I wrote the following over the weekend as a short list of criticisms of the Google/Earthlink proposal for San Francisco’s WiFi network and requirements for them to fix it. Over the last couple days, however, I’ve talked to enough people that I don’t think that even 100% agreement with this list would solve the problem. I purposely chose only three criticisms for this document, but there are at least a dozen serious problems with the proposal. Fundamentally, it’s a crappy deal for San Francisco.

There will be a meeting of the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) this Friday, 2 pm in Room 263 of City Hall. At the meeting, there will be plenty of criticism of the deal from a variety of knowledgeable sources.

Here’s what I wrote this weekend:

World-class city gets small-time deal
On April 5th, the San Francisco Department of Telecommunications and Information Services announce that the Earthlink/Google proposal had been selected to fulfill the City’s Universal WiFi network proposal. Unfortunately, the proposal fails to provide a way to meet the primary goal of the TechConnect initiative: a “Universal, Affordable Wireless Broadband Network.”

There are three fundamental flaws in the Earthlink/Google proposal: It fails to protect the privacy of San Franciscans; it fails to provide universal network coverage; and it fails to address the barriers that are preventing many San Franciscans from benefitting from internet access. In short, the proposal is not good enough.

Earthlink and Google will not protect our privacy
The proposal is riddled with privacy concerns. It appears that users’ every interaction with the network will be recorded. The vendors will know when and where you log in, how long you stay connected, and they can even record what websites you go to and what searches you make. he proposal does not restrict what the vendors can do with this information. They can sell the information to other companies or use it to target advertisements. The proposal also does not protect against legal claims on the information. Any information related to activities on the internet can be disclosed to government agencies or private parties, in many cases without notifying the user.

Earthlink and Google will not cover all of San Francisco
The proposal specifies approximately 30 WiFi nodes per square mile for the city of San Francisco, which means they will be an average of 1000′ apart. As standard computer WiFi connections can link up to an outdoor node at most 250 feet away, the proposed deployment is likely to be woefully insufficient to provide coverage to all of San Francisco. Further, it appears entirely unlikely that there will be significant coverage above the second floor of most buildings. San Franciscans who do not happen to be next to a node, and on the ground floor, will find the promise of a network for all San Franciscans a hollow one.

Earthlink and Google are doing nothing to close the Digital Divide
The proposal does not specify any efforts the companies will take to increase digital inclusion. They do not commit to providing any free or discounted hardware for low-income San Franciscans. They do not commit to providing any training for San Franciscans who need it. They do not commit to providing content that is relevant for San Franciscans, particularly those who do not read at a college level or who are not native english speakers. Finally, they do not commit to funding community organization who have been providing these services to our communities for years.

We Can Do Better
San Francisco is a world-class city, and we deserve a better deal. We demand the folowing to ensure that we get the WiFi network that will provide universal coverage, protect our privacy, and help us close the digital divide:

1. The network providers must commit to protecting personal information. Only the information necessary to operate the network should be stored. Any commercialization of user information should require the user to agree beforehand. The network providers should commit to following all city laws regarding access to personal information.
2. We must have a network that covers all of San Francisco. The network providers should demonstrate that they can provide the coverage the RFP specified: (95% everywhere outdoors, 90% everywhere indoors) before they are awarded a long-term contract. The network providers must have a realistic strategy for covering interior rooms and upper-story rooms.
3. A network without equipment, training, support and content for people who currently do not have access only worsens the problem of digital inclusion. The network providers must establish a Digital Inclusion Fund that is used to fund community-based organizations’ work in these areas. Philadelphia’s fund (5% of revenue) should serve as a model.

The Earthlink/Google proposal as it stands is a far cry from the city’s original goal of providing universal, affordable access. If Google and Earthlink can’t agree to solve these problems, we should find somebody who will or do it ourselves.