Author Archives: Bill Coleman

Blandin Broadband Leadership Roundtable Discussion Notes June 2, 2020

Posted on by
Reply

Today, our group learned about the broadband funding available via the federal Economic Development Administration.  Thanks to Robin Weiss and Jay Trusty from Southwest RDC for their excellent overview of the program.  You can also find a summary on the Blandin on Broadband blog.

Here are links to Development Commissions: http://www.mnado.org/contact/

Key learnings:

  • Lots of money – grants available up to $30 million
  • Grants are first come-first served so haste is required
  • The Regional Development Commissions are the best gateway to these dollars
  • Grants can require little (20%) to no match ($0)
  • Dollars can be used for broadband infrastructure or technology technical assistance, including adoption and use activities
  • Economic development considerations are important
  • There seems to be significant opportunity for all kinds of collaborative efforts on both construction and non-construction activities. The RDCs are talking about this.
  • It would be great to leverage DEED Border to Border dollars to get more federal dollars.

Next week, we will hear from Matt Fulton of POLCO (www.polco.com) who will showcase a cool technology for community engagement with local government.  Join us at 9 am on Tuesday morning.

EVENT June 2: Blandin Broadband Leadership Roundtable: State broadband funding

Posted on by
Reply

Join a group of community broadband advocates for their weekly broadband discussion. Next week, we will start the discussion with information on the federal Department of Commerce’s available broadband funding.  This program was covered in the Blandin on Broadband blog recently.  The dollars are available on a rolling basis so haste is required to get it.  We will talk about program rules and processes and possible strategies for consideration.  Maybe some opportunities for collaboration!

Once we wear out the above topic, we can shift to any other topics that attendees want to talk about.  Bring your ideas and questions.  Click here for to join us – or register in advance.

 

May 26 Blandin Broadband Leadership Roundtable Discussion Summary:

Posted on by
Reply

I was happy that on the Tuesday morning after the Memorial Day holiday we had a dozen folks discussing community efforts to spur broadband adoption and user sophistication.  Using the Intelligent Community framework as a guide, I showcased some of the projects that our Blandin Broadband Communities have implemented over the past several years.

For the broadband pillar, I highlighted public wi-fi offered at the Chisholm Pocket Park, Rock County campgrounds, wi-fi on school buses and improved wi-fi at libraries.  For knowledge workforce, I talked about Leech Lake’s computer training tied to their workforce program, Swift County’s online welding program, and Red Wing’s Coder Dojo after-school program and Fond du Lac’s summer app camp for kids.  Digital Equality efforts highlighted PCs for People, Hibbing HRA’s broadband project in housing that they operate and Winona’s longstanding to connect new Americans with college students for computer training.  Innovation projects included multiple efforts at one-to-one business technology audits and counselling, Access North’s installation of Smart Home technology for older adults and those with disabilities and Hibbing’s use of iPads in health care.  Finally, in advocacy/marketing, I talked about Red Wing’s community calendar and web portal and Cannon Falls “Cannon Roots” branding campaign.

There was active discussion among participants about the implementation strategies for these projects as well as talk about the challenging task about how to make them sustainable once grant funds expire.  Participants also spoke about how the COVID-19 pandemic has multiplied the benefits of these projects and accelerated adoption.

Great thanks to Robin Weiss of Southwest MN RDC for discussion about the new funds available through the federal Department of Commerce EDA program which can support new infrastructure and adoption and use.  The Blandin blog has a nice post on this program with all of the links.

Join us June 2nd at  9 am for our next roundtable discussion when we will focus on this EDA program and generate some ideas and strategies for applications.

Blandin Broadband Leadership Roundtable Summary: selecting private sector broadband partners

Posted on by
Reply

On Tuesday May 19, Blandin Foundation hosted a Broadband Leadership Roundtable discussion focused on selecting private sector broadband partners.  I started the conversation by asking participants to list some of the characteristics that they want to see in a broadband partner.  Responsiveness, transparency, community engagement, longevity and established reputation.  Several people indicated that they were looking for a provider who put “people over profit.”

That list alone demonstrated that it is important for communities to create a shared perspective on what makes a good partner.  “People over profits” may point to the need for a public sector entity or a cooperative.  It is interesting to note that “fast speeds” or “cheap prices” did not make this list.

