The Task Force graciously spoke about their report. The Blandin Strategy board chimed (here’s their written comments)  in and folks had questions.

Here is the introduction from moderator/task force member/former Blandin strategy board member, Mike O’Connor. In it he addresses Jim Baller’s critique of the Task Force report expressed the previous evening.

Here are comments from the Task Force members:

Chris Swanson – represented rural, small city, small business and started with goal of ubiquitous FTTH. Still stands behind importance of ubiquity. We often looked at Minnesota as a whole, which is different from sum of the parts. Private investment has done a good job but public-private partnerships are needed to reach far corners.

Mary Ellen Wells – represents rural healthcare as CEO of hospitals. Hope that by 2015 we can take broadband for granted. Access and quality are very important, especially in healthcare.

Craig Taylor – IT Director at HealthPartners – as a large business we have the technology/broadband we need but we need more across the state for smaller businesses. The speeds we chose were based on applications that are being used today.

Dan McElroy – Commissioner of DEED to represent economic development issues. Economic development issues have changed; access to the Internet is a utility today. We need reliable access to attract/retain businesses. Need to be specific about where access is in community – even outside a town; those folks 5-10 miles outside town need to know about access. Quality of Place is a big seller for Minnesota – broadband helps to weigh the quality of place more heavily. Check out MNPro,

John Stanoch – President of Qwest in MN & ND. The process of convening and the task force was very valuable – both meeting, and research done by members. Speed factors included need for speed. We need an ongoing dialog to keep this in the mind of Minnesota. We need an ongoing entity. Technology changes and to be successful need to plan too. Universal consensus on universal access was vital. Also we made some good plans for demand too. The equity of supply and demand will carry of forward.

Glenn Wilson – Commissioner from Department of Commerce – around the state we’ve found that manufacturers, doctors, others are using broadband and need broadband. The task force report will help focus the legislature.

From Blandin Broadband Strategy Team

John Linnell – Healthcare background – a big concern in healthcare is that healthcare is driven by connectivity; interoperability is essential with transient patents (including snow birds); we need symmetry; but they are all expensive drive. Healthcare is a cost sharing process and the patient is the one who pays. Sometimes the $2 aspirin is paying for more than the aspirin – sometimes it subsidizes connectivity. We address metro and small community needs – but not necessarily rural needs. We can keep people in their homes with telepresence – we catch things faster with home care. We need high speed, we need symmetric, we need affordable.

Nancy Hoffman – from Benton County, half of the county is well served. Unserved area heard complaints from businesses and schools. Ubiquity is very important. Speed is important too – Jim Baller’s presentation reinforced that. Changes come so quickly with broadband we need to keep up. We always ask businesses about broadband need; we are losing businesses to broadband-rich areas. We need local champions for broadband; we need users in government.

Questions:

What would it take to be 5th or 15th in the world?

Well documented in Task Force report (pg 56).

Did the Task Force deal with cutbacks?

We recognized that in areas that are expensive to serve the government provided incentives. There are some federal incentives too. One problem is the current definition of rural are (more than 50 miles from city).

The stimulus funding is a drop in the bucket; we should look at USF and think about transitioning voice subsidies to filling broadband need.

How do we encourage public-private partnership?

There’s going to have to be more p/p partnership. It’s not necessarily popular, but will be important. Local officials need to understand importance of broadband.

There are some examples of efforts (Monticello, North St Paul…) but it depends on what the local government and the incumbents can do together.

We’re hoping that as the Task Force has agreed maybe we can start a new trend where there’s more consensus, more collaboration. In the short term, we need a better discussion about where the need is – and what are the resources. The incumbents are other providers need to work more closely with economic developers – we can provide service to businesses that want/need it. Minnesota should not lose businesses or jobs due to lack of broadband.

An ongoing entity might help that communication.

Where do you think money will be spent in the future?

Look to page (80), we have a sources of funds list. These will/should serve (in this order) unserved, underserved – the rest. The RUS is a good place to go. It has been and it should be even better as the ARRA funding thins the herd.

I highlighted one statement above because – and this is just my opinion – I think that consensus and collaboration are two important things addressed/demonstrated by the Task Force. They modeled it in their recommendations; they model it in their public appearances.