Monthly Archives: March 2013

Fergus Falls is all for Telecommuting

Posted on by
Reply

Last week I wrote about telecommuting in Minnesota, mentioning the move by Yahoo and Best Buy to curb telecommuting in their own offices. I’m not surprised to see others chiming in too – especially in Fergus Falls, a place that has really focused on telecommuting as an economic development strategy. This week the Fergus Falls Journal has run a story on the local impact of telecommuting…

There are about 350 teleworkers in Fergus Falls, and the number is growing, according to Fergus Falls Economic Improvement Executive Director Harold Stanislawski. …

Stanislawski said he has been in talks with major companies, such as Blue Cross Blue Shield, to expand job opportunities. But while the Twin Cities touts easing traffic congestion as one of the top benefits, Stanislawski puts new job creation at the top of the list. …

A basic concern for employers is whether or not telecommuting employees will really be working. Stanislawski said research is overwhelming in proving that on average employee productivity actually increases with telecommuting.

The article cites some of the same advantages I noted for workers – you get to be home for your family and you have access to jobs that may not reside in your zip code. I noted Fergus Fall in my original post too. They really have made a concerted effort to encourage telecommuting. This article mentions a local take on a job listing service designed to help get people telecommuting jobs…

Mary Robertson reviews telecommuting opportunities for the Economic Improvement Commission’s Telework Initiative in Fergus Falls, and sends out opportunities weekly to those that have signed up for free.

“We use flexjobs.com because it seems to have the most opportunities, but do encourage people to use minnesotaworks.net too,” Robertson said.

Using search criteria to view all new jobs in Minnesota that allow telecommuting, Robertson pulled up 1,794 opportunities on her computer. While most were technical positions, there were several opportunities in marketing, writing, social media, sales and customer service.

Robertson looks at each opportunity to see if it has restrictions, such as a whether a worker must be located in a certain state or area, but until a potential telecommuter contacts an employer, they won’t really know all of the requirements and restrictions.

Robertson then sends out job listings to the email database.

Federal Energy and Commerce Committee looking at Lake County

Posted on by
1

The ARRA-funded Lake County Fiber Network (LCFN) is getting attention again. A press release from the Energy & Commerce Committee reports…

In a letter to RUS Acting Administrator John Padalino, the members [Republican leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee] requested information regarding the agency’s management and oversight of the BIP program, particularly its review process for awarding $66.4 million in grants and loans to Lake County. Members expressed concern that the Lake County project may be overbuilding areas already served by existing broadband providers, instead of expanding access to underserved or unserved areas, as required by ARRA.

The leaders wrote, “While the committee recognizes the importance of expanding broadband access to rural areas of the country, we are concerned with suggestions that the BIP program may have been used to overbuild existing systems rather than extend service to areas that legitimately meet the underserved/unserved eligibility requirements. Materials reviewed by committee staff also raise questions as to whether RUS adequately considered the financial viability of the Lake County project before committing $66.4 million in government funding.”

The letter to the RUS (Rural Utility Service) asks a series of pointed questions:

Q1: Please provide an overview of your application review process. What information was required from Lake County and how was that information verified?

Q2: Why did RUS reject Lake County’s Round 1 BIP application? Did RUS make recommendations for Round 2 BIP funding? If so, what were those recommendations, who communicated them to Lake County, and what was RUS’s rationale for making such recommendations?

Q3: What review did RUS conduct to verify data regarding served, unserved, and underserved populations in Lake County Fiber Network project area? Did the Lake County Fiber Network project enter a market that already served (in whole or in part) by an existing broadband provider? If so, please list those providers and state whether they offered broadband services at speeds in excess of 5Mbps. In addition, what percentage of the projects’ target wholesale and retail customers were already served by one or more broadband providers at the time the Round 2 application was filed?

Q4: How did RUS define the term “household” for purposes of calculating the number of served, unserved, and underserved premises in the Lake County Fiber Network project area? Did that definition make a distinction for seasonal residences (i.e., cabins and summer homes)? If so, did RUS consider this distinction in reviewing the pricing and take rate assumptions used in Lake County’s financial projections?

Q5: Is RUS aware of any misrepresentations or inaccuracies in the Lake County Fiber Network project application? If so, what were those misrepresentations or inaccuracies and how there they addresses by RUS?

Q6: What review did RUS conduct to ensure that Lake County had the necessary legal authority to build the Lake County Fiber Network project? What review did RUS conduct to ensure that Lake Communications would be capable of operating and managing the proposed network? What review did RUS conduct to ensure that the Lake County Fiber Network project would be financially viable?

Q7: Why were neither National Public Broadband Inc nor Lake Communications listed as co-applicants on the Lake County’s Round 2 BIP application or considered sub-recipients of the load and grant proceeds?