Blandin Foundation has published a list of principles for partner selection and partnership development.  They are:

  • Complementary mission, values, and culture
  • Commitment to inclusion
  • Mutual trust and respect
  • Balance of power and sharing of resources
  • Clear, open, and accessible communication
  • Continuous partnership improvement
  • Established partnership roles, norms, and processes
  • Reality-based and action-oriented
  • Willingness to share credit
  • Long-term and flexible perspective

Two providers on the call indicated that they look for community engagement as a key indicator of a good community partner.  If communities can fill a room for a community meeting or if they can get a good turnout for a community broadband survey, that is a good sign.  If a community can provide even a small financial contribution to a project, even as little as one percent, that is a great sign.  One provider indicated that communities should seek to include multiple providers in coming up with their connectivity solution when possible.

We shifted topics to talk about an exciting new digital inclusion effort under development to ensure that kids have devices and connectivity when school starts in the fall.  Look for more information on this project soon.

Next Tuesday, May 26, we will talk about best practices in community broadband adoption.  In other words, once you have a network, what is your community going to do with it!  Learn about what some communities are doing through the Blandin Broadband Communities program.  A key lesson – most projects don’t take much money to be successful and to positively change your community!

Blandin Broadband Leadership Roundtable Summary: Speed Testing

Posted on by
Reply

I led off the conversation on Speed Testing with a brief PowerPoint presentation Speed Tests: The What, Why and How (attached), covering what data most speed tests generate: Download Speed; Upload Speed; Ping/Latency; Jitter; and Packet Loss.  I talked about the uses of speed tests for individuals and communities.  I also discussed standard objections of providers to the use of speed tests to illustrate the quality of broadband services and some counterpoints to those sometimes-valid objections.  Finally, I promoted a set off broadband speed test best practices for communities to use.

There was strong participation from the attendees including community leaders, broadband providers and GIS mapping specialists.  At the core, communities are seeking to challenge maps that overstate broadband coverage which makes places ineligible for broadband funding like the FCC RDOF program and the Minnesota Border to Border program.  There was frustration that while providers can simply claim that they provide service to an area, community activists have to provide highly documented data to refute provider claims.  Adding to the injustice is the protocol that allows providers to claim service in an entire census block by providing service to a single location within that block.

We also heard brief updates from Colin Peterson’s congressional staff about new broadband legislation.

Join us next Tuesday at 9 am for our next discussion.

EVENT: May 12 Blandin Roundtable discussion on Broadband Speed Tests

Posted on by
Reply

Tuesday morning at 9 am, Blandin Foundation will host the 2nd of its broadband roundtables.  The starter topic is Broadband Speed Tests.  After that, it will be discussion of the topics that are front and center in your mind.  Bring your questions and comments to the conversation.  Register at broadband.blandinfoundation.org and look under the webinar series.

Blandin Broadband Roundtable Roundup: Notes on Rural Development Opportunity Fund from May 5, 2020

Posted on by
Reply

From roundtable host, Bill Coleman…

The FCC’s Rural Development Opportunity Fund and the impact of the Frontier bankruptcy were the topics of the day yesterday on the first of a series of broadband roundtable discussions happening every Tuesday morning at 9 am CDT.  Everyone is welcome and you can find the Zoom registration link at broadband.blandinfoundation.org under the webinar heading.

The consensus of participants was that the RDOF reverse auctions will be critical to currently unserved areas broadband future.  The program rewards the deployment of high-speed, low-latency broadband networks which is great.

While the auction will be held this fall, prospective bidders must complete their short-form application soon.  This is a real opportunity for local units of government to plan with their preferred provider partners.  It is important to be listed on the provider’s short-form application due to bidding rules. A community’s best role might be to create a partnership to help providers deploy to the surrounding ineligible areas.

The eligible areas are a patchwork of geography.  The preliminary eligibility map can be found here: https://www.fcc.gov/reports-research/maps/auction-904-preliminary-eligible-areas.  The FCC initially declared areas eligible based on their maps using provider supplied data.  Incumbent providers were then able to challenge that eligibility, essentially challenging the data that they had already supplied to the FCC.   You can see a map of those challenged areas here:  https://www.cooperative-networks.com/rdof-challenge-map/ .  The community route to challenge these maps is unclear, possibly requiring outreach to federal elected officials.

You can find some excellent introductory materials about the RDOF process here: https://www.adtran.com/index.php/rdof

Our second discussion topic was about the Frontier bankruptcy.  This process is generally outside of state regulatory processes. It is possible that Frontier will emerge stronger out of bankruptcy with the removal of debt.  Frontier recently sold their exchanges in three states, so we discussed possible buyers here in Minnesota.  We also discussed the relative approaches of an entity purchasing existing Frontier assets and customer base as opposed to simply overbuilding in those areas.  It is possible that Frontier may acquire long-term subsidies via the RDOF process.

