Google Fiber Austin, San Antonio Fiber here? (Houston, Dallas: utilities, quality of life)

[Austinite101]

Originally Posted by saltwater heaven

never could a more undeserving city get google fiber.

im wondering how all the college kids on campus network are gonna pay for it? all the failed musicians barely scraping by on 6th street? maybe all those bouncers can get together and afford a single connection?

/why yes that is contempt and spite i have for our crappy neighbor to the north.

Bro, you are just jelly. Lol, but seriously, calm the heck down. Austin was obviously near the top of Google's list or they wouldn't have picked it. I'm sure SA will get something one day.

[datacity]

Originally Posted by Bo

Looks like Texas has a law restricting cities from operating municipal broadband networks. I thought I remembered a bill going through the legislature to do that a few years back and this article confirms it.

Why Are There No Big Cities with Municipal Broadband Networks? - Emily Badger - The Atlantic Cities

This means that your great hope of the city's municipal electric utility expanding into broadband would be against state law.

Yes, hence the legal issues that would have to be dealt with. This is another reason why our state reps need to hear from us as citizens. The telecom and cable interests sure did their lobbying several years ago.

Still, if we can make progress on laws allowing micro and craft brewers more freedom (as it looks like), maybe we can do so with something that has an even broader positive impact on residents and businesses.

[Rustybolt]

Originally Posted by datacity

Guess what at&t announced in Austin?

AT&T follows Google with gigabit network plans for Austin | Internet & Media - CNET News

See? Competition leads complacent companies to compete. I think San Antonio should at least give the local oligopoly a notice that if they don't invest in our city's future and residents, the city will.

Here is a quote from a Statesman article High-speed celebration: Austin lands super-fast Google Fiber... | www.statesman.com:

"Google will build its network without incentives from the city or state, but it did seek a high level of cooperation from the city and from Austin Energy, the city-operated utility company, which owns the utility poles on which much of the network will be strung."

So CPS Energy could serve a similar role here for a private company or if legally possible, do it themselves.

The last thing I want is the City of San Antonio getting more into our lives. Do not need government competing with private industry. What is happening in Austin is the way it should be...competition...free enterprise.

[GloriaUpson]

Good for Austin... They got a real feather in their cap with this one!

[Merovee]

If we can't include this as part of our municipal utility supply because of the relationship between state reps and the telecom lobby then we should ask Castro to begin courting Google to invest here.

Just another good example set by Austin which we should follow. There is definitely an overall demand among the younger generations for better broadband.

[Shock]

I used to pay $90 for 40mb down and 10mb up thru gvtc but over time it just wasnt worth paying it. 70 bucks gigabit speeds, sign me up immediately

[datacity]

Originally Posted by Rustybolt

The last thing I want is the City of San Antonio getting more into our lives. Do not need government competing with private industry. What is happening in Austin is the way it should be...competition...free enterprise.

Unless one is forced to purchase something or it is exclusively sold only by the government, how is the city getting more into your life? I doubt that GVTC, Time Warner or at&t would close shop; if they did, it would only show that they are unable to compete. In Austin's case, while Google is a private company, there is a public aspect to their arrival in that Austin Energy will provide easements for fiber to be installed and the city will expedite the permit process.

In any case, I think there is a long history in this country of the populace accepting that certain services can or should be provided by or through the government vs being offered solely by private industry. It is not always exclusively one case or the other, nor is it at the same level from city to city or state to state.

The only question then is what is appropriate as a public service? I think that certain things that tend to be natural monopolies (e.g. infrastructure road, electricity, gas, police, fire, etc.) are items that are most likely to be provided either through government or through a highly regulated private market. If private industry is more nimble and can do a more efficient job for less, that is great and my first choice! If they drop the ball however, they should not complain if the citizens demand a public option.

I hope that Google or some other company chooses to come to San Antonio, and I would hope that both the city and county leadership encourages this for the future. Still, it is always good to work on a backup option.

[Rustybolt]

My point, datacity, is that we already have these services being provided by more than one private enterprise. If more private firms wish to compete in that market, then great. If CPS Energy, a city government owned monopoly, decided they wanted to get into the business, I would be against it. Use their poles? Sure. Compete directly? No way.

[budjb]

Just because a couple private companies comprise our market here does not mean they are competing. There's no incentive to provide a better service than they do.

[Merovee]

Originally Posted by budjb

Just because a couple private companies comprise our market here does not mean they are competing. There's no incentive to provide a better service than they do.

Isn't that price fixing?