The also request a large number of documents – such as all written and electronic communications related to the project.

For better or for worse, many of these issues have already come up for Lake County. They seem to magnets for attention. In fact many of these issues came up last summer in an issue of Communications Daily and then in a House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology. Here are the allegations that came up in the Communications Daily article…

  1. Lake County didn’t have the funding required at the time it.
  2. Lake County didn’t use the most recent census data in its original application.
  3. To be successful, the Lake County plan would require 100 percent take rate, which would be very difficult to obtain.
  4. Lake County has been assured that even if they default on the loan, the RUS would not seek repayment beyond the proceeds of a foreclosure auction on the network.
  5. The replacement consultants hired to manage the project are more like an extension of the County than a separate entity.
  6. There are questions on how much the consultants are getting paid to run the network versus the amount they set to pay the County for access to the network ($8 per line per month).
  7. Minnesota law prevents municipalities from owning a telephone exchange without a super majority approval through a referendum.

It seems as if the Republican leaders of the House Energy and Commerce Committee have picked up where the House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology left off. It also seems as if many of these issues were discussed and dismissed at the House Subcommittees meeting last summer.

Some of these issues may be new – but it sort of feels like déjà vu – especially since the same issues have come up in different ways since the Subcommittee Hearing…

  • Soon after the Hearing, local leaders chimed in (Duluth News Tribune) to refute the claim that there had been sort of misrepresentation
  • In July there was some back and forth between Mediacom has been outspoken and local leaders on whether the business plan and take rates are unrealistic. There have also been discussions (Op-Ed letters anyways) seemingly between Minnesota Cable Communications Association and local leaders based on who would pay back the loan in case of default.
  • In August 2012 the Minneapolis Star Tribune ran an article on unserved areas of Lake County. They refer to Mediacom and the Minnesota Cable Communications Association as other providers in the area. Reliability is also mentioned as a factor for infrastructure in Northeast Minnesota. Lake County has had a few major outage issues in the last few years.

 

Minnesota Office of Broadband Development Bills – HF1255 / SF1128

Posted on by
2

Last Wednesday Legislators heard about bills to establish an office of broadband in both the House (1255) and Senate (1128). Unfortunately due to some time on jury duty, I wasn’t able to attend the sessions and the archives aren’t yet available online but I thought I’d at least look at both bills. (Both were discussed last week at the TISP Forum.)

The House Bill (1255) was introduced by Representative Johnson on March 5. The last action was March 14 – to do a committee report, pass it and send to Government Operations.

Here’s the short description: Office of Broadband Development established in the Department of Commerce and duties assigned; and Department of Transportation required to post a database on its website, and reports required.

Here are some details:

Fiber Database – A place where the Department of Transportation will post upcoming construction projects – updated annually. Details will include location, start and end dates, nature of construction. Local governments, utilities are encouraged to post info too. Providers may sign up to get updates. This shall reside on the Department of Transportation website.

I think this was already in the works. It seems like it might helpful to get buy in from a wider audience to encourage greater collaboration – but I understand that so long as broadband is a competitive commodity, not a utility, that probably won’t happen.

Reports – Increases current reporting requirements to include suggestions for policies as well as a report on the state of broadband expansion.

Definitions – They revert to the “FCC definition of broadband,” which is currently slower than the Minnesota Broadband goal. (FCC uses 4 Mbps down and 1 Mbps up; Minnesota is shooting for 10-20 Mbps down and 5-10 Mbps up.)

Office of Broadband Development – create an office at the Department of Commerce to become the go-to people for broadband in the state: perform broadband planning for the state, work with public and private parties to develop a standard access and use policy, encourage cost-effective broadband access and greater use of broadband, coordinate efforts to meet the 2015 broadband goals, keep an eye on what’s happening in other areas, on the federal level and look at security and redundancy.

Reporting – the annual reporting, currently the responsibility of  the Broadband Task Force has been extended to include some analysis, predictive modeling and legislative updates. The bill also suggests a second report that, it sounds like, really sets out recommendations to improve access to and use of broadband – including training and reaching out to mobile users

Broadband Infrastructure Development – The office will strive to work with local government, department and agencies to create a smooth path to deploy fiber. Dig once is mentioned specifically.

The Senate Bill (SF1128) was introduced on March 7 by Senator Schmit. Last action was March 14, to pass as amended and re-refer to State and Local Government.

The Long Description: Establishing and providing for the office of broadband development in the department of commerce to improve broadband within the state; requiring the department of transportation (DOT) to post on the DOT web site a list of construction projects; requiring the office to coordinate broadband infrastructure development in collaboration with the departments of commerce and transportation; requiring an office report.

