webnetic.net

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.