Lincoln County listening session June 2013

1. Broadband!
Session #4; June 13, 2013 9AM-3PM
Merrill Community Forum Series

2. Introductions
Who are you? Who Do you represent?
How important do you think broadband expansion is
in Lincoln County?
Nice?
Important?
Imperative?

3. Center for Community Technology Solutions
Connecting Wisconsin Communities to Compete

4. What is Broadband?

5. Broadband

6. What Speed Means
Dial-up+ (56 Kbps):
 1 day, 10 hrs, 44 min
T1/DSL (1.54 Mbps):
 1 Hour, 15 min
Cable (10 Mbps ):
 11 min, 44 sec
Fiber (1 Gbps):
 7 sec

7. Broadband Adoption
7

8. No, you weren’t downloaded.
You were born.

9. The Switch to Online

10. What percentage of Wisconsin households
subscribe (pay) to broadband (3 mbps/768
kbps) at home?
A. 96%
B. 76%
C. 56%
D. 26%
E. 16%

11. The national broadband plan calls for
a minimum residential broadband
connection of:
A. Something faster than “one ringy dingy”
B. 1 Mbps download/200 kbps upload
C. 4 Mbps download/1 Mbps upload
D. 100 Mbps download/4 Mbps upload
E. Faster than a speeding bullet

12. AT&T is reported to have the fastest
LTE Network in the Country. What
is the average reported speed for
AT&T?
A. 2 Mbps
B. 4 Mbps
C. 13 Mbps
D. 100 Mbps
E. 1 Gbps

13. We Need both Fixed and Wireless

14. What speeds are fiber-based networks
able to deliver?
A. 4-10 Mbps
B. 100 Mbps
C. 1 Gbps
D. 10 Gbps
E. 100 Gbps

15. When the IEDC surveyed economic
development professionals what percentage
felt that 4 Mbps/1 Mbps was sufficient for
advancing their local economies?
A. More than 95%
B. 75%
C. 50%
D. 25%
E. Less than 10%

16. The 2011 Wisconsin Agricultural Survey
reports that 73% of farmers have access to a
computer.
What percent had access to the Internet?
A. 97%
B. 77%
C. 67%
D. 57%
E. 37%

17. Hartung Brothers

18. What % of schools receiving subsidies
for broadband connections through the
FCC’s E-Rate program report having
the bandwidth to meet current needs?
A. 90%
B. 80%
C. 60%
D. 40%
E. 20%

20. Very Different Bandwidth Needs
“As many as 80 percent of E-rate-funded
schools and libraries say their broadband
connections do not fully meet their needs.”
Eighth Broadband Progress Report, Aug 21, 2012, FCC
http://www.fcc.gov/reports/eighth-broadband-progress-report

21. Where Do We Stand?
 In the State
 In the Country
 In the World

22. Max Adv Download speed (Wireless)

23. Where Does Lincoln County Stand?

24. Number of Providers

25. No Broadband Coverage Reported

26. Max Adv Download Speed (Wireline)

27. Max Adv Download Speed (Wireline)

28. Max Adv Download speed (Wireless)

29. Wisconsin ranks
#24 (Access)
#38 (Adoption:
Residential
Source: Eighth Broadband Progress Report, FCC, August, 2012,
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-12-90A1.doc

30. Our Place in the World…
45.1806° N, 89.6833° W

31. country/region Q4 ‘12
avg. mbps
QoQ
change
yoy
change
– Global 2.9 5.0% 25%
1 South Korea 14.0 -4.8% -13%
2 Japan 10.8 2.7% 19%
3 Hong Kong 9.3 3.4% 5.4%
4 Latvia 8.9 2.3% 20%
5 Switzerland 8.7 0.5% 20%
6 Netherlands 8.6 0.1% 3.3%
7 Czech Republic 8.1 7.0% 21%
8 United States 7.4 2.3% 28%
9 Sweden 7.3 7.4% 29%
10 Finland 7.1 4.3% 20%
6
9 10
1
5 4
2
8
7
3
figure 10: Average Measured Connection Speed by Country/Region
The State of the Internet, Q3, 2012
Average Connection Speeds

