Mayor Signs Off On Bringing FiOS To DC > Agreement Hashed Out In Private?

Agreement Hashed Out In Private?

reply to kapil
We're not a democracy, actually... We're a Representative Democratic Republic.
I agree with you that this should have been open.

The thing that really bothers me is why is it going to take 9 years to completely wire the District? There's already soooo much dark fiber there ready and waiting... Geesh, I'm in the NW quadrant, and won't see Fios forever. Oh well, so much for efficiency. I guess I could go outside the district and get Fios now! How lame!

reply to kapil
no we are a Democratic Republic not the same thing

reply to jjeffeory
Nine years seems like a reasonable time for 100% coverage. The "dark fiber" you refer to is mainly for backbone use, going to and from select commercial locations, telco facilities, data centers etc.

Fios requires wiring each dwelling with fiber...and that's a lot of work.

Count your blessings, at least you're not in an AT&T territory, otherwise you'd never get fiber.
--
»www.Digium.com

reply to jjeffeory
It will take some time (although 9 years does sound a bit much) because there are *other* places getting FIOS, too. Installations do not come to a halt everywhere else, just so that everyone in DC can be served first.
--
The Labor Movement - those wonderful folks that brought you the weekend!

reply to kapil
Actually, my other condo is in AT&T territory. I have U-Verse there. U-Verse is okay. Actually. it's a really buggy service. I've had FiosTV/Fios in the past as well. It was fantastic. So I know what Fios is all about too. I just think that nine years to wire a such a small area is a pretty long time.

reply to elios

reply to kapil
I do not think that the outcome of agreements negotiated in public are necessarily any better than the outcome of agreements negotiated in private.

The various 'public' special interests that attend these groups have their own agendas that are outside of the meeting's intended scope: wiring the city.

If the meeting was public, there would be a lot of these sentiments expressed: "wire me first" and "i'll agree but only if they subsidize [insert cause]", "that is not fair" and "work should be done by [insert company]"

In the duration of time that it would take the public to speak their uneducated opinion, the city could be wired.

reply to kapil
This has nothing to do with the precedent set by the president. When Bloomberg negotiated the NYC deal with Verizon he did it behind closed doors. Why did he do it that way? Was it because of a precedent set by Bush? Come on. He did it that way because there's alot of political, well, agitation (for lack of a better word) in many urban areas. Things just don't get done because of political pandering and posturing. Bloomberg said he went behind closed doors because he knew the deal would never happen if it was publicly disclosed. Heck he didn't even notify the borough presidents that he was taking part in those negotiations. He wasn't hiding it from the people of NYC - he was hiding it from the politicians of NYC. But, because you can't hide it from the politicians unless you hide it from everyone, he had to go behind closed doors to make the negotiations work.

Look at what's happening here in Philly, for crying out loud. A member of city council proposed setting up a franchise with Verizon. The mayor seems to be in favor of it. The negotiation for the deal was publicly disclosed, and what happens? Comcast leans on other local politicians to put the breaks on the deal. It's now sitting in limbo because some of these morons express the concerns spoon fed to them by Comcast. Please. THAT'S why these deals are happening in more and more secretive fashions.

reply to kapil
There are still public hearings, but the contract negotiations have to be done in private. The companies won't do them if they are public because of the confidential information that is discussed.
In order for them to be private, certain public officials cannot attend the meetings, and appointed or elected boards have to stay below quorum numbers. When the rest of the board sees the proposal, it has to be public.

Either way, the agreement itself is open for comment, inspection, and public hearing before made law. Just not the negotiation documents.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher

reply to Karl Bode
Depends a lot on the cities involved. In the hearing I ran, we ran over a dozen newspaper ads and 300+ tv spots to publicize it. We carried the meeting live too.

Two people showed up; one to complain about his cable problem (that was fixed before he left the room), and the other was a non-resident who happened to be walking by and decided to comment.

We actually completely revamped two sections of the franchise between the hearing and taking it to city council, and nearly had to do another full revision after the first city council vote. So, in our case, consumer input probably would have had an impact if there had been any real input.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher