Tonight’s broadband community forum we posted about a couple of days ago has been cancelled. We’re told it will be rescheduled as soon as possible, and when we know the new date, we’ll post it here on the blog.
(Editor’s note, March 25: The meeting discussed in this post has been CANCELLED.)
A reminder about the UTUC broadband Community Forum coming up on Thursday where Broadstripe’s city-granted monopoly franchise agreement will be a major point of discussion.
Scheduled speakers include City of Seattle Chief Technology Officer Bill Schrier and Broadstripeâ€™s recently appointed Northwest General Manager David Irons.
Your presence will help drive the City of Seattle and Broadstripe to improve the way the current franchise agreement is handled. Sponsored by Upgrade Technology for Underserved Neighbors, all are invited and especially neighbors living in the underserved areas: Central District, Beacon Hill, Leschi, parts of Capitol Hill. We will review the 2010 Work Plan to ensure internet and cable service delivery improves as promised.
Thursday, March 25th, 5:30-7pm at the Central Area Senior Center, 500 30th Ave South. Refreshments will be served courtesy of the Central Area Development Association.
UTUN brings together neighbors from multiple south Seattle neighborhoods to advocate for immediate improvement to substandard cable and internet services. For more information about the forum or to get email updates, contact Tracy Bier at 206-227-2369 or firstname.lastname@example.org.
* * *
Speaking of City CTO Bill Schrier, his recent blog posting on the FCC’s broadband plan is good reading and answers these questions and more:
- Is this plan really radical or different?
- What does 100 megabit service really mean for consumers at home or small business?
- What are the implications for large cities like Seattle?
- Practically, why do we need a public safety wireless broadband network?
[T]he FCCâ€™s plan is visionary. Certainly it was carefully crafted with many competing interests interests in mind. And it doesnâ€™t really provide any good mechanism to encourage competition between private providers. Such competition would reduce costs to users. Nevertheless, if it is followed, will materially improve the economy, safety, and quality of life for the people of the United States.