32. country/region % above
10 mbps
QoQ
change
yoy
change
– Global 11% 2.7% 31%
1 South Korea 49% -5.7% -13%
2 Japan 39% 4.3% 28%
3 Hong Kong 28% 3.9% 7.9%
4 Latvia 27% 1.9% 26%
5 Switzerland 23% 1.8% 58%
6 Netherlands 21% -0.7% 1.1%
7 Sweden 19% 16% 72%
8 United States 19% 5.5% 90%
9 Finland 18% 13% 49%
10 Czech Republic 17% 16% 60%
10 7 9 4
6 1
5
2
8
3
figure 12: High Broadband (>10 Mbps) Connectivity
High Broadband Connectivity (> 10 Mbps)

33. country/region % above
4 mbps
QoQ
change
yoy
change
– Global 42% 2.1% 15%
1 South Korea 86% -0.5% 0.7%
2 Switzerland 82% 1.3% 18%
3 Netherlands 82% -0.1% 1.1%
4 Japan 76% 1.1% 13%
5 Hong Kong 74% 4.8% 8.8%
6 Czech Republic 72% 6.2% 14%
7 Canada 72% 2.3% 17%
8 Latvia 72% -0.2% 16%
9 Belgium 71% 3.5% 0.8%
10 Denmark 69% 0.8% 26%
…
13 United States 64% 1.9% 16%
10 6 8
3 1
7
9 4
13 2
5
figure 13: Broadband (>4 Mbps) Connectivity
Broadband Connectivity >4Mbps Global

34. South Korea: 1G
Finland: 100Mbps/2015
Chattanooga TN: 1G
A Global Economy

35. "Winning The Global Bandwidth Race"
“We are in a global
bandwidth race. A nation’s
future economic security is
tied to frictionless and
speedy access to
information.”
http://www.fcc.gov/document/chairman-genachowski-winning-
global-bandwidth-race
--FCC Chairman Genachowski

36. IEDC Survey 2012
Fewer than 10%
believe 4 Mbps
is sufficient for
advancing their
local economies

37. Estimated Annual Cost of Digital Exclusion
(-) $55 Billion U.S.
(-) $1 Billion Wisconsin
www.econsult.com/articles/030810_costofexclusion.pdf

38. Retail sales increased at an average annual
growth rate of 2.6% from 2002-2010
Sources:
U.S. Census E-stats, May 10,2012: http://www.census.gov/econ/estats/2010/2010reportfinal.pdf
Quarterly Retail E-Commerce Sales, Q3, 2012:
http://www.census.gov/retail/mrts/www/data/pdf/ec_current.pdf

39. In 2010, U.S. manufacturing shipments
totaled $4.9 trillion.
What percentage of the $4.9 trillion in
manufacturing shipments was attributable to e-
commerce in 2010?
a) 13%
b) 25%
c) 46%
d) 88%
Source:
U.S. Census E-stats, May 10, 2012, http://www.census.gov/econ/estats/2010/2010reportfinal.pdf

40. E-commerce generated $4.1 trillion in sales in 2010
What percentage of total internet sales was between
businesses (B2B)?
a) 27 percent
b) 38 percent
c) 62 percent
d) 89 percent

41. Impact On Business…
 Minnesota business establishments that use
broadband report median annual revenues that are
approximately $200,000 higher than businesses that
do not use broadband.
 Nearly 60% of small businesses report that
broadband availability is an essential factor in
making a decision on their location.
Sources:
www.sngroup.com
www.connectmn.org/sites/default/files/learn-sidebar-docs/mn_biz_2012.pdf

42. Economic Development Impact

43. Businesses that get it: B2C

44. Businesses that get it: B2B

45. Farm Computer Usage WI, 2001-2011
http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Wisconsin/Publications/Annual_Statistical_Bulletin/bulletin2012_web.pdf

46. Break (10:30-10:45)

47. Wisconsin Communities
Addressing Broadband

48. Door County Broadband Efforts
Step 1: 2001
Door County Technology Council forms & develops mission:
“The Door County Technology Council is made up of private and
public sector organizations working to provide for the
telecommunications infrastructure needs of Door County to improve
the competitiveness of its businesses and the quality of life of its
residents.”
http://www.doorcountybusiness.com/community-development/technology-council/

49. Door County: Next Steps
Informal analysis of Tech Council members
identifies two main issues:
 Lack of redundancy
 High cost for limited broadband services
 2002 - Infrastructure Assessment
 2003 - Technology Needs & Market Study
 2008 - Economic Development Corp. strategy:
 Move to a New Economy model that includes and supports…
technology infrastructure….

50. Door County: Continued Action
Action Steps
 Continue to educate citizens and business owners
 Seek local, state and federal support for building
telecommunications infrastructure in a rural county.
 Develop promising and feasible approaches to providing
broadband service to Door County.
 Develop a marketing plan that leverages the improvement
in telecommunications to retain and attract businesses.

51. Fiber Optic Backbone Installation
 Began with ARRA (Federal Stimulus) application
 2011 – Green Bay To Sturgeon Bay
 2012-13 – Sturgeon Bay to Gills Rock
 4G service to all of Door County
Door County Results:
Improved telecommunications infrastructure

52. Chippewa Valley
Inter-
Networking
Consortium

53. Members - 1999
• CESA 10
• Chippewa Falls School District
• Chippewa Valley Technical College
• City of Eau Claire
• Eau Claire County
• Eau Claire Area School District
• Eau Claire Public Library
• University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire

54. Community Area Network - CAN
Backbone Middle
Mile
Last
Mile
Houses & Businesses
Anchor Institutions

55. Timeline
•1999: Y2K CIO monthly “breakfast club”
•2000: Discussing IT needs & cost burdens led to collaborations for
mutual benefit; Chippewa Valley Inter-Networking Consortium (CINC)
formed
•2004: Joint purchases to share infrastructure & applications
•2008: Named a fiscal agent
•2009: St. Joseph’s Hospital became a FCC Rural Health Care Pilot;
redundant link between hospitals
•2010: $32M federal “Building Community Capacity
through Broadband” BTOP grant (led by University
of Wisconsin-Extension) awarded to State
•2011: Became Unincorporated Association (§184 WI Statutes)

56. Results
CINC

57. Become “The Anchor for
Technology in the Northwoods”
Someone had to step up
and be the early adopter
role model for the region
Three Lakes Building
Subscribership

58. Building is about far more than merely providing access to the
technology. Engaging people in the community throughout the
process is critical to the long-term success of the effort.
THE THREE LAKES MODEL
Building Community Broadband Subscribership
Technology
Capability
·Existing
Infrastructure
·Technical
Expertise
·Local and
Regional
Providers
Technically Capable Expanding Broadband
Interested Governmentally Engaged
Local Government Engagement
·Ability to change mindset
·Commitment to broadband development
·Willingness to earmark financial resources
·Dedication to collaborations on a broad front
Just starting out
Fully engaged

59. THE THREE LAKES MODEL Building Community Broadband Subscribership
STEP ONE: change and commit
 the local government mindset must change
 local taxpayer dollars must be committed to the effort
STEP TWO: assess and decide
 take an inventory of what you have and make a list of what you want / create a coverage map
 choose what broadband options you want to pursue
STEP THREE: collaborate and contact
 arrange meetings with your local service providers
 go to the technology – you’ll be waiting forever for it to come to you
Without the support of the local government a broadband
implementation plan has no chance. As hard as it is to budget
funds in these difficult times, that’s precisely what must be done.

60. THE THREE LAKES MODEL Building Community Broadband Subscribership
STEP FOUR: implement and execute
 as service options come online, educate your residents on the choices
 enter into agreements with providers to build/create infrastructure
STEP FIVE: evaluate and refine
 how are we doing, where are we strong, where do we need improvement
 find/fill the gaps in your local coverage area / upgrade service offerings
The job never ends. It’s a ongoing cycle of continuous evaluation and
improvement. The collaborations you form will constantly expose you to
groups with great ideas you can use and assimilate.

61. Second Home Owners

62. Business Location

63. Broadband Improvement: Town of Minocqua
The Past
 2010: Minocqua invests $50,000 in three towers to
improve options to residents.
 Entered agreement with SonicNet to provide
Internet Service to areas now served by the new
towers.
 2012, Town Chairman, created the Minocqua
Broadband & Business Development Committee
 Committee executed survey on broadband, sent
out with 2012 tax bills.

64. Minocqua Broadband Survey
1. Is this your Primary Residence YES NO
2. Do you currently have Internet Service at this address YES NO
3. Who is your Internet Provider: Charter - Frontier - Verizon -AT&T –
Hughes – Wild Blue - Other _________________
4. Are you satisfied with your current service YES NO What is your
monthly cost $________
5. Do you know how fast your current internet service speed is?
___I don’t know [go to www.speedtest.net to find the speed]
___< 1 Megabits ___1-3 Megabits ___3-5 Megabits ___5-10 Megabits
___ > 10 Megabits
Please print your current Minocqua Home Street Address:
___________________________________________________________

65. Minocqua Survey Results
 Received 1,670 responses from over 5,000 tax
bills sent
 Approximately half were seasonal residents
 Approximately half had internet service
 Only one third were satisfied with the service
 Only 33% were satisfied!

66. The Present
 Analyzing data from recent survey and 2011 Survey of Grow
North Region
 Planning July 9, 2013 Broadband Fair at LUHS
 Internet Service Providers
 Educational Opportunities
 Food
 Revising Agreement with SonicNet.
 Considering involvement in Partnership with the Lac du
Flambeau Tribe & Vilas County to create a regional Internet
Service Provider for underserved and un-served areas.
Broadband Improvement: Town of Minocqua

67. Lunch Time!

68. What do you think?
How well is broadband understood in your
community?
What do you think are the roadblocks or
obstacles for expanding broadband usage?

69.  If we could help you with one thing regarding
broadband, what would it be?
 Imagine your area as a broadband connected
community five years from now; what does it
look like?

70. Break (2:00 – 2:15pm)

71. Center for Community Technology Solutions
How We Can Help
www.flickr.com/photos/wi_broadband

72. Our Goals for the Next Year
Work with Economic Development Specialists to
increase broadband availability across the state
Partner with the Public Service Commission on their
planning and mapping effort
Increase the number of rural communities actively
engaged to find solutions
Tech/Broadband Training & Coaching

73. Do your businesses have what they need?
http://wisconsindashboard.org/business-survey

74. Support Business Participation
Source:
LinkWISCONSIN
PSCW
http://wisconsindashboard.org/business-survey

75. County Business Business # Est 2010 % Response Residential Census HH Est 2010 % Response
Adams 11 330 3.33% 61 8666 0.70%
Buffalo 6 324 1.85% 78 5708 1.37%
Fond du Lac 65 2440 2.66% 944 40697 2.32%
Kewaunee 133 478 27.82% 249 8239 3.02%
Langlade 37 588 6.29% 85 8587 0.99%
Lincoln 31 718 4.32% 49 12094 0.41%
Price 84 448 18.75% 549 6329 8.67%
Saint Croix 35 2068 1.69% 541 31799 1.70%
Vilas 75 976 7.68% 237 9658 2.45%
Wood 51 1833 2.78% 206 31598 0.65%
Demand Survey (5-20-13)

76. Demand Survey - Residents

77. Building Community Capacity
 Throughout Wisconsin
 Listening Sessions
 Presentations
 Ongoing advice and
assistance
 Resource sharing
 Hands-on consultation
 Within UW-Extension
 High Speed Boot camp
 Digital Leaders
 Division of
Entrepreneurship &
Economic Development
 Telling and showing
success stories

78. Exercises to help you figure it out

79. What Types of Projects Might a Connected
Community Team Take ON?
 Awareness/Application/Education (relevance,
potential uses, etc.)
 Access (helping secure needed infrastructure,
equipment, etc.)
 Adoption (increasing the number of households,
businesses and community institutions that
actually subscribe to broadband where it is
available)
 Community Content

80. Who Needs to Be On the Team?
Leadership Team Identification Worksheet
http://srdc.msstate.edu/ecommerce/curricula/co
nnectingcommunities/files/1-
2_leadership_team_id.pdf

81. Designing Solutions
 Community Projects Checklist
 50 Ideas to Connect Communities

82. Contact Information:
Prof. Andy Lewis
Community Economic Development Specialist
Center for Community Technology Solutions
University Wisconsin-Extension
(608) 890-4254 or andy.lewis@uwex.edu
Maria Alvarez Stroud
Director
Center for Community Technology Solutions
University of Wisconsin-extension
(608) 263-9295 or maria.alvarez-stroud@uwex.edu