Here are some details: (Note the bills are quite similar, I’ll just try to call out the differences here.)

Office of Broadband Development – Again calls for the establishment of an office. The director here will be appointed by the Governor; other staff may be hired if necessary. Again the goals are similar but this version specifically calls out working with commissioners of Commerce, DEED and Transportation. (Ironically not a mention of a website in the first engrossment, although it is mentioned in the description.)

Appropriation – $500,000 for both 2014 & 2015.

It will be interesting to see what happens moving forward.

Minnesota star telecommuting state

Posted on by
Reply

The Minneapolis Star Tribune reports…

The Twin Cities has experienced the fifth-biggest rise among metro areas nationwide in the number of workers based at least partly at home, according to U.S. Census Bureau commuting surveys. Between 2000 and 2010, the number rose by almost 22,000 people, to about 82,500, according to estimates.

And Minnesota is the only state with two big job centers, Mankato and St. Cloud, among the top 10 metro areas nationally in the share of people working from home.

They don’t mention other areas such as Fergus Falls, Olmsted County or other areas featured in an MPR article on telecommuting in rural Minnesota – but I will add them.

The article highlights some of the benefits of telecommuting. From the point of view of the workers – it’s nice to work and be around when your kids get home from school. As someone who normally lives that life, I have to second that benefit. Also businesses are seeing increased levels of productivity…

About three-quarters of the 48 eWorkPlace employers [employers who allow telecommuting] reported that productivity increased, while only a smattering sensed a decrease, according to a Humphrey School report.

And they are reducing costs…

“Organizations are trying to cut costs,” Kacher said, “and one way is through real estate. It’s not hard to have people like travel agents work from home: It saves lots of money on real estate, reduces turnover and people have more time. ”

The article recognizes that this news comes in the shadow of businesses such as Yahoo and Best Buy stepping back from telecommuting. Last month, Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer pulled the plug on telecommuting in a memo…

“To become the absolute best place to work, communication and collaboration will be important, so we need to be working side-by-side. That is why it is critical that we are all present in our offices. Some of the best decisions and insights come from hallway and cafeteria discussions, meeting new people, and impromptu team meetings. Speed and quality are often sacrificed when we work from home.”

The Huffington Post countered the Yahoo move with more research supporting telecommuting as a practice but also indicating management’s hesitation with it…

– A Stanford study, conveniently released on the same day as Yahoo’s memo, reported that call center employees increased their performance by 13 percent when working from home. They also reported “improved work satisfaction and experienced less turnover,” according to the study.

– A University of Texas at Austin study from late last year found that those people who work from home “add five to seven hours to their workweek compared with those who work exclusively at the office.” Such workhorses, we homeworkers are!

– A Bureau of Labor Statistics study, also from last year, reported that working remotely “seems to boost productivity, decrease absenteeism” — that means missing work — “and increase retention.” It also gives employers more incentive to ask you to work on weekends, the authors say. Boo!!

– According to some recent research published in the MIT Sloan Management Review, bosses are roughly 9 percent more likely to consider you “dependable” and “responsible” if you “put in expected face time” Translation: Being at the office can help you get that raise you so desire.

Free trial of broadband ROI? 84% customer retention in Itasca County

Posted on by
Reply

Two questions I hear a lot in the broadband world: How can public and private work together? How can we encourage non-adopters to subscribe to broadband? I think the following story answers both…

Through MIRC funding, KOOTASCA Community Action supported a project that sought to bring computers and broadband connectivity to Native American student families in the Deer River School District. They partnered with PCs for People and Paul Bunyan, the local broadband provider to make it happen.

There were 28 PCs for People refurbished computers available at no charge to these families along with a paid 10 month subscription for Internet service for 24 families through Paul Bunyan Communications. The families qualified for free and reduced price lunch. The project ended December 31, 2012.

As of January, 2013 the households picked up the cost of the Internet at the regular rate from Paul Bunyan Communications. To date in March only 4 households have dropped their Internet service from Paul Bunyan Communications….an 84% retention rate.

KOOTASCA helped to facilitate the project between PCs for People (a nonprofit), the school and the local provider. We’ve had stories of similar projects in Thief River Falls and other areas – but it seems like the kind of straightforward plan that bears repeating.

Teens & Technology: Is mobile the right tool or the only tool available?

Posted on by
2

rural phonePew Internet and American Life released a new report this week on teens’ use of technology and the Internet. I’m always interested in these reports – both because of my obvious interest in broadband but also because after a big birthday in February I am now the proud keeper of two teens. And as of this week they each have an iPhone.

Here are some of the broadband highlights from the report…

  • 95% of teens are online, a percentage that has been consistent since 2006.
  • One in four teens (23%) have a tablet computer, a level comparable to the general adult population.
  • Nine in ten (93%) teens have a computer or have access to one at home. Seven in ten (71%) teens with home computer access say the laptop or desktop they use most often is one they share with other family members.

I’m impressed by 95 percent of teens being online – although that is a huge wake up call to the five percent who aren’t. It would be interesting to know why those teens aren’t online. Yesterday Connect Minnesota released a report on Minnesota adoption. They found reasons that most Minnesotans who aren’t online have stayed offline. The top answers are:

  • Don’t want it (19 percent)
  • Broadband fees are expensive (13 percent)
  • No content worth viewing (13 percent)

Since I just saw my teen send SnapChat pictures to a friend on the whole drive home from dinner last night – I can’t believe the bar for “cotent worth viewing” is that high with teens. You wonder if it’s cost or access or parents’ decision. The bigger question is how do we prepare those teens to use the technology their peers take for granted?

There were also range of statistics on cellphone use by teens:

  • 78% of teens now have a cell phone, and almost half (47%) of those own smartphones. That translates into 37% of all teens who have smartphones, up from just 23% in 2011.
  • About three in four (74%) teens ages 12-17 say they access the internet on cell phones, tablets, and other mobile devices at least occasionally.
  • One in four teens are “cell-mostly” internet users — far more than the 15% of adults who are cell-mostly. Among teen smartphone owners, half are cell-mostly.
  • Older girls are especially likely to be cell-mostly internet users; 34% of teen girls ages 14-17 say they mostly go online using their cell phone, compared with 24% of teen boys ages 14-17. This is notable since boys and girls are equally likely to be smartphone owners.
  • Among older teen girls who are smartphone owners, 55% say they use the internet mostly from their phone.

So now I have the data to contrast my teens’ whining that they were the only ones in the world without smartphones – but I have to admit 37 percent is pretty impressive. I’m intrigued by 25 percent of teens being cell-mostly internet users. I get that 71 percent share a computer at home, which makes it harder to use the laptop or desktop, but that number still surprises me. And I wonder if it is because their cell use is virtually constant through the day so that any other time spent on a traditional computer seems brief? Or is the cell use replacing traditional use?

For me the difficulty with smartphone/cell-only (or mostly) access has been my difficulty understanding how someone could get their “work” done on a smartphone. For example – I don’t want to read a Pew Report, cross reference other studies or type out this blog post on my smartphone. I do want my smartphone for directions (maps and occasional how-to videos), contact management, easy communication (Facebook, Twitter, text), music while I workout, ready reference, comparison shopping; some of those activities are work related.

The big question to me – for teens and others who choose cell/smartphone access – are we doing things differently? (Do they find a smartphone sufficient for research and writing?) Is the “work” changing? For example are people watching videos instead of reading reports and are they commenting via video? Because I’d choose a smartphone for that work too.

Do they choose smartphones because it’s the right tool for the job or because it’s the only tool available?

Minnesota Broadband Adoption Leaps up 6% to 78% home adoption

Posted on by
Reply

connect mnSix percent may not sound like a lot – but in a steady market and a demographic that many have suggested will be difficult to coerce into adopting, it’s great to see Connect Minnesota announce a 6 percent increase in broadband adoption across Minnesota…

Connect Minnesota today released new data showing that broadband adoption in Minnesota is increasing, with 78% of households now subscribing to broadband service, up from 72% in 2011. That represents 3.2 million adults statewide with broadband service at home. One of the biggest jumps was in mobile broadband usage, which increased by 12 percentage points.

Here are some other specifics from the research…

  • 369,000 Minnesotans who do not subscribe to home broadband service say they do not subscribe because they don’t feel that broadband is relevant to them, or they don’t believe they would benefit from having broadband at home.
  • Rural computer owners are more likely to have said good-bye to their desktop computers – In Minnesota, 41% of rural computer owners only have a laptop or tablet compared to 31% in non-rural Minnesota.
  • Within the past year mobile Internet usage has increased from 39% to 51% across the state. The freedom to access the Internet while away from home is the main reason why Minnesotans are subscribing to mobile broadband service on their cell phones.
  • Only 1% of Minnesotans who do not subscribe to mobile broadband on their cell phones cite concerns about mobile data limitations (or “data caps”) as the main reason why they don’t subscribe; among Minnesotans who have mobile plans that include data caps, nearly one in three say they went over their cap in the previous 12 months (32%).

Interesting to look at the growing interest in mobility – from the shift away from desktop computers in rural areas, to increase in mobile Internet access to one third of mobile users bumping into data cap issues.

Also it would be interesting to know what has spiked the growth. Is it a growing interest in mobile? Has it been digital literacy programs, such as those deployed in MIRC communities? Are the non-adopters “aging out”? Are the discount pricing options reaching more people?

MHTA Spring Conference: April 30, 2013

Posted on by
Reply

The Minnesota High Tech Association just announced their grand finale speaker for the MHTA Spring Conference – Jim Link…

In his presentation, “The New Creativity,” Link will strip the mystery from creativity and reveal it for what it is—a skill and discipline that with some effort, anyone can master. MHTA’s Spring Conference will be April 30 at the Minneapolis Convention Center. Registration is available.

Link started one of the world’s first idea companies in 1994. Since then, he has brought new thinking to more than 100 companies across 160 different product and service categories.

Developed over thirty years of hands-on new product innovation, Link’s approach to creativity has attracted many of the world’s biggest corporate innovation leaders, including 3M, Cargill, General Mills, New Holland, and Nestle. His carefully developed methods have brought proven success and his engaging speaking style consistently earns him rave reviews.

Earlier they announced Best Buy CEO Hubert Joly as the keynote…

The Minnesota High Tech Association has announced Best Buy CEO Hubert Joly will keynote the upcoming MHTA Spring Conference. Joly will discuss the importance of innovation as well as leadership lessons learned throughout his tenure at some of Minnesota’s most prominent companies, including Carlson. …

According to his biography, Joly led the restructuring and growth of Vivendi’s video game business from 1999 to 2001, which included the development of a massive online presence with Diablo II and then World of Warcraft. He later oversaw the highly complex integration of Universal and Vivendi’s media assets in the U.S., and was part of the team that led the successful restructuring of Vivendi in 2002 to 2004.

I like the focus on ideas and innovation. Innovation has been a core part of the MIRC and now Blandin Broadband Communities (BBC) projects for a few years now. The participating communities use a modified version of the Intelligent Community Forum framework that builds local economic development on: knowledge workers, digital inclusion, infrastructure, marketing and innovation. It will be fun to learn more about both speakers’ perspective on ideas.

Three faces of mobile broadband: we need more than mobile super consumers

Posted on by
Reply

I’m on jury duty this week – so far that has meant a lot more time to read emails that usually breeze by me. One up note – they do have Wi-Fi here. I’m going to say about a third of us in the jury duty holding cell are typing away. Some folks are reading and I can hear at least two people snoring! So today I am thankful for mobile broadband. In light of my gratitude I thought I’d highlight three disparate uses of mobile broadband that help illustrate its importance.

Moms Shop via Mobile

eMarketer reports…

According to a December 2012 survey conducted by women’s mobile network Alt12, which surveyed US moms who used the network’s apps, fully 70% reported using their smartphone or tablet to shop. An even more staggering one-third of moms said the devices accounted for nearly half their shopping time or more.

The report goes on to indicate that moms use retailer apps; 60 percent reported that apps helped them make buying decisions. Moms also use social media channels and peer reviews to make decisions.

Workers in the Field Go Mobile

The Wall Street Journal reports…

Nearly half of the respondents in a recent Forrester Research Inc. FORR -0.96%survey said they use a smartphone at least once a week for work, and 21% said they use a tablet for work at least weekly.

Much of this use so far is for emailing or as a mobile supplement for existing workplace tasks, like digital flight manuals for airplane pilots on iPads or checking in guests at hotels. But now, mobile technology is becoming affordable for a broader base of companies, and it is spreading from ancillary functions to areas ingrained in employees’ workdays, such as marketing materials for pharmaceutical reps, customer account software for service technicians and apps for testing the quality of cow’s milk for farmers.

Again apps are noted as a popular way to get things done. The article highlights a couple of fun examples: online blue prints accessible from the building site and Coca-Cola technicians tracking customer info with ServiceMax apps.

People in Indonesia

eMarketer reports…

Indonesia’s economic engine will help create a new and considerable digital class of consumers. eMarketer projects about 29% of the population—or 72.7 million people—will have access to the internet by the end of 2013. That penetration rate is expected to climb to 39.8% by 2016, accounting for 102.8 million internet users. …

Fixed broadband remains a rarity in Indonesia, with a penetration rate of about 1.6% of households, or 800,000 homes.

A significant impediment to fixed broadband access is that many people in Indonesia simply can’t afford it, along with the logistical difficulty of providing internet across a geographically fractured area. While the government is taking steps to improve broadband access, as in most developing economies, growth in internet access will largely come through the adoption of internet-enabled mobile phones.

Mobile access, mobile devices will make it possible for millions of people all over the world to get online in the upcoming years.

