Comments from NBCSL stressed the need to support access to technology for parts of urban areas that are underserved by market driven service provision. They point out that all urban areas are not equal and that within urban areas neighborhoods do not currently have equal access. They also call for a needs based formula to measure telecommunications penetration as a benchmark for determining which communities will receive support. My last observation is their reference to the New York State Education Departments inclusion of cultural and community based organizations in addition to schools and libraries as places for public access.
Some excerpts...
"It is well known that Manhattan has very little broadband infrastructure above 59th st., however, under the Act's definition, above 59th st. would not be considered a high cost area. In my own district, Brooklyn's Bedford Stuyvasant, until last year the central office switches had not been upgraded since 1963. It would be an unfortunate irony if wealthy distant communities were subsidized and low income residents in urban communities were neglected."
"The issue of access for the urban disadvantaged and minorities has been a longstanding and inadequately addressed aspect of the social policy discussions around telecommunications. The fact that the issue of access for low income persons had to be added in conference is a cause for concern to NBCSL."
"In a study conducted by the Office of Telecommunications and Energy in New York City, my own district in Bedford Stuyvasant had 28% of the residences without telephone service."
" Market-driven competition will not bring new telecommunications services to everyone in the state at the same time. This can adversely affect the citizens and communities left behind. . . New York's policies to foster competition must reflect a continuing commitment to basic universal service, including an expanding definition of such service as new services become essential to participation in the social and economic mainstream. Connecting to the Future--The Report of the New York State Telecommunications Exchange--December, 1993 pg. 22"
"In New York State, the State Education Department has proposed the Omnibus Technology in Education Act of 1996.[16] The bill provides for a comprehensive plan to upgrade the infrastructure and networking capability for K-12 schools, Higher Education and Libraries. It also goes a step further by including cultural and community service organizations as part of eligible recipients. Most importantly, it calls for a redirection of human resource funds toward training teachers to maximize instruction and learning in an interactive content environment. It is an example of a state utilizing its traditional spending capability, whether bonding authority or redirecting traditional spending in human resource allocation or aggregating current information technology spending for more modern use and cost savings.
A needs based Federal universal service plan can compliment a comprehensive state initiative by insuring that support is given to public institutions who are the last resort for access opportunities in advanced telecommunications services, and/or serve as the initial point of presence for technologically neutral broadband infrastructure. This complimentary profile can also stimulate regulatory solutions on the state level with regards to universal service. The needs based formula assures that there is indeed a private market concept for business, residential and public sector use of advanced telecommunications use and that both Federal and State universal service formulas will truly be targeted to insure societal interconnectivity."