When citizens in the Illinois cities of St. Charles, Geneva and Batavia voted on whether or not to start a municipal network, local incumbents ran advertisements warning about the financial pitfalls of such projects. One of their examples of such fiscal trouble spots was the Click! network in Tacoma, despite the fact the network quickly found itself running in the black, and did not result in higher taxes. You can find responses to the incumbent claims from Click! representatives at the Tri-cities broadband website.

said by text of article above:

---

The Click! network was developed as an afterthought; Tacoma Public Utilities already had fiber in the ground, and like many utilities (see our recent article on the subject), decided to put that extra bandwidth to good use.

---

said by RadioDoc :

---

I'm all for competition no matter who is competing, but isn't this cross-subsidization from the power customers?

---

said by zabes63 :

---

I for one am SHOCKED!!

---

said by zabes63 :

---

By the same token one could argue that a fiscally thrifty muni operation, minus the ilk of a John Rigas, or other, overpriced, whiney CEO, could show a tidy profit and therefore subsidize electrical customers who don't use the broadband utility.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

I personally would like to see state and local governments provide significant tax breaks and/or other incentives so that private citizens and businesses could have an easier time investing in their own broadband networks for their own towns.

---

said by zabes63 :

---

I just don't see it happening with the influence that the incumbents hold over the politicos.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

I wonder how the non-broadband power customers took the 50% rate hike in electric bills. It sounds like some competition is needed in the electrical market here so that the customers can get lower prices.

---

said by
Broadband Failures
Tacoma, Washington:

---

The Charge: To pay for increased capital costs for their fiber system, Tacoma Public Utilities imposed a 50% surcharge on local electric bills.

Response From The Utility: "I am aware of your citizens group, your upcoming Tri City Broadband Referendum and the aggressive media campaign by those in opposition to your efforts. I review DSL Reports regularly and would like to set the record straight about Click! Network, for those who are interested in facts rather than propaganda.

...snip...

An important note, those opposing your efforts have erroneously connected Tacoma Power’s surcharge during the energy crisis with Click! Network, when in fact the two have no connection at all. At the beginning of the energy crisis (winter 2000), Click! was already constructed in Tacoma and Tacoma Power had over $100,000,000 in cash reserves, which is triple the amount we carry on an operating basis for contingencies. The utility was determining the best way to invest it when the energy crisis hit. Unfortunately the $100,000,000 was not enough, and the utility chose to initiate a surcharge.

---

said by pnh102 :

---

That may indeed be true. Personally, I don't buy it. What privately run power company "just happened to lay fiber optic cable" and then said "oh, we're not using this, lets resell the network!" But I digress.

---

said by JTRockville :

---

you questioned how non-broadband customers viewed the rate increase. Why did you make that distinction?

---