Citywide Wi-Fi in Mpls?

Cool:

Minneapolis is about to become an unwired city, creating a universal wireless Internet access network available to every citizen, visitor, business and municipal facility within city limits.

On Wednesday, the city will unveil a request for a proposal for a privately owned, $15 million to $20 million citywide wireless and fiber-optic network. It is likely to use the Wi-Fi (wireless fidelity) technology that has created several hundred Internet access 'hot spots' for laptop computer users in metro coffee shops, bookstores, airports and hotels.

...Consumers would be able to buy broadband access of 1 million to 3 million bits per second for $18 to $24 a month -- a bit slower than wired cable modem service but about half the price. The network also is expected to create an economic incentive for businesses to locate in Minneapolis.

...No tax money would be used for the Minneapolis wireless network, which would be paid for, built, owned and operated by the winning bidder on the city's proposal. That is a markedly different approach than in Philadelphia, where the city will own and operate a new Wi-Fi network.

Minneapolis officials decided not to build their own wireless network because of high construction and administrative costs, Beck said. In addition, city officials were concerned that cities offering high-speed Internet service have been accused by large telephone companies of competing with the private sector, he said.

It's annoying as hell that a city can't decide to offer a public service to it's citizens because Time Warner and Comcast won't like it. How about we vote on it? We can either have a publicly owned, available-to-all WiFi'd city or we can have private corporations. How do you think the vote would turn out? Of course, we'll never have that vote, will we? For all the talk about "choice in the marketplace," these are the choices we're not allowed to make. The interests of Time Warner and Comcast to make millions by privately controlling access to a publicly developed resource (the internet) must be protected, even if we as a city would prefer to provide access through other means.

But still, if the service is good enough, this would chop our high speed internet bill in half, and I'd be able to be online anywhere. I may be being too cynical too: no doubt having a low-cost service like this would cut into the business of Time Warner and Comcast - although, who knows, they may end up being the private contractor running the thing anyway...