The roundtables are a great opportunity to bring both your knowledge and your questions to share with the Blandin team and other community broadband advocates.  We will start our next roundtable with a discussion of speed tests.

Now available – Model Broadband Feasibility Study Request for Proposal

Posted on by
Reply

Good information is required for good decision-making, especially when the consequences of those decisions are important and expensive. For community leaders working to improve local broadband services, good information is usually acquired by hiring a consultant to conduct a feasibility study.

Study elements generally include the following: a review of existing networks and services; a market study; technology options; legal structures and/or partnership agreements; operations; and financial projections. The study process should drive decision-making so that on completion, the community has a strategy with committed leadership that leads to the desired goal – better broadband services.

Selecting the right consultant is critical. They need the right mix of technical and financial expertise, plus know how to work with community clients. While private sector providers have a well-defined decision criteria and decision makers, these things are more fluid and complex in a community broadband initiative.

Over the years, Blandin Foundation has funded many broadband feasibility studies. In fact, the demand for grant funds for this purpose has never been higher. We have created a model RFP for communities to use as a base document that should be customized to meet specific community objectives. A focused study scope will yield detailed analysis critical to good decision-making.

You can find the sample RFP and a list of possible consultants on the Blandin Foundation site. 

5G Wireless as Rural Solution: Not any time soon.

Posted on by
Reply

bill rightA guest post by Bill Coleman
(Download as White Paper)

5G Wireless as Rural Solution: Not any time soon.

Minnesota legislators are now hearing that a market-based broadband solution is near. 5G wireless to the rescue!  Learning that public dollars would not be necessary for rural broadband development would be soothing music to elected officials’ ears as other groups line up for funds– roads, schools, health care, tax cuts; the list is endless.

After all, many counties and regional entities are growing desperate for broadband and are actively studying the options for spurring broadband delivery to meet at least minimum FCC broadband standards.  Alternatives range from subsidizing incumbents to partnering with new or existing broadband cooperatives.  While the State of Minnesota is seen as the major finance partner, even townships are writing checks for broadband!

So the question “Is 5G coming to rural America anytime soon?” is critical for policy leaders and elected officials.  They wonder, “If we wait, will our future pass us by?” Conversely, they question “Will our investment in fiber be a waste of money as wireless becomes the preferred and available technology?”

After doing a lot of reading and talking with technologists, it is clear that 5G wireless is coming to the marketplace, but it is not coming to rural America anytime soon.  5G wireless does offer promise, but only to high density population centers such as  campuses, large office buildings and apartment buildings.  5G’s chief feature is very high bandwidth– 1 Gigabit or more!  Once established, 5G promises to have the ability to connect many devices with very quick responses, especially applicable for self-driving vehicles or many smart devices in a factory, on urban streets and so on.  5G would also be great for large file sharing applications like HD movies.

So why not 5G in rural areas?  That answer is easy and indisputable.  Deployment of 5G wireless services will require significant fiber deployment, more than either the current 4G wireless cellular network or the new CAF2 Fiber to the Node (FTTN) installations by large incumbent providers.

Rural 5G wireless services would require installing radios every 1,000 – 3,000 feet on towers and poles.  These small cells would require direct fiber connections and all of them would require electricity to power the radios.  The radios would connect to wireless devices in customers’ homes and to other devices on the network and, of course, back to the network backbone.

For comparison, today’s fiber-fed 4G towers might be four to fifteen miles apart depending on terrain and the number of customers.  We know that 4G services have yet to reach many rural customers at their homes since these services are often focused down state and federal highway corridors in tandem with existing fiber routes leaving those in the bulk of the rural countryside without modern service.

In today’s CAF2 environment, providers are making significant investments to deploy FTTN, shortening copper loops to approximately 7,500 feet.  These shorter loop lengths will allow some customers to exceed the 25 Mb download and 3Mb upload FCC broadband standard while others at the end of the line will more likely receive 10 Mb/1 Mb. While this may be a significant improvement from current services, it lags far below the Minnesota broadband goal of 100 Mb/20 Mb by 2026.  Optimists view these CAF2 improvements as an interim step to future FTTH deployment; others view these improvements as the last incumbent investment for a generation.