It’s interesting to take a look at three faces of mobile. I am an advocate of mobile access. I think the applications above – shopping and working – make the case that mobility is attractive in technology. I am also wary of any situation where access is mobile only, especially in the case of Indonesia or lower income users in the US because I think mobile-only users are relegated to partial functionality online. Never mind cap issues, I think a mobile device is great for shopping, directions, even ready reference – all consumer tasks.

Without training, I don’t think mobile access allows users to become creators of content. The power is there – I think of folks such as The UpTake who have turned cell phones into powerful reporting tools. (The UpTake uses cell phone video to record civic events.) Or even Google Square, which makes it easy to accept credit cards from your smart phone.

The challenge is providing training and/or developing apps that make it as easy to allow mobile users to become more than consumers – we/they need better access to create content, create jobs, engage in civic action through mobile access.

Carolyn Parnell & Massoud Amin on Gov Tech’s Top List of Doers, Dreamers and Drivers

Posted on by
Reply

Gov Tech recently announced their 2013 Top 25 Doers, Dreamers and Drivers list. There are two Minnesotans on the list: Carolyn Parnell & Massoud Amin. Note: 2 Minnesotans out of 25 names seems pretty good. Speaks to local innovation!

Carolyn Parnell, the State CIO, is recognized for her consolidation of Minnesota IT functions and staff, based it seems on a policy of setting standards. According to Gov Tech…

Then, in June 2011, the Legislature passed a bill to consolidate all IT functionality in the state under Parnell’s office — a consolidation that she says is about one-fifth complete because it’s a massive, multiyear undertaking. “We started with a mandate to  pull under one roof all aspects of IT — people, projects, infrastructure, applications — which was scattered among 70-plus organizations,” she said. “This had not been done in the state before.”

Within about six weeks, Parnell’s organization grew from 350 employees to 2,100.

The reorganization is the largest in Minnesota state government in decades, said Tarek Tomes, assistant commissioner for customer and service management at MN.IT, the state’s new IT agency. “Carolyn’s leadership has been the instrument that brought this together,” he said. “Her style is employee-focused, innovative and very reform-oriented.”

For Parnell, defining standards for delivering technology services was an important part of the undertaking. She and her team created the Agency Centralized IT Reference Model after realizing that existing models didn’t meet their needs. “We looked high and low to find an IT reference model that already existed, but we had to develop our own,” she said. “And we did, after some research in both the public and private sectors, so we’re comfortable with where we ended up.”

Where MN.IT ended up, Parnell said, was with a standard IT language and set of IT functions — versus having more than 70 ways to deliver IT prior to the consolidation. Parnell and her team also have met their mandated consolidation timelines thus far. “There was legislative language around when we had to have certain things completed,” she said. “The fact that we were able to meet that timeline was quite the accomplishment and a great team effort.”

Carolyn has recently joined the Blandin Broadband Strategy Board.

Massoud Amin, Director, Technological Leadership Institute at the University of Minnesota, is recognized for his work creating a more powerful smart grid. According to Gov Tech…

Massoud Amin is a self-described geek on a mission. The multilingual brainiac is supercharged about transforming the electric grid into a self-healing, sustainable and resilient smart grid. The new grid would consist of a network of sensors that communicate with one another to intelligently and proactively detect outages and perform repairs automatically. Amin’s mastery of the subject has led to groundbreaking research in the electrical engineering sphere, earning him the moniker “father of the smart grid.”   …

Late last year, following Hurricane Sandy, Amin spoke with NPR about the necessity and benefits of creating a smart grid. In that interview, he said the multimillion-dollar power outages that occurred could’ve been avoided. In February, Americans received another reminder during the Super Bowl blackout — the latest in a long line of arguments for a smarter power grid.

Target Looking at Upgrading Online Buying Options

Posted on by
Reply

According to Minneapolis St Paul Business Journal…

TechCrunch reports that Google is testing a service that would compete with Amazon Prime, tapping eight stores in the Bay area to see how the project works. Target is reportedly one of the merchants involved, though there’s no official word from either company.

I was surprised to read that Wired thought that interest would be low, sounded like a heck of a deal to me. Certainly any extra cost for same day delivery would be offset by impulse  purchases I would have made shopping in Target in person…

But it’s unclear how much demand for the service there might be. Wired reported last week that, according to a survey by The Boston Consulting Group, less than one-tenth of U.S. consumers saw same-day delivery as an important improvement to online retail. The biggest interest came from “affluent millennials” — ages 18 to 34 living in urban areas, who are basically this century’s Yuppies.

Minnesota Telephone Customers Must Act to Receive Discounts

Posted on by
Reply

I hope folks will pass this on to the right audience…

MINNESOTA CUSTOMERS MUST ACT TO KEEP LIFELINE AND TAP TELEPHONE DISCOUNTS

St. Paul, Minnesota – The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission and the Minnesota Department of Commerce want to make sure that telephone customers are aware that they must act to continue to receive the benefits of certain telephone discount programs they may have been receiving.

