The network envisioned with the help of a $30 million federal broadband grant, now in jeopardy.

A consortium of 15 rural north Florida counties awarded a $30 million federal broadband grant to provide a “middle-mile” wireless broadband network for the region has spent almost $7 million of its federal grant on consultants, design engineers, land acquisition and staffing without breaking ground on a single construction project.

In February 2010, the Obama Administration announced the broadband grant to deliver rural Florida residents a way to finally obtain high-speed access to the Internet within three years.  Now, a year-and-a-half later, not a single tower of the wireless network has been built, residents have been told they will never receive Internet service directly from the project, and one of the key members of the North Florida Broadband Authority charged with constructing the network has called one of the major contractors “incompetent.”

Last week, federal officials suspended the grant amid growing accusations of wasteful spending and lack of oversight.

NFBA was supposed to be building a wireless wholesale-access network across 15 counties that would deliver ISPs, government agencies, libraries, and other institutional users packages of 6, 12, 25, 60, 150Mbps or faster service, linked with fiber to Orlando and Tampa.

Although media coverage touted the project as delivering improved access to residential customers in Baker, Bradford, Columbia, Dixie, Gilchrist, Hamilton, Jefferson, Lafayette, Levy, Madison, Putnam, Suwannee, Taylor, Union and Wakulla counties, the NFBA project will not directly make broadband service available to consumers.  Would be residential customers will have to hope an incumbent Internet Service Provider chooses to participate and resells access to the network across the region.  Otherwise, those taxpayers will only be able to use the network they paid for at a local library.

That is, if the project ever gets completed.

To date, financial statements from the NFBA reflect the biggest checks paid to-date have gone to architecture and design consultants, which have received a total of more than $3.37 million dollars.  In contrast, NFBA has paid $0.00 for on-site construction and site work as of the end of the last quarter.  Money has also been spent on “Administrative and Legal Expenses” amounting to more than $863,000, and $1.54 million has been spent on property appraisal, acquisition, and expenses related to establishing rights-of-way.

When questions began to be raised about why the project had spent so much on so little, the fur began to fly, according to the North Florida Herald:

Christopher Thurow of Bradford County, accused [contractor] Government Services Group of being “incompetent.” Government Services Group answers to the Authority and is in charge of managing the project.

Then Rapid Systems, one of the project’s engineering companies, began making accusations of not getting paid. But GSG pointed to what it said was inadequate documentation by Rapid Systems and not following payment procedures.

Adding to the controversy was that GSG had been let go from managing the Florida Rural Broadband Authority (FRBA), a program similar to the North Florida Broadband Authority.

Multiple FRBA meetings were canceled, and the project was behind schedule, said Rick Marcum, chairman of FRBA.

“We felt like we needed to move in a different direction,” he said.

Since then, Government Services Group has filed a lawsuit against FRBA, saying there is a breach of contract.

At the North Florida Broadband Authority, some members allege a conflict of interest between GSG and Capital Solutions, which was contracted by GSG to oversee the administration of the grant money.

The apparent conflict comes from the accusation that Government Services Group CEO Robert Sheets is 25-percent owner of Meridian Services group, where Lisa Blair is CEO and president. Blair also is the CEO of Capital Solutions.

NFBA project members seem content to blame most of the problems on others, as well as on a sudden discovery their initial network design would not meet the performance requirements of potential wholesale customers.  That meant a wholesale re-design of the project into a “interconnected-ring network” design topology.  The rest of the delay, according to the NFBA, was because the project was sitting around waiting for government approvals:

This entire process (which included design re-evaluation, engineering services procurement, and network redesign) was carried out over a period of two to three quarters, which was the period of time designated in the original Baseline Plan for the turnkey link design phase as well as for subsequent equipment procurement, site acquisition, and pre-deployment activities. Additional variance from the Baseline Plan resulted substantial delays that were incurred awaiting wage-rate determinations (more than 3 months), awaiting a response to a waiver request to allow eligibility of Long term Operational leases (requested process in December, 2010, AAR submitted in April 2011, received in June, 2011); and comments from the Program Office on a Route Change Request (2 months).

That explanation did not pass muster with grant administrators at the National Telecommunications and Information Administration, the federal agency overseeing broadband grants.

“NFBA has experienced a number of external and internal delays on its project and, as a result, NTIA has serious concerns regarding the project’s long-term viability and, in the short-term, its ability to implement and deploy the proposed project during the grant award period,” the NTIA wrote in a statement.