There are many questions yet unanswered on 5G wireless technical standards and final standards may be years in the making. There are just as many questions on the different business models that will drive deployment in urban, suburban and rural markets.  These deployment strategies will likely vary by location and provider mix.

For example, ATT and Verizon are dominant wireless carriers seeking to use more wireless in their old wired local exchange areas.  They could relatively easily transition their landline customer base to the new 5G networks adding to their existing wireless customer base.  In Minnesota, these wireless companies use a combination of their own networks and leased facilities from a variety of providers to reach large customers, but primarily to reach cell towers.

In Minnesota, incumbent providers CenturyLink and Frontier are just one year into a five-year process to deploy their CAF2 FTTN networks.  Once completed in 2020-21, likely to coincide with 5G technology and devices entry into the marketplace, will they be willing to open these deep fiber networks to competitive 5G wireless providers?  Or will they offer their own 5G wireless services on enhanced CAF2 networks?  Or, will these companies decline to sell access to their networks to wireless providers to preserve their own customer base.  In that scenario one has to wonder if there would ever be a business case for wireless carriers like ATT and Verizon to install duplicate fiber networks to reach rural customers?

So 5G is coming, definitely and soon, but only to metro areas, just as new technologies always seem to hit metro markets first.  But will and when will 5G reach rural?  For those rural residents and businesses still waiting for 4G wireless services, the answer is clearly not any time soon.  Fiber networks, to the home or to the node with very short loop lengths, will be a requirement to support future 5G wireless services.  First fiber, then 5G.  Not the other way around.

My advice: keep pursuing local fiber deployment so that all innovative broadband services – wired and wireless – can be offered in your community.

Steven Senne of Finley Engineering reviewed this article for technical accuracy.

 

Broadband hot topic at MN Association of Townships

Posted on by
Reply

bill rightIn the midst of rain and snow and wind, township officials met in St. Cloud last week for their annual conference.  Broadband was the topic of choice.  I stared with the following introductory presentation…

Senator Amy Klobuchar, Danna MacKenzie and two panels of presenters talked about rural broadband challenges and solutions.  Blandin Foundation community partners Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Chisago County and Cloquet Valley Internet Initiative were all featured as was the USDA and Paul Bunyan Telephone Cooperative.  It was great to hear of the winning solutions that will result in Fiber to the Home networks at Fond du Lac and north central Minnesota.  The value of partial solutions was also highlighted recognizing that more work and some luck will be required to reach a full solution.  The Minnesota Association of Townships has been a strong partner in an alliance of rural stakeholder groups, all of which recognize the foundational necessity of rural broadband services.

Southwestern Minnesota Counties Working Together on Broadband

Posted on by
Reply

bill rightLincoln, Murray and Pipestone Counties are three rural counties that have decided to work together on better broadband.  The counties share a similar mix of small communities and big farms on the southwestern Minnesota prairie.  They also see a growing number of neighboring counties getting fiber to their homes and farms, including Lac qui Parle, Swift, Big Stone and Rock Counties.

The leadership of these counties, staff and elected leaders alike, are worried that current broadband is hindering economic growth and detracting from their ability to attract manufacturing firms, other businesses and, most importantly, people due to the lack of broadband services.  More than 60 people attended one or more of three meetings held in Ivanhoe, Pipestone and Slayton, including a variety of broadband providers.

Attendees learned about the financial and technical challenges of providing high speed broadband in areas with such low population densities.  Those who live behind trees or in low valleys talked about their discussions with providers and challenges of even receiving wireless services.  They learned about the promise of the Connect America Fund 2 and when improvements might be coming.  In the future days, leadership teams from the three counties will meet to discuss the meetings, the input from residents and businesses and next steps.  Each county had 15 or more volunteers ready to team with county staff and elected officials on prospective solutions, including investing their own dollars to make expanded broadband possible.

Bill Coleman for policymakers – we must invest in broadband

Posted on by
Reply

bill rightEarlier this week I was invited to testify before the House Committee on Job Growth and Energy Affordability Policy and Finance committee, but didn’t get the chance to say what I had prepared. Here is the testimony I prepared and would have delivered.

Good afternoon Chairman Garafalo and members of the committee.

Thank you for this opportunity to testify before you today.

I will quickly address three related topics:

• The difference between broadband goals, broadband standards and the broadband marketplace
• The impact of the CAF2 program on rural places, and
• The need for rural communities to be able ensure their own broadband future.

