Thursday, April 23, 2009

Broadband's Problems in Poor Areas


Years after the introduction of the Internet, it seems amazing that some citizens of the Old Dominion do not have access to broadband, but that's the way it is.

For-profit companies ignore mountainous areas or poor flatlands because they claim it costs too much to pay the installation costs. For several years, governments have promised to fill the gap. Indeed, Barack Obama identified the problem in last year's campaign and promised solutions which could cost $7.2 billion in stimulus package money.

But as The Washington Post points out today, even government involvement is dicey. It looks at two small Southwestern communities -- Lebanon and Rose Hill -- and shows just how different their broadband experience has been.

In Lebanon, a small burg where the tobacco fields end and the coalfields begin, Rep. Rick Boucher and Gov. Mark Warner put together a $2.3 million grant package to wire the area. It was wise move because defense contractor Northrup Grumman and software maker CGI swooped in to take advantage of the new, nearly instantaneous communications and created 700 jobs paying about $50,000 a year.

Poor Rose Hill had a different story. Boucher brought grants worth $700,000 in part for the multi-billion settlement with four tobacco companies in 1996 and other sources to wire Rose Hill. But only three homes have signed up for the service which costs about $50 a month.

It is stories like these that make the U.S. a Johnny-Come-Lately in broadband. Among advanced industrial nations it comes in pathetic 15th place, down from 13th place a few years earlier. South Korea, Japan and some European countries are farther ahead.

Some argue that it is easier to wire the crowded neighborhoods of Tokyo or Seoul and there's truth in that. But the lame performance hurts the U.S. as it struggles through recession and tries to make a tech comeback amidst tough global competition.

Part of the problem is the easy-profit, next-quarter thinking of the big U.S. communications firms. It is much easier for Comcast or Verizon to wire concentrated downtowns or rich suburbs faster since they can jack up their prices and go for a triple play of broadband, digital phone and cable television all in one expensive monthly price of about $200. Doing so gets them a faster and fatter return on equity and makes them look better on Wall Street.

That sure was the case in Philadelphia a few years ago when I wrote a story about the problem for a national business magazine. Inner ghetto areas were left behind as rich, white neighborhoods got wired. One African-American small business owner told me that he wanted broadband for his business but doesn't want to also have to pay hefty fees for HBO, Starz and ESPN which he doesn't watch when he is working.

Philadelphia's government bravely launched a $15 million broadband project and Earthlink won the contract. But it was a bad play since Earthlink was hit hard by its exposure to antiquated DSL technology and got in such financial trouble it dropped Philly. Some private investors got the project for a song and few residents have signed up for broadband.

In Southwest, other anomalies come into play. Lebanon has a high high school graduate rate and is the locus of a coalfield economic development authority. These people were highly annoyed with me some years back when I did a piece on the coalfields that didn't paint the rosy picture they wanted. I noted that coal is dirty, dangerous and cyclical. Locals have trouble getting adequate health care given their isolation. One hospital in Clintwood, the only one for miles around, shut down abruptly because the Ohio company that owned it went out of business.

Still, Lebanon had an edge over Rose Hill which has a much lower education rate, the Post reports.
The jobs that Lebanon got are good deals because too many times, the only new employment people find is with call centers that shut down as fast as they set up.

The problems also raise questions about Virginia's tobacco commission which decides how to divvy up the oodles of bucks the state gets from the tobacco settlement. Years ago I wrote about how the first act of the highly-politicized commission was not to pay for health care or infrastructure or educate kids not to smoke. No. They gave thousands away to holders of tobacco quotas, some of whom lived in Brooklyn, Las Vegas or the Gold Coast of Chicago and had very little to do with Virginia. This was done on the theory that they were going to lose money. Go figure.

Anyway, the tale of two towns in the mountains shows the problems of providing broadband in poor or isolated areas. It's amazing since it is already 2009 and most of us take broadband for granted.


Peter Galuszka

Sunday, April 19, 2009

Why Can't Richmond Be Charleston?


I took a pleasant spring break trip last week, but my love-hate relationship with Richmond came roaring back to life. That gnawing emotion came back when my wife and I traveled to the Low Country of South Carolina and spent a rainy night in charming Charleston. When I left, I asked myself the usual question -- why can't Richmond ever get it together?

I've been visiting Charleston off and on since the 1970s and have stayed at a number of hotels. This time it was Elliott House with our own brick entrance just a little North of Broad. Dinner was a cheap, oyster-stuffed happy hour at a local bar and the next morning, we did the usual rounds of the market, some art galleries and the Battery where the elegant homes run vertically to tap every sea breeze and some have special supports to avoid the same kind of damage wrought by an 1886 earthquake.

As we drove off, I kept wondering why Richmond, which has arguably more history and is a bigger deal as a city, comes nowhere close to its Southern cousin as a glamorous tourist destination. True, Richmond doesn't have the dramatic setting between two wide, tidal rivers or the mild, subtropical climate where the sticky sweet perfume scent of gardenias wafts everywhere.

But Richmond surely has the history from Patrick Henry to the antebellum South to the War. The conflict may have started at Charleston but it was run from Richmond. Architecture is different, with Charleston having more Latin influences but Richmond's no slouch given Church Hill's Federalist townhouses, the stately mansions on Monument and the Victorian porches in the Fan, not to mention Jefferson's magnificent state capitol.

So why does Richmond give me the blahs? Why is its downtown so lackluster? Where are the tourists when its not Race Week at RIR or Folk Festival time? How come Broad Street still looks like Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn and Schockoe area has never reached its cobble stoned potential? After all, Richmond is a lot closer to major population centers and, unlike Charleston, is right next to the major north-south interstate.

From what I know of Charleston, which isn't that much, the city wasn't all that big a deal until the 1970s. It was pretty much a Navy town with strip joints and lots of earmarks from Mendel Rivers, its military-crazed overseer in Congress.

A lot of what is Charleston today is the brainchild of long time mayor Joseph P. Riley who started unlocking the city's tourism potential when he arranged for the unusual if not unlikely Spoleto Festival back in the late 1970s. This celebration of the arts modeled after one in an Italian town immediately drew tourists -- so many, in fact, that Riley urged city residents to rent out rooms in their homes because there weren't enough hotels. Thus was born a booming Bed & Breakfast industry.

Charlestonians managed to remake and renovate their town's various charms. They didn't want to turn into a tourist trap where nobody lived like Williamsburg or an out-of-control party town like New Orleans. Charleston, despite its small population of about 126,000, remains one of the top five travel spots in the U.S. and from all appearances from our pedestrian tour, it is thriving.

Why can't Richmond? A lot of reasons, I guess. One is that we just don't have a Riley who is competent enough and has enough staying power to get things done. Doug Wilder had the potential, but ruined it by perpetual squabbling. The white and black city leadership never can get it together. Despite their lip service, the whites actually moved out to Innsbrook years ago. The Broad Street revival hasn't happened yet and one wonders if a few new court buildings will be worth driving miles to see on a Friday night. True, First Friday is a hit, but it has limited appeal pretty much to teenagers like my daughters.

The rich African-American culture just steps away in Jackson Ward was ruined back in the 1950s when white leaders dug a superhighway right through the neighborhood, moving thousands of black residents each month in the process. Eugene Trani, the empire builder and outgoing president of VCU who got his usual fawning treatment from the Times-Disgrace Sunday, hasn't helped matters by throwing up lots of ugly, bland, boring college buildings from Oregon Hill to MCV.

Even Norfolk, once a Navy town hell hole of unspeakable ugliness, has remade its downtown to take advantage of its watery venue, albeit the effort is now showing its age.

So why can't Richmond be Charleston? I just don't have a good answer.

Peter Galuszka