Both the Commission and the Department have received numerous inquiries from customers who were removed from Lifeline and Telephone Assistance Plan (TAP) programs and recently saw an increase in their telephone bills. The Commission and Commerce Department have also received reports from local telephone service providers regarding the numbers of customers removed from the telephone discount programs.

The telephone companies are currently implementing new rules issued by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) that require telephone service providers to remove Lifeline customers who fail to re-certify their eligibility for the programs. Results from the 2012 recertification in Minnesota show that 33,000 or 46 percent of about 71,000 Lifeline customers failed to return signed certification forms with required information to their service providers and were subsequently removed from the programs.

“It is critical that all Minnesotans have telephone access in order to keep in touch in today’s changing world and to be able to make contact with needed emergency services,” said Beverly Jones Heydinger, Chair of the Public Utilities Commission. “While it is important to maintain the integrity of the programs by confirming that the benefits are extended only to those who truly qualify, it is also important that those who are eligible receive the assistance they need.”

Lifeline and TAP are federal and state programs that provide discounts for telephone service to eligible customers based on income (at or less than 135 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines), or participation in qualified government programs (e.g., Medicaid, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), National School Lunch Program, Federal Public Housing Assistance, Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), and others). Lifeline provides up to a $9.25 discount per month, while TAP provides an additional $2.50 discount per month. Further discounts are available to qualified residents of tribal lands.

“Lifeline and TAP programs make a big difference in the lives and family budgets of Minnesotans,” said Commerce Commissioner Mike Rothman. Minnesota consumers have been warned of the need to protect their identity, as they should, but in this case the recertification process required that the last four digits of the consumer’s social security number be included on the recertification form. “I urge all consumers who have qualified for the programs in the past to review their phone bills to ensure that these credits are being applied, and to contact their local service provider if the credits do not appear on their bill,” said Rothman. The telephone companies are responsible for providing customers with the recertification form.

The Commission and Commerce Department are concerned that many of the customers who were removed from the programs are still eligible but simply have not submitted the annual application as required by the new federal rules. Telephone customers who are no longer receiving their Lifeline or TAP discounts and believe that they qualify for the discounts based on income or qualified assistance program participation should contact their local telephone service provider and request an application for the Lifeline and TAP programs. Information on how to contact the telephone service provider should be available on the individual customer’s telephone bill.

For More Information

Concerned consumers can call:
The Public Utilities Commission Consumer Affairs Office at 1-800-657-3782 or 651-296-0406
Department of Commerce Telecommunications Division at 651-296-4026 or telecom.commerce@state.mn.us

Computer Commuter (bookmobile for computers & broadband) featured on Kare 11

Posted on by
Reply

computer commuter bus picWe’ve written about the Computer Commuter before. We took a tour of it in 2011. It is the tricked out van with computers and broadband touring Lac qui Parle County to give local residents a taste of Internet access. Fun news over the weekend – the Computer Commuter was featured on KARE 11 over the weekend as Minnesota’s only portal to the information highway that drives into town on one. It’s fun to see it get mainstream attention. …

“We heard a lot of people say ‘I can’t take an introduction to computer class, because I don’t even know how to turn it on,'” said Pamela Lehmann, executive director of the county’s economic development authority.

Lehmann said her organization initially considered locating a computer lab in one community, but ultimately settled on a bus, because we “just couldn’t pick” between the towns in the county.

Lehmann purchased the 17-year-old hotel shuttle bus on — where else — the internet.
“Yeah,” she laughed. “We bought it on Craigslist.”

The bus operates on a budget of $60,000 a year, primarily from grants from the TDF Foundation and Southwest Adult Basic Education. The Lac qui Parle EDA is currently seeking $30,000 to continue operations past June.

High speed internet is finally arriving in the county through fiber optics, funded by nearly $10 million in federal stimulus grants and loans. The first users logged on last month.

But Lehmann says the bus is needed more than ever – as a training vehicle. Talk about bridging both the information and generation gaps: at one work station 16-year-old Brooke Franzky taught Werner how to organize her family photos – nearly 70 years separating them.

You can see the whole story on the KARE 11 website.

Definitions matter: A rose by any other name, might not get funding!

Posted on by
Reply

What is broadband? That was a popular question at the East Central Minnesota Broadband Summit in February. Many of the people asking were new to the topic and were looking for basic definitions– but those of us who aren’t so new understood that the definition of broadband was important.

