By Ahmad Hathout
TORONTO – The executive committee of the City of Toronto has recommended for consideration this week that city council nix two recommendations related to the city’s role in the building of a high-speed broadband network, but the city says the project will continue.
City council will review on May 11 the executive committee’s suggestion – on the advice of the chief technology officer – that the city delete two recommendations, which refer to the so-called ConnectTO project as a “municipal broadband network” (MBN).
The city told Cartt.ca this is not a drawback on the project.
“This does not suspend or stop the program in any way. The activities intended in Recommendations 1 and 2 were already embedded in previous Council directives,” said a spokesperson to the city’s technology services division. The recommendations said the “municipal broadband network” would support municipal services, connect city-owned facilities and assets, and be accessible to internet service providers.
The use of the term MBN caused unnecessary confusion at an executive committee meeting on March 30, the spokesperson said, as the city did not intend ConnectTO to provide the services to homes and businesses directly.
The city said it will be developing a business plan for the project and is requesting a further report on items, including the short, medium and long term costs of building and maintaining the proposed network, the cost of the internet to users, proof the city can create better access and affordability than the existing ISPs, evidence price is a main factor hampering adoption in priority neighbourhoods, address how the project will gain access to buildings that have contracts with ISPs, and the metrics for success.
If city council approves the amended ConnectTO on May 11, the city said it will continue its plan to “centralize and interconnect City-owned fibre assets,” and will be working on a business case for the 2023 capital budget.
“Then, in 2 to 3 years, staff will come back to Council with a report on how the interconnection is progressing and how the City can move forward with it’s plan to use excess capacity in a way that will help increase access to affordable high-speed internet in low-income neighbourhoods,” the spokesperson said.
The executive committee also adopted recommendations Wednesday to be considered at this week’s city council meeting, including urging the council to ask the province to identify provincially-owned fibre assets that can be used to help close the digital divide, including in schools, hospitals and traffic corridors, and to review existing legislation to include provisions on open access to telecom cabling and trenching.
It is also recommending council ask the federal government to “formalize a definition of affordability” that adds fixed and mobile internet costs as a percentage of household income; collect and share local level data on fibre infrastructure assets, internet speeds and internet service; and ask the CRTC to “examine supports for municipal carriers who wish to promote access to their fibre broadband networks for public and private providers.”
Since its adoption by city council early last year, the ConnectTO project has drawn supporters who say the city has a segment of low-income residents who cannot afford the private offerings of the big telecoms, as well as critics, who say that the city is one of the best connected in the world.
The city has heard complaints including that the new project would just duplicate existing networks, that a new network would not address people who do not have devices to connect to it, and the city already subsidizes free internet in public places.
The gist of ConnectTO is to fill gaps in connectivity by interconnecting city assets – including leased and owned fibre and utility structures – to provide the backbone for a new fibre network, which would then be used by private telecoms to provide affordable services, specifically to older buildings that are in so-called neighbourhood improvement areas. The city would also lease excess city capacity to ISPs while putting in place the groundwork for more “smart city” functionality.
But after the city issued a negotiated request for proposals (nRFP) asking telecoms to submit applications to deploy low-cost services to 6,700 residential and business units in neighbourhood improvement areas, it received no applications, despite 45 potential suppliers having accessed the document.
In light of the failed procurement call, the city said it learned there is no incentive for service providers to partner with the city in the “absence of a commitment of capital or serviceable fibre infrastructure;” the capital investment needed for new infrastructure by non-dominant carriers “is significant and can’t be recouped through the low-cost subscriber pricing targets outlined,” in light of big telecoms owning and controlling most of the last-mile; and the city’s focus on those vulnerable populations means it is looking at older infrastructure owned by larger telecoms and access can be difficult.
Bell disagreed with the reasons as to why the city did not get any interest. In late March, the company submitted that the procurement failed simply because the areas are “already well served by Bell and other providers.
“It is questionable in our view that the City will be able to offer high quality, reliable and sustainable high-speed broadband services through an MBN at a lower price than a highly competitive market. It may be possible by compromising on one or more of these factors (price, quality, reliability and sustainability) but that would not be a good use of City funds,” Bell said, pointing as well to the existing low-cost Connecting Families internet program, which provides 50 Mbps download speeds for $20 per month.
Bell recommended the money that would otherwise go to this endeavour be spent on directly subsidizing low-income household internet.
Earlier this month, Beanfield Metroconnect, which owns its own fibre network and provides services in Toronto and Montreal, said in a submission to the city it did not submit a response to the city’s RFP because it emphasized “creating, building and operating new fibre, which Toronto has quite a lot of.”
But the independent telecom did recommend four things the city could do to push the ball forward. First, it recommended the city allow a window of opportunity for providers to install their fibre into a new building. Second, when a city utility company is doing work underground, notify the telecoms and invite them to participate in installing their own infrastructure and “share the cost equitably.” Third, use existing city utility structures to support fibre facilities “in ways that minimize costly modifications to existing structures.” And fourth, the city should partner with the telecoms to retrofit with fibre buildings with older technologies.
Small internet service provider SkyChoice also submitted its own recommendations, which urged the city to rely less on leased fibre to interconnect its own fibre assets, and prepare its own infrastructure for leasing by private telecoms to bring high-speed internet to those not getting it. The city has stated it intends to reduce costs by limiting its need to lease fibre.