Regarding goals, standards and the marketplace.

In 2010, the federal government set a 100 Mb goal which is still in place. In comparison, since 2008, the FCC standard for broadband has accelerated from 768k to 25 Mb, a thirty-fold increase in eight years.

The broadband task force is also recommending a 100 Mb by 2026 goal as well as an interim goal of 25/3 by 2022. If the 25/3 goal is adopted, Minnesota would gain notoriety as the only state that has adopted a lower upload speed goal in 2016 than they had in 2010.

In comparison, the marketplace is moving faster than either the federal or state goal. Companies are deploying Gigabit and greater broadband in both the Twin Cities and greater Minnesota. This change is enabled by new technology of course, and in the Twin Cities by some level of competition.

In rural Minnesota, cooperatives like Paul Bunyan, CTC and others offer Gigabit speeds. Hiawatha Broadband and Midcontinent do as well. So Gigabit broadband is not just a Google dream – it is a reality. Those communities without Gb services know that they are falling behind in economic competitiveness and quality of life.

The 25 Mb FCC broadband standard is of little use as a current benchmark or goal, especially for state broadband funding. Looking forward, if we were to apply the same growth rate to the FCC standard over the next 8 years as the previous eight, the 2024 FCC standard would be 750 Mb.

CAF2 is a program that will provide band-aid improvements to broadband services in some rural areas, but alone, will not provide a ubiquitous long-term solution. To quote Jason Dale, president of Cooperative Network Services, a collaborative of Minnesota’s Gb providing cooperatives, “these large companies will deploy essentially the same technology as was deployed by broadband cooperatives 15 years ago, probably causing them to fall even further behind the current rate of change.”
While DSL can provide speeds in excess of 25 Mb to homes within a half-mile of the electronics, those living two miles away will see their speeds top out at 10 Mb or worse, depending on the condition of the copper network.

Based on these incumbent providers’ investment track record, the CAF2 program may be these area’s last significant technology upgrade for a generation. Can you imagine the shortcomings of a 10/1 Mb connection in 2022? And areas ineligible for CAF2 may not get any improvements at all.

The right of first refusal concept is comparable to an arranged marriage, a concept almost as old and out-of-date as DSL technology. Many rural Minnesota communities have experienced the reluctance or outright refusal of these incumbents to invest in greater Minnesota over the past decade or longer. Efforts to develop public-private partnerships have been rebuffed before even mildly serious discussions could take place.

Communities must to be able to select their partners based on shared mutual interests and goals. Considerations would include the quality of the planned infrastructure, its long-term economic development potential and the reliability of the partner over the long term.

The ability of a rural community or county to create a partnership with a provider to deploy a world-class, Gb capable network should be encouraged, not prohibited. Monopoly providers delivering inadequate services should not be protected from competition.

A world-class broadband network is defined by more than just speed delivered to a particular location. Communities must ask: Does the network go everywhere and connect everyone? Do we have the networks that tech savvy people in all industries desire and require? Can the local economic developer reach a provider decision-maker while working with prospective economic development prospects? Are those who live in outlying areas – farmers, doctors, entrepreneurs, retirees, tele-workers, students, and vacationers – able to connect to do what they want and need to do to enjoy a vibrant rural lifestyle?

Because those that can’t connect will go elsewhere to live and work. And others will never come. As greater Minnesota works on another significant challenge – to grow and maintain a skilled workforce – those places without broadband are already at a significant disadvantage.

I encourage you to set aspirational broadband goals, like the 100 Mb goal that was adopted by the task force. It would then seem smart to require that all state funds be used only to reach the 100 Mb goal and not the current 25/3 FCC standard. Ensure that state funds are well used and create a long-term platform for rural vitality.

Thank you.

Can your community host a Good Friday Broadband Breakfast?

Posted on by
Reply

bill rightThe broadband discussion is heating up at the Minnesota State Capitol.  A coalition of rural organizations are working hard to keep the rural voice on broadband front and center this year knowing that no state broadband funding is guaranteed until the final legislative gavel and Governor’s signature.

A growing number of local organizations are hosting broadband breakfasts on March 25th to provide an opportunity for local leaders from economic development, health care, education, business and community to talk with their local legislators about their local broadband situation.  If you want to host an event, please contact Bill Coleman, MN Broadband Coalition at bill@communityechnologyadvisors.com.  We have a template agenda and invitation.  You might also complete the community broadband assessment tool on the Broadband Coalition web site in advance of the meeting so you can talk about the ways your community’s broadband is either an asset or a constraint to community development.  We all know that the adequacy of broadband is more than just a bandwidth number.  You can find the assessment at http://mnbroadbandcoalition.com/?page_id=296

Early next week, we will publish a list of the breakfasts and activate our partner organizations to help spread the word through our health care, education, business and other partner organizations.

