Concord Town Meeting adopts Article 34 by an overwhelming margin – vote is in the high nineties percent!

Comcast whups itself – with our help

------------------------------------------

Now we can finish the website, to reflect this new stage that the town's quest enters. We are thinking about a new domain name, one that suits the next phase. Ideas? – let us know.

 

If you are WORRIED about some things you have heard, you can jump straight to here.

We are a number of your neighbors across Concord.  Some of us have been engaged for almost a decade with the project to investigate a town-run communications network; all of us are familiar in some detail with the business and the technology of such a venture.  We strongly support article 34 and encourage you to do so.

• A yes vote on this article risks nothing.  It empowers the Light Plant to finish its planning and evaluation.  It does not commit the town taxpayers to pay anything.
• A yes vote preserves our option to shape our future for town-wide communications.  A yes vote allows the town to act when business conditions indicate.  A no vote (by law) puts off any opportunity for action for a minimum of two years.  There is no reason to hinder ourselves in this way. 
• A yes vote builds on almost a decade of citizen committee planning, and a similar vote taken last year at town meeting.

We believe that a yes vote on this article risks nothing.  Nothing, that is, except the virtual monopoly position held by our existing communications providers.  Comcast, the Town’s present cable TV provider, has mounted a campaign of disinformation.  The company attempts to spread fear and stop our small town from considering how it might best shape its options for town-wide communications.  Its apparent actions include:  a study, repeated local presentations by several paid spokesmen, three expensive mailings, a slick website and a mass calling campaign.  The study has the appearance of independence but was funded by the cable industry, and includes a critique of a selected business model, even though the town has not picked any particular model yet.

They claim we will fail – ask yourself why they have spent so much money:  They know how likely we are to succeed, if we do proceed.  Comcast implicitly endorses us.  The industry historical record confirms it, also.

In the last half-dozen years the Town impaneled two citizen committees to look into a Concord network.  Members of both committees are among those signing below.  The first committee strongly recommended that the town explore the option of a town-run system based on technology more advanced than that of Comcast or Verizon.  The second recommended the initial vote last year, which we complete with a yes vote on this year’s Article 34.  These committees looked both at business models and technology options, and CMLP continues to study the various approaches for Concord.

We know from long experience that Concord’s geography makes it unattractive to the usual network providers – the long delay in getting cable modems being only a recent example, along with the incomplete coverage of DSL broadband.  The advantage of a town-run system is the benefits we can enjoy when we direct our own destiny through a network that serves us all.  Concord has proven these benefits for over a century with what was new-fangled electricity a hundred years ago.

In contrast to the shrill alarm of some of the propaganda about this article, there is much evidence since last year’s vote that community-run systems are succeeding.

• The one commercial example at that time, and model for us, Kutztown PA, is flourishing.  Particularly they have demonstrated the power of an open infrastructure to bring all manner of competing service providers to town – something today’s incumbents in Concord will not soon envision.

• In the year ensuing since last Town Meeting, more than 35 additional towns and cities across the US have taken up an advanced technology option, fiber to the home, bringing that option to the verge of the mainstream.

This Article 34 is not a plan of action and no money is involved; it is just approval for the Town to consider its options.  Before we can even know if we might proceed with a town network, CMLP needs to complete its work.  It needs to finish its look at the various business and technology options for the town and bring back results to Town Meeting on a timely basis – that is the purpose of this vote, together with the vote we took last year. This vote lets us proceed at a time of the town’s choosing, if and when we decide to act.

We salute Comcast’s ringing if implicit endorsement – made unmistakable by its out-of-proportion effort to stop us.  We invite you to join us and confirm Concord’s better future with support of Article 34.

signed, in reverse alphabetical order:

Rick Wheeler 99 Sudbury Rd	Tom Tremblay 1455 Monument St	Gerry Tolman 365 Laws Brook Rd
Fred Serr 182 Oak Hill Circle	Jim Reynolds 71 Assabet Avenue	Bill Lehr Bouzha Cookman 99 Hubbard St
Scott Lawrence 560 Old Marlboro Rd	Bob Kusik 119 Ministerial Dr	Greg Higgins 228 Park Ln
Mike Finson 9 Bartkus Farm Rd	David Douglas 66 Monument St	Dave Clark 329 Heaths Bridge Rd
Cris Casey 53 Maple St	Mark Bonchek Elizabeth Davidson 95 Martha's Point Rd	Deborah Bier 63 Prescott Rd
Stonewall Ballard 34 Aurora Lane	David Allen 316 Heaths Bridge Rd

 

---

Are you worried the "technology may be moving fast," worried that there are "already several competitors"?

Then you should go here. And here. And here. And here.

Are you worried money spent on a network will "compete with other needs," such as schools and sewer?

Then you should go here.

Are you worried for the right of "minority viewpoints" to be seen and heard? worried about who "contorls access"?

Then you should go here.

 

---

 

To sum up? – an editorial in our Concord Journal Thursday does it best:

Editorial: Protesting just a bit too much?

Was it Shakespeare that said, "The lady doth protest too much"?

That's the idea we're getting about the cable industry, as residents of Concord were flooded this week with fliers, a Web site, telephone calls, and a full-page ad in this paper urging the defeat of Article 34, the Light Plant's plan to enter the cable and internet business. Not to mention the Beacon Hill Institute study released this winter, which predicted nothing but failure for Concord.

Could the Vote No to 34 Committee be sending a message about the effectiveness of municipally-owned cable and Internet services just by the amount of money they've spent trying to convince us to vote against it? Are they afraid a Concord-run cable and Internet service could be as successful as the Concord Municipal Light Plant has been over the last 100-plus years?

When Paul Cianelli, president of the organization that funded the Vote No to 34 Committee was asked how many people made up the committee, he was "not comfortable" giving us that information. Aren't voters just a bit "uncomfortable" listening to a committee that they don't even know the makeup of?

It's up to Concord voters to decide starting Monday. Last year, the cable companies didn't appear to blink an eye when members of the Telecommunications Committee garnered their first vote at Town Meeting. As the town looks for its second and final vote, suddenly, flags are waving. Are they afraid of our success? Or do they have valid points? We'll see at Town Meeting. Make sure you're there to cast your vote.