Appendix B: Results of Community Consultations Contents:
Community Workshop to Develop Broadband Vision In October 2001, an advisory committee to City Council, known as The Ottawa Partnership (TOP), brought together a diverse cross-section of community leaders, including education, health, cultural, government and business representatives to prepare a vision statement for the deployment of broadband connectivity throughout Ottawa. Participants at this workshop developed the following vision and strategies for broadband. Vision
Participants also recommended a strategic framework to help move towards this Vision. The elements of the proposed strategy have been separated into two categories: foundation strategies and enabling strategies. Foundation strategies are the basic principles that govern the recommended approach, while enabling strategies are specific actions to be taken to support the implementation effort and enable effective progress to be made. As in the building of a structure, the foundation must be laid before the supports can be put in place. Thus, the enabling strategies must build on the foundation strategies. Foundation Strategies:
Enabling Strategies: Public awareness: that a public awareness plan be developed and carried out to articulate to individuals and the community the value and importance of broadband connectivity throughout Ottawa. Another key part of the plan should be celebrating the City's success in extending broadband connectivity to its constituents. Benchmarking: that further research be done to identify workable models for ownership, partnership, costing, and policy development and to learn from the pioneers in these areas. Look beyond Ottawa: that the needs of communities adjacent to Ottawa be taken into consideration, and that wherever possible the demand from those communities be aggregated and leveraged to attract a diversity of services and competitive pricing. Leverage current infrastructure: that an inventory of Ottawa's current communications infrastructure be conducted in order to find ways to more effectively utilize existing capacity. Existing user needs can also be aggregated to enhance the purchasing power of broadband infrastructure and services. The potential of using the City owned Telecom Ottawa and its infrastructure could also be considered. BROADBAND STRATEGY COMPONENT REPORT ON CONSULTATIONS SURROUNDING THE CITY OF OTTAWA'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES December 9, 2002 Prepared by: Williamson Consulting Inc. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY From November 21, 2002 until December 6, 2002 a series of one-on-one and group interviews were carried out in Ottawa to obtain feedback from 59 key stakeholders concerning three City of Ottawa Economic Strategies. The Reports were entitled The City of Ottawa Broadband Access Strategy; Rural Ottawa Securing a Vibrant Economy and Serving Ottawa: Service-Based Economic Strategies to Develop Ottawa's Local Economy. As part of this Tier II Consultation process, representatives from the MUSH sector, rural sector, carriers, school boards, developers, homebuilders, Business Improvement Areas (BIAs) and business associations were interviewed. Interviews were report specific, although in some cases such as the Greater Ottawa Chamber of Commerce and the National Capital Business Alliance one meeting was used to discuss both the broadband and local market strategies. Each interview began with a series of report-specific questions. These questions can be found at the end of Appendix B. A number of themes emerged through the interviews that were common to all three reports. In many interviews, respondents were sceptical about the City's ability to implement the reports. Comments such as "we've heard and seen these things before" were repeated throughout the Tier II Consultations. When discussing the local market and rural reports, respondents were frequently critical of the antibusiness stance of City Hall and the high cost of doing business in Ottawa. Apart from these higher-level concerns with City Hall those groups interviewed about the local market and rural reports reacted very positively to the two reports while suggesting changes they felt would make the reports stronger. The broadband report elicited the greatest amount of discussion and concern. The strongest support for the report came from the MUSH (Municipality, Universities, Schools, Hospitals) sector who see the City's facilitation role as essential to achieving the goal of high-speed connectivity throughout Ottawa. Business associations supported the report in principle but felt there were other priorities that were more important. Many business people cited issues such as service harmonization and a more efficient planning department as higher priorities for the City to address. The development sector and carriers have strong reservations about the broadband report. Mandatory conduits and the lack of a strong business case were often cited during interviews as a reason for scepticism. Among carriers, the role of Telecom Ottawa in the marketplace was questioned along with the appropriateness of a public organization competing with the private sector. The following report outlines the comments received through the consultation sessions as they relate to each specific strategy. BROADBAND ACCESS STRATEGY Ottawa's Broadband Vision: "Ottawa will be a world leader in the provision of affordable, high quality, equitable broadband access to all its citizens. Ottawa's new broadband network will form an integral part of the infrastructure of the City and will be rapidly deployed, competitive, cost effective, scaleable for future growth and compatible with existing and emerging provincial and national high-speed networks." This strategy outlines the activities required to make the Vision a reality. The report reviews the current broadband situation and service area. Initiatives implemented by other communities are also highlighted. Information concerning the technology and applications for broadband services are brought forth. The draft strategy identifies what is in place today and what is needed to make residents and businesses in Ottawa, world leaders in their access to broadband services. The gaps in "infrastructure", the cables, wires and equipment needed to provide broadband services, are also outlined. Tier II Consultations: MUSH Sector This group was the strongest supporter of the broadband report. The initiative itself and the approach being proposed was supported and endorsed. The library service, school board, National Capital Freenet and University of Ottawa viewed the provision of broadband as critical for their sectors in the future. All participants felt the City should play a leading role in the implementation of broadband connectivity since no other single group had the "reach" to deliver broadband across the City. All participants also felt the delivery of broadband was important in maintaining Ottawa's quality of life in the future. The MUSH Sector had the following suggestions on the strategy:
Local Business Organizations This group was supportive of the vision statement and recommendations in principle but felt the issue of broadband delivery was not a priority today for the business community. As one representative stated, "Our members are not coming to the Chamber complaining about a lack of high speed." This group was very supportive of the co-ordination of communications towers and believed the City should show leadership in this area. The group was less supportive of the last recommendation in the Executive Summary about the City providing facilitation. Many were confused by this section and raised concerns about Telecom Ottawa competing against private carriers. One participant stated that in rural areas cable or fibre were not the answer-wireless was the best and most efficient approach. When discussing the City's role, one participant stated it was better to wait for technology to develop a solution rather than pulling cable. Many questioned whether it was wise to proceed without the support of developers and carriers since they play such a key role in the strategy. Business groups had the following suggestions on the strategy:
Rural Sector This group was supportive of the strategy and its recommendations but felt the business case was lacking. In addition, the group felt the strategy needed to do a better job "painting the picture" of what a fully connected City would look like; the advantages it would bring and the impact on quality of life. The rural group also felt the strategy needed the support of ORAN (Ottawa Regional Advanced Network) and required a better explanation of what role Telecom Ottawa would play in the strategy and its implementation. The rural group felt implementation of the strategy was essential for rural areas and that a person in-house dealing with broadband issues was also very important. Rural groups had the following suggestions on the strategy:
Developers and Homebuilders This group was somewhat supportive of the vision for the strategy but had serious concerns about many of the recommendations. The group felt there was no need for the strategy in the core area and little need in the rural areas. As one individual stated, "why should tax-payers and businesses subsidise the delivery of broadband to the rural areas when the City will not do this for essential services like sewer and water?" The group also felt strongly that no business case had been made for the strategy and that private carriers should be left to provide service. In rural areas, it was felt that wireless solutions were the most practical and that new technologies would make any City initiative obsolete before it was completely implemented. The recommendation that was most vehemently opposed was the proposed conduit installation. Developers felt this was unfair since carriers, not homebuilders, are the experts in designing and installing conduits. Furthermore, given the CRTC's ruling on access to existing conduit, developers felt this recommendation would result in the building of parallel networks, something that caused the collapse of the entire telecommunication sector-building more than is needed. The developer and homebuilder groups had the following suggestions on the strategy:
Carriers In general, the carrier groups felt the vision and goal of the City was somewhat positive. The recommendations were not supported. In short, the carrier groups felt the City was going beyond simply filling in the gaps in connectivity and was proposing to compete with the private sector for the delivery of broadband services. One individual went as far as to say that Telecom Ottawa's claim to be a carrier's carrier at the broadband launch on November 26 was misleading and wrong. The role of Telecom Ottawa needed to be better explained as well as its reporting mechanisms. The conduit build recommendation was universally condemned as simply not workable. When questioned why, all carriers stated that conduit will not last more that five years before it collapses. Furthermore, forcing homebuilders to place conduit in the ground ignores the problems of network architecture that is different for each carrier. When the example of Montreal was cited, carriers stated that Montreal conduits are buried many feet under the ground and are encased in concrete-this will not work for cable or fibre going to a house. Carriers also felt there was a missing gap in the report. If the City is going to subsidize broadband delivery, what about those who cannot afford the Internet hook-up-who will help them and how? The carrier groups had the following comments on the recommendations: If a committee is struck at City Hall, carriers should be on it
KEY OBSERVATIONS The broadband strategy provoked strong responses from the public and private sectors in Ottawa. Within the MUSH and rural sectors there is considerable support for the initiative although many still feel the business case is weak and needs to be expanded. Within the private sector and the carriers, the support is much weaker. Although local business organizations feel the vision is a good one, there is a consensus that other more important priorities need attention first. Examples such as improving the planning department and providing water and sewer to rural areas are cited as higher priorities. Among carriers, support is very weak with many groups opposed to the conduit build and City involvement in network planning and installation. Many also question the role of Telecom Ottawa and want a better explanation of its operations and mandate. QUESTIONS ASKED Questions for Broadband Tier II Consultation
Next: Appendix C: Land Development and Infrastructure Installation |
Official site of the City of Ottawa
