|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All of the turmoil, hand
wringing and
bad press surrounding muni wireless lately is the result of a failure
of process. With better needs analysis, technology due diligence and
financial model analysis, many municipalities would be achieving the type of broadband
successes highlighted in this report.
As predicted in my January 2007 Snapshot Report, June saw the beginning of the end of the “free wireless for all” craze, a model that should have died a-borning 18 months sooner. Local governments making positive strides are those that executed rational planning processes while others about them were losing their heads amid swirling hype and poorly thought out RFPs.
This month's Snapshot Report
focuses on the non glamorous but oh so effective processes that eight
cities and counties followed. The steps they took were similar, but
executed in ways that identified success that was relative to
each municipality's unique needs, economic situation and political
realities.
| Corpus Christi, TX
|
Greene County, NC |
| Loma Linda, CA | Minneapolis, MN |
| Morrow County, OR | Providence, RI |
| Santa Monica, CA |
Williamstown, KY |
Cisco is the sponsor of this
report and they are also
interviewed.
To get to the heart of the how
they developed successful broadband plans that were right for their
municipalities, I asked report participants the following questions:
In the final analysis, you need
to:
| Sponsored by |  |
www.cisco.com/go/outdoorwireless www.cisco.com/go/servicemesh |