Connect Itasca innovative plan to make business case for broadband

Posted on by
Reply

Bill_ColemanConnect Itasca is using an innovative tool to gather market development and business plan data for the un-served and under-served areas of Itasca County.  The survey tool provides mapping, network cost estimating and social media tools to build a business case for broadband deployment.  This initiative is critical because about one-third of the county’s households – approximately 6,000 families – lack broadband that meets the state goal.  Many people are struggling with satellite and cellular connections to operate businesses, go to school and live a modern lifestyle.

The project is almost half-way towards its goal of 1200 completed surveys. The partners are working hard to get the unconnected and highly dispersed to participate in the survey.  Team members are promoting the survey through schools, lake associations, township meetings and lawn signs!  Connect Itasca now has 30 “champion” volunteers out spreading the word.  Project updates are posted on the Connect Itasca Facebook page which now has almost 300 followers.

It was nice to see the effort get attention from the local paper…

The Connect Itasca mission is “to provide broadband Internet access to all Itasca County residents and businesses at speeds meeting or exceeding Minnesota’s state broadband goals of 10-20 Mbps download and 5-10 Mbps.” The first step in this process is to gather information from residents about their particular wants and needs for this project. The county has been joined by the Itasca Economic Development Corporation, Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce, and the Blandin Foundation in order to help make this project possible, but time is of the essence.

Because of federal grants that are available for broadband projects, funding is not an issue for making this happen. But the grants won’t be around in a few more years, so Klein said they hope to connect Itasca’s rural residents as soon as possible. When asked what the biggest problem is currently for Connect Itasca, it turned out to be slightly ironic.

“The greatest hurdle is connecting with the people who are unconnected,” said Klein. “So the typical message that we at the county use to communicate with our residents are email or through public access television. But what we discovered is that people who don’t have Internet also don’t have email and they’re not watching our board meetings on ICTV.”

Connect Itasca has a survey that they’re asking residents to complete on their Internet use and needs. The survey is available online at connectitascans.servicezones.net, but it may also be mailed to your home by calling the county administrator’s office at (218) 327-2847.

BOOK REVIEW: Brain Gain: How Innovative cities create job growth in an age of disruption

Posted on by
Reply

Bill_ColemanI have been a fan of the Intelligent Community forum for quite a while now. I have attended their annual conference many times and led Dakota County’s Intelligent Communities’ initiative that led to three consecutive years recognition as a Smart 21 Intelligent Community. I also brought the Intelligent Community concept to the Blandin Foundation to serve as the framework for their Minnesota Intelligent Rural Community project. Most recently, I worked with ICF co-founder Robert Bell on a project with three rural Louisiana communities. I provide all of this background to let readers know that I have a favorable bias towards the ICF concept and team.

I recently read Brain Gain: How Innovative cities create job growth in an age of disruption. The authors, ICF co-founders Robert Bell, John Jung and Louis Zacharilla, provide numerous interesting stories about communities creating their own positive future. The stories are quite varied, but share common threads woven together into the quilt of the Intelligent Community elements – broadband, innovation, knowledge work, digital inclusion and marketing/advocacy.

The stories are from great urban centers, suburbs and rural regional center communities. The common element is smart and sometimes heroic leadership, often shared across business, government and education sectors. Shared vision, collaborative strategy, long-term commitment-these are at the heart of the all of these success stories. All involve creating an environment that can support business development and entrepreneurship. The themes are similar to those expressed in the book “The Rain Forest” by Hwang and Horrowitt.

With a visit today to the FDR and MLK memorials, it reminded me that the ICF founders have always had a strong commitment to social equity as expressed through the Digital Inclusion ICF element. In fact, this book makes the case that creating and supporting an inclusive, innovative, well-skilled and well-connected workforce may be the most important strategy that any community, large or small, should prioritize.

I recommend this book for a number of audiences- for community leaders wanting to learn about success stories; for community economic developers who want to know how broadband and digital inclusion fit with more traditional economic development elements of innovation, workforce and marketing; and for community broadband advocates who know that broadband is important, but not sure how the full benefits of current and prospective fiber networks can be realized.