been selected and then backs down (not very convincingly).
Then Tim Pozar asks why the City continues to assistscompanies like Google in keeping most of their proposals secret. Ron says the City is indeed concerned about this and that they could release the documents but are concerned about being sued by the companies over Trade Secrets.
Tim and the Host point out that there is no way for the Public to comment on the solutions being proposed without access to them.
58:00 Lastly, Ron, who's department DTIS has received an official invitation to answer to the Board at the GAO (Government Audit and Oversight) on Monday the 12th 1:00 PM City Hall room 263, doesn't seem to know the time of the meeting (though Tim does) and Ron gives the *wrong* name of the meeting. Emy as noted above had all this information correct. And of course Sydney who called in knew about the hearing too.
Some would call this last point a simple mistake on Ron's part. Others might call it intentional misdirection for the people who show up at City Hall on the hearing day and can't find the meeting location. The meeting name Ron gave was a valid name, but not for this hearing so it sounded correct, but was not. Over the course of my interactions with Ron on this topic, I surprisingly experieneced half answers and misdirections.
Remember that is Ron's job, to provide correct information for the department.
Over the whole course of the show, Ron continued to extoll the City's techconnect website, yet that website has yet to announce anything on it regarding the hearings on Monday the 12th or Friday the 16th.
It seems the City really wants community input doesn't it?
People continue to point out that the RFI/C's have proprietary information in them. Therefore the secrecy is ok.
0) The RFI/C period was officially announced as over by the city on 11/8/05 - Even if this was a completed (and more formal) RFP process, proposals would now be Public Record according the the Sunshine ordinance.
1) No one made companies submit RFI/C's if they wanted to keep it private, this is a public Infrastructure discussion, RFI/C participation was not required for RFP participation.
2) Under the Sunshine Ordinance, companies may not redact large portions and certainly not declare the whole proposal is proprietary (AnchorFree did this- they finally created a one page exec summary that says nothing) Google 100 pages, 6 available to the public.
3) There's not a lot of new ideas under the sun, new chip sets, new business models and rumor spread the internet in hours
4) Some Companies submitted two versions of the proposals Public and for the Mayor's Eyes - there is no way to know what is really being offered
5) Apparently even after the deadline revisions additional submittals occurred - these have not been posted on the city website.
6) In Sunshine communications I have documeted with the City, they are actually helping the companies with the secrecy by saying that it is now not up to the City to say what is and what is not proprietary. Even though the RFI/C itself warned companies that this was all under the Sunshine Ordinance and the there was a reasonable chance this information could become public (and if so they couldn't sue the City) - this was reaffirmed in the pre-RFI/C meeting verbally and transcribed in questions and answers as well.
View image>
Why are anonymous comments being suggested as a course of action?
One wonders for what purpose, a suggestion is made that Emy Tseng a representative of Comunity Technology Foundation of California (which so far, seems like a good group) who was on the secretive Techconnect RFI/C Due Dilligence group and who's organization submitted a seven page brief (seems like a possible conflict of interest?), should comment without attribution. While 160 pages of emails were delivered today, there is no subsequent email provided from Chris Vein, the DTIS director, disagreeing with this approach.
.
We read this as an Analyst following orders from the top.
As part of a Sunshine request, I received this email today. Of 160 pages provided today, this is the only obvious redaction.
Smoking Gun? The phrase Oogle comes to mind. Why does the City continue to prevent an open discussion on WiFi?
No explaination was provided for this Redaction. This Redaction was not called out in the materials delivered.. We have asked for an explainaton from the City for this redaction - So far, silence
UPDATE: 11/9/05, City says that one line is Client Attorney communication. - Sorry Folks, that's not how Protected communication works - of course, the City only made this claim after we brought the unexplained redaction to their attention in thei first place.
From Christopher Caen, Sf Examiner:
On a more civic matter, Kimo Crossman checks in with the latest on the imminent decision on our citywide wireless Internet connectivity. And Kimo is loaded for bear and is planning to set up a wireless net right there for blogging, a live chat room and possibly streaming video, too. All of which will create more transparency than those hallowed halls have experienced before. Do you have the feeling the phrase “hung by their own petard” might be bouncing through our Supervisors’ heads right about then?
Remeber these hearings are not even Official Public Comment on RFP - They are a demand to include community before releasing the RFP..
The only member of the secretive RFI/C due dilligence committee for Techconnect (which was disbanded on 11/8/05 with no recommendations) who does not receive a check from the city, represented an organization that submitted a seven page brief (page one)
Emy Tseng, Senior Policy Advisor for Comunity Technology Foundation of California sat on the Techconnect Responses Review Panel. Bios (Word)
