Fresno “open” to anchor tenant model for municipal wireless network
The city of Fresno, California recently issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the creation of a citywide wireless broadband network. In the RFP, the city states that it prefers not to spend any money on the network and that all of the costs of the deployment should be borne by the service provider (the private corporate franchise model). Given that this model has failed in a number of cities, prospective bidders submitted questions that revealed their serious reservations about the city’s insistence upon this model: What will the city do if it receives no responses in favor of the private corporate franchise model? Will the city consider the anchor tenant model?
As might be expected, Fresno is very coy about how much it would be willing to invest in the wireless network. I doubt they will contribute any money. Budgets are very tight in cities across California. Moreover, for an anchor tenant model to succeed, the city itself and its departments have to tell the bidders what they want in great detail in the RFP, so that the bidders know what to propose in the first place.
I have copied and pasted the some of the more interesting Q&A portions in the Addendum to the RFP, which was released today by Fresno.
Q: In regards to the business model addressed in the RFP and considering the past success rate of such a model which is very low, what would be the game plan of the city if you don’t receive any responses based on this model?
A: Section 5.41 states that the “preferred” model would be privately owned and that it not use City funds. This means that we “prefer” this model, however, other models will also be accepted as well as the anchor tenant model. We are seeking propositions that make sense in light of the current failures that have been experienced in other cities. The city of Fresno has kept up to date with the state of the wireless community and is well aware of its current situation. The city of Fresno hopes to find a viable solution and will re-evaluate its position if all bids are rejected.
Q: Will the city be ready to be a major tenant in financing this project, what is the dollar percentage or the $ amount the city would be ready to finance with project with?
A. Once the bids have been evaluated, the evaluation team will be taking the recommendation to Council for approval. The city will evaluate proposals and determine a funding percentage and City funding commitments at the time of recommendation. The City is well aware that there may be a funding commitment for this project.
Q. Will the city consider deploying a wireless mesh network only in key areas and monitoring the financial and economical success rate before expanding the wireless network and services to the rest of the city?
A. The answer to this question is yes. Section 5.5.1. was meant to cover this type of scenario.
Related posts:
Loading ...
If they were smart they would put out an RFP for anyone willing to bite on an ISP model. The systems integrators are going to pass on this one. It’s not too late to revise their strategy.
Then if no one bites they can release a new RFP with their available/estimated budget listed.