How about city-owned cell service?

A couple of recent developments have brought me some pleasure recently.

First I saw snow shovels marked down 70 percent, which I take to mean that there is only a 30 percent chance of global warming causing another heavy snowstorm by warming the atmosphere and causing it to freeze water.

Secondly, I noted that the Grand Junction City Council voted fairly decisively not to embark on the possible misadventure of municipal internet service — known by those in the know as “Fibergate.”

This was a rare exercise in fiscal constraint, which I’m certain will be followed by an explosion of spending in some other area of glamorous but strikingly tangential government concern.

Nevertheless, it was the right decision and it was one that raises the fundamental question of how much of an economy should the hairy hug of government embrace.

We’ve asked the question before of what are the triggering mechanisms that indicate government should do a task ahead of private industry and found the extremes easy to define but the point of transition, not so much.

To help me answer this question I went back to some of the minutes from prior City Council meetings discussing the possibility of municipal participation in internet services. I was first interested to see how many people commenting on behalf of staff have been replaced. I don’t necessarily find this to be a bad thing as I generally hold that city managers, police chiefs and public works directors should be fired regularly, like Roman candles on the Fourth of July.

One of the terms I found interesting was the idea that there was a belief among the citizenry that deemed internet service to be practically a “fourth utility.”

The others I assume to be water, power and sewer but I could be wrong as an outsider looking at the priorities of the last few years probably would assume them to be event centers, coliseums and partially renovated opera houses.

I understand the argument, which is essentially a sound one that necessary infrastructure should be provided or available so that an industry is able to operate effectively or they’re going to find a place where it is available or more reasonably priced.

Outhouses and wells are quaint but do not meet the standards of the modern, mega-widget manufacturing concerns we are trying to attract.

Accordingly, I do believe that a fairly strong argument can be made that the internet itself has become a powerful method not only of information transfer but of commerce.

So working with that analogy it might seem digital services fall into the same category as roads and bridges, which local government provides — but how does that reason out in the case of railway, shipping or air travel?

Also, doesn’t the efficiency curve seem to point toward a competitive model of aggressive providers, such as the example of the United States Postal Service, a vital service once provided by government being overtaken by more cost-effective private contractors?

And what about perhaps the most important electronic medium of information exchange and rapidly growing commerce — the smart phone? It consumes a substantial portion of teenage attention and consumer expenses.

If you think people aren’t very happy with their internet service just ask them about their cellular provider and the high cost of data download for those who have to watch vital science fiction programming on their cell phones at the gym because no one in their house is interested in the genre. OK, maybe a little too self-referential but valid nevertheless.

Cellular service is certainly considered to be an essential service for individuals and businesses so why not municipal cell service that is so reliable and cavernous in bandwidth that it’s discussed from the rock bound coast of Maine to the tents and sleeping bags of downtown San Francisco.

Perhaps these are good ideas and possibly do rise to the level of necessity in most people’s mind, if so the price tag should be determined, the range of monthly charge made available and a vote should be arranged.

Taxpayers should just consider, however, that if something like this does happen, you will likely end up having the same range of choices for internet as you have for trash, water and sewer.

Rick Wagner is a Grand Junction attorney who maintains a political blog, The War on Wrong. He can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).


COMMENTS

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.
Page 1 of 1


Whether one is for or against any public works project, should be expressed in serious, and not in a flippant manner, in which Mr. Wagner all too frequently chooses to express himself.

Something else which does not at all impress us, are those who look only to benefit themselves with public services, all too frequently with little attention to who has to pay for them.  It is not that we do not see or appreciate the problems and challenges they face, but their arguments clearly reflect that they are unable to think or consider anything beyond.

When public officials labeling themselves “conservative” propose a project involving public funds, they are really admitting to the failure of “free wheeling” or “liberal” capitalism.  They are admitting to the fact that “privatizing of everything” does not provide the products or services demanded or required by the public.  They do that every single time they go to the “public coffers” either to subsidize, or provide some corporation or individual with “incentives” to provide those products or services.

If we need such things as sewers, we should be willing to directly pay for those.  The same is true of water, and even law enforcement services, and not attempt to “raise” funds indirectly by doing something else.  That is one thing which some of us see far too many attempting to do, a process which is nothing more than everyone taking his/her “cut” along the way, something which is not only inefficient, but actually drives up the final price.

Page 1 of 1




TOP JOBS
Search More Jobs





THE DAILY SENTINEL
734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050; M-F 8:00 - 5:00
Editions
Subscribe to print edition
E-edition
Advertisers
Advertiser Tearsheet
Information

© 2017 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy