Finally, The Possibility of Free, Widespread Wi-Fi: The Signs Are Everywhere

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio has brought the dream of a nearly zero-cost (to taxpayers) wireless New York City closer than ever with a brilliant plan. Admittedly first proposed in the last administration, if successful the proposal will enjoin a private-public partnership system that will install tens of thousands of Wi-Fi hotspots around the city. Access will be free and unlimited, and here’s the kicker – it will be, for the most part, privately funded, and gladly so.

How do they plan to do it? The strategy is two-fold. First, the Wi-Fi routers will be placed on city property that has been leased to advertisers. Billboards, old telephone booths, subway ads, etc. Year after year private advertisers pay millions of dollars to get their names up in public access areas and central commons. Previously, the deal was, pay the city and for a limited time your sign goes up. Signs are expensive too, especially ones that are illuminated. Well, now, the updated deal will be, buy public advertising space and along with your message, your company will be required to purchase and hang up one or two expertly camouflaged Wi-Fi routers to create a local wireless cloud. Equipment prices have plummeted to such lows that, frankly, the system’s costs will be marginal – practically built-in. There will be no huge increases in rates to these advertising firms. The actual network would presumably be run by the city; again, supported by, say, a small additional fee to be paid by advertisers. The actual public network would be ad-free. And once the infrastructure is up and running, additional costs to advertisers will drop to near zero.

Overall, a great idea for Jersey; but there's more. Another source of revenue that could create an instant, funded and installed Wi-Fi network is through a small increase for illuminated sign and tower permits. If a business seeks to construct and display an illuminated sign (even on private property), for a few extra dollars the payer would fund one or two routers adjoining such signage.

Our communities, and our kids, see these every day; 

why not let them double as WiFi hotspots?

Free wifi. Widespread. Readily available. Supported (mostly) by private sources for the public good, and implanted in a ready-made infrastructure. For Jersey, the possibilities are endless. With a little bit of tweaking with the contracts for billboard and other advertisers, we can unleash a long-overdue public resource: Free Wi-Fi. Think about it. How many huge billboards do you see locally? On bridges? Along the Turnpike? Aside tall buildings? How many old phone booths dot our towns and cities? In Newark there must be hundreds of sites, just waiting to be transformed to beacons on the Information Superhighway.

Using this arrangement, Wi-Fi clouds could be quickly established in our cities. Newark, Camden, Jersey City, Union City, New Brunswick…even smaller communities with dense, commercial downtown areas like Kearney, Princeton, Irvington and Belleville would benefit.

Okay, we’ve got this great idea. It’s already beginning to work for other cities. This idea is way outside the box, but it is sure to work, helping to light up our cities in the 21^st century like they were illuminated in the 20^th.

Our effort must be centered on the State Legislature. That is the only statewide authority capable of passing the laws to make this plan possible.

Let’s do this. Let’s have the hard liquor and cigarette advertisers in our cities bring fast, free Internet to our kids. Let’s take those bright signs along Route 1 and bring Internet to motorists and local shoppers. This plan is a no brainer. Do we dare to innovate? Can we still do great things? I believe we can.

Democracy Under Siege in...Jersey City?

Earlier this month the Jersey City Board of Education passed, in a 6-0 vote, what amounts

to a licensure and notification requirement for any person who would like to address their meetings during the public commenting period. When asked by the press to justify the new policy, Board President Sangeeta Ranade responded that the changes:

“are part of an effort to streamline board meetings, which can begin well after their scheduled start time and feature lengthy, often raucous public comment sessions with…comments from the public that are sometimes out of bounds.”

As citizens, we need to step back for a moment to give this statement, and the Board’s action in general, their due consideration. We need to look at them in historical context, because these limitations and attitudes present a very serious divergence from this nation’s most cherished Democratic practices and values. And because it was taken on the part of a school board – a panel in which the education of our children is entrusted – it is all the more grave.

As public officials who are usually unpaid, Board of Education members in our state have to be given some credit. They must invest countless hours of their time reviewing papers, arguing with peers, hiring top administrators, making and reviewing local policy and showing up to numerous meetings that exceed hoursbeyond their scheduled times. In fact, such observations are probably accurate in describing about 99 percent of all municipal and county level elective offices in this nation. In return, of course, these elected officials get a degree of power, prestige, respect and influence. That doesn’t make them aspiring dictators; it’s just human nature. Our own Founding Fathers – Madison and Hamilton in particular - wrote prodigiously on this topic when they were justifying the U.S. Constitution, and the limits it places on officials - in The Federalist Papers in the late 1700’s.

But let there be no mistake here. There is a set of principles that stand far above the efforts of such elected politicians to make their jobs easier or more “manageable.” It is the principle that, literally, the buildings, proceedings, papers and decisions of democratic proceedings are the property of the people. And in these proceedings, there is nothing more valuable than vigorous, and even sometimes “ raucous” discourse. History has proven time and again that this discourse might be messy, it might be loud, it might look disorganized, but it’s what keeps us free. In a democratic system, the idea that a public official is somewhat fearful of vigorous discussion is a good thing, not a bad one.

As children and teens were are all taught in schools, public, private and religious alike, that we need to get along, that we need to work together as a team and in all situations maintain courtesy and avoid confrontation. In personal situations, most people would agree with such values. But historically, Americans know that it is because of their loudness, because of their plain old “problem with authority” and natural distrust of those in power that they live in one of the freest societies – at least in terms of expressing ideas - in the world.

Politics is a tough game. It’s not for the meek or polite. Government, especially boards of education, deal with serious questions and policies that deeply affect our children every day. And sometimes these policies even touch upon life and death itself, as our boards continue to grapple with school visitor, security and “lockdown” issues. So perhaps we need a little yelling, some straight-talking, some unsettling and, dare I say, even “raucous” questions posed between those in authority and those that they serve.

The idea of public participation in political meetings is an iconic one. How many of us recall, provided above, the stirring painting by Normal Rockwell during the early, terrifying years of World War II? In his work “Freedom of Speech,” we see the image of a workingman, a commoner, rising at his town meeting to address his elected officials. This standing man, with his chest out and his face forward, commands the attention of his fellow voters and citizens nearby. What is he saying? It’s not as important as who he is saying it to: people in power, be they town council members, county freeholders, or yes, board of ed members.

Rockwell classics aside, it heartens me that our legislators in Trenton – the people who really make the rules that all towns and boards must follow – have noticed this. Assembly Bill A523 wouldrequire these local boards to reserve time – at least 3 minutes for every speaker - for all interested members of the public to comment on issues. And the most compelling part of the bill (from its interpretive statement) is quoted below:

“Should the portion of the meeting dedicated to public comment exceed the scheduled length of the meeting itself, no vote shall be taken on the subject of the comment until the next meeting, at which time the public comment shall resume until all interested members of the public have had opportunity to comment on the subject.”

How’s that for putting power back in the hands of the people? If this bill is passed into law, not only will elected boards of all kinds have to make time for public speakers, if they don’t adequately address the public’s concerns, such boards won’t be permitted to vote on contentious issues at all. The message is clear: the process (that being, open public debate) is just as, or perhaps even more important, than the finished product (a board’s decision).  

Democracy is not meant to be streamlined, at least, not in most instances. Boards of Ed and other policymaking bodies are the domain of the people, and if you don’t like people, or aren’t willing to put up with their nonsensical demands for liberty and respect, you don’t belong in a position of power in the first place.

Support Democracy. Support Dynamic Public Discourse. Support Assembly Bill 523.