The definition of broadband has been used to calibrate funding mechanisms. So even though the topic is dry and wonky – the outcome is important to folks on the street, especially in rural areas, because it defines the speeds that the government (state or federal) might subsidize. For example, Minnesota is shooting for ubiquitous broadband at speeds of 5-10 Mbps upstream and 10-20 Mbps down. The National Broadband Plan is looking for 100 million homes to have access to 100 Mbps; and 1 Mbps upstream and 4 Mbps down for the rest.

Now the USDA is looking at redefining rural. They are recommending that rural be measured at 50,000 people. The Daily Yonder puts the change in succinct perspective…

Over two years past that due date, the Department has chosen to better target funds by recommending a dilution of the definition of rural to its highest level – 50,000 people – arguing that having a consistent definition will streamline program delivery and ensure predictability for the constituent communities. The Department argues that the existing different population thresholds set up “arbitrary barriers to regional strategies” and harm their ability to provide integrated program delivery.

A shift to this population level from the population caps that exist currently (10,000 for rural water/wastewater programs, 20,000 for community facility programs) means additional seats at the table for programs distributing ever smaller pots of money.  House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas (R-OK-3) and Ranking Member Collin Peterson (D-MN-7) expressed similar concerns in a press release issued this week.

In response to this concern, USDA Rural Development suggests that it will be able to ensure that those smaller communities currently eligible will retain priority over larger communities by allocating those smaller areas priority points.  When applications come into the agency, they are vetted for eligibility and then scored based on a set of criteria.  The higher you score, the better your chance for receiving funding.

Here is what the USDA report outlines as definition of rural in terms of telecommunications…

For the Telecommunications Program, Section 201 of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 gives preference to applicants operating in rural areas, defined in Section 203(b) as anywhere except an incorporated or unincorporated area with a total population in excess of 5,000. An updated definition reflecting current market conditions for these larger utility loans was included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for broadband loans, grants, and loan guarantees, as follows:

For an additional amount for the cost of broadband loans and loan guarantees, as authorized by the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C. 901 et seq.) and for grants (including for technical assistance), $2,500,000,000: Provided, That the cost of direct and guaranteed loans shall be as defined in section 502 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974: Provided further, That, notwithstanding title VI of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, this amount is available for grants, loans and loan guarantees for broadband infrastructure in any area of the United States: Provided further, That at least 75 percent of the area to be served by a project receiving funds from such grants, loans or loan guarantees shall be in a rural area without sufficient access to high speed broadband service to facilitate rural economic development, as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture: Provided further, That priority for awarding such funds shall be given to project applications for broadband systems that will deliver end users a choice of more than one service provider: Provided further, That priority for awarding funds made available under this paragraph shall be given to projects that provide service to the highest proportion of rural residents that do not have access to broadband service . . . . (Emphasis added.)

Now on the one hand, we’ve seen steady and successful progress in broadband planning shift from towns, to counties to multi-county approaches in Minnesota. Lifting the focus to a regional level has allowed for economies of scale that help get infrastructure to the areas between cities and towns. On the other hand, I don’t know that changing the definition of rural helps to cover those gap areas. Again, the Daily Yonder does a nice job of laying out the argument…

USDA argues that regional initiatives will blossom once the population limit is lifted, since smaller communities will work with larger nearby communities – all of whom will now be eligible – and greater cooperation will be achieved, since the entire system will be eligible for funding.  However, what incentive will larger communities have to work with smaller communities when those larger areas will now be eligible for grants and low-interest loans regardless of whether they develop an integrated system or not?

It’s a wonky topic, it is mired down in details and seems like something many practitioners might leave to the theory/policy folks BUT like the definition of broadband, I think the definition of rural will determine who gets funding in the future. So folks on the front lines and far corners will want to be paying attention.

FTTH growing but still rare in Minnesota

Posted on by
1

Broadband Communities magazine reports good news for the fiber industry…

North American fiber-to-the-home deployers forged ahead in 2012, passing 2.7 million homes with fiber between September 2011 and September 2012, marketing fiber services to 3 million more homes and connecting 1.5 million new FTTH customers.

This growth – the industry’s best showing since 2008 – occurred as stimulus projects advanced in the United States and as the leading Canadian telcos ramped up their FTTH construction.

Revenue kept pace as well, with FTTH customers paying, on average, more than $57 a month for data – by far the most profitable offering a network provider can sell. Customer satisfaction soared, and average take rates continued an unbroken, decade-long rise.

It’s good news for the industry – and it’s good news for consumers who want fiber . I was surprised to see how FTTH is doing in Minnesota – as the map below indicates, we’re at about 2-3 percent fiber. For comparison – it looks like South Dakota is about 10 percent, North Dakota is better than 22 percent and the US average is 8 percent.

ftth map 2013