As a result, the NTIA has suspended the program, ending all work, pending some sort of oversight agreement with the NFBA being concluded before Oct. 10.

The NTIA wants all invoices and disbursements from the $30 million grant approved directly by them before any more money is spent on the project.

To date, filings indicate the project has no signed customers of any kind, institutional, commercial or otherwise.  NFBA anticipates it will “outline service to 308 anchor institutions by project closeout,” with “outline” at this point defined as “offer.”

However, NFBA claims to have received a “Commitment Letter for a substantial monthly service commitment from one of our last mile partners, and we expect to receive additional Commitment Letters over the next quarter as we continue to actively engage last mile providers in the network region.”

Last-mile partners are the ones that will ultimately deliver service to residential and business customers.

Dixie County resident and Stop the Cap! reader Jimmy Dixon, who alerted us to the latest developments, calls it “a good government program hijacked by greedy consultants and incompetent local officials.”

“This was supposed to be about serving the unserved — we the people — and instead the project will only sell to government buildings and libraries, and whatever ISPs choose to buy access,” he writes. “But when an ISP won’t sell DSL to your home today, nothing about this grant will make them sell it tomorrow.”

Indeed, Dixon says the local phone company in his area continues to have no plans to wire his neighborhood for DSL, grant or no grant.

“They frankly told me it did not make economic sense to extend DSL here, and unless the government directly defrayed those expenses, they never will service us,” Dixon shares. “But I guess until recently it was just fine to line the pockets of consultants with millions in taxpayer dollars to not deliver service to anyone else, either.”

“We’re all in the same boat, and it’s sinking fast.”

Read the special investigative report published by the North Florida Herald here.

Big cable companies are targeting their non-customers, and those current customers who refuse to sign up for triple-play bundles, with some of the most aggressively-priced promotions in years.  The two largest, Comcast/Xfinity and Time Warner Cable, have been sending out letters offering dirt cheap $20 Internet service or cable television packages that include DVR service, a second set top box, and hundreds of digital cable channels for $49.99 a month for two years.

Comcast

Comcast promotions vary in different markets, depending on who their competitors are.  The best pricing goes to new customers, as a recent promotion sent to suspected DSL customers in their service areas illustrates.

(click to enlarge)

The cable company is pitching 12 months of Xfinity Performance (typically around 12Mbps) for $19.99 a month for the first year for new customers only.  Some customers report they can cancel penalty-free at the end of the first year, while others are told Comcast is actually pitching a two-year contract where the price of the service increases to $34.99 a month during the second year (a early cancellation fee pro-rated to less than $50 applies in some areas if you cancel early).  This pricing applies to standalone service, which makes it aggressively priced.  Most cable providers charge a higher price for Internet-only service.  Some customers also report a $25 or more installation fee applies (and in some areas an in-person install is required for new customers).  We’ve heard from some readers that successfully qualified for the promotion under the name of a spouse if they have had Comcast service previously.  Otherwise, Comcast usually requires customers to be without service for 90 days before they are considered “new customers.”

Customers can try calling 1-877-508-5492 to request this offer: $19.99/Month for 1 year with no additional service required (Code at bottom of letter: LTP79376-0014).

If that number does not work from your calling area, other numbers to try include: 1-877-298-0903 (CA, TX), 1-877-508-5492 (CA, WV), 1-877-494-9166 in NJ (currently pitching 6-month version of this promotion without contract.)

If 12Mbps is not fast enough, ask the representative what promotional pricing exists for faster speeds.  Some customers scored 35Mbps service for $10 more per month.

A separate ongoing promotion from Comcast offers Blast Internet service at 25Mbps+ on similar terms.  But pricing varies wildly in different markets.  Customers in California were able to purchase this promotion for as little as $19.99 a month with a year-long contract, while customers in Chicago were asked to pay $39 for essentially the same service.

Comcast’s promotions list runs several pages, so if you are shot down asking for these promotions, ask about other current offers or hang up and try calling again and asking to speak with someone else.  Your results may vary depending on the representative you speak with.  Remember Comcast’s 250GB usage cap applies to all residential service plans.

Time Warner Cable

In addition to regular Road Runner standalone Internet service promotions that deliver Standard Service speeds for $29-35 a month for a year, Time Warner has been getting very aggressive trying to win back cord-cutters and those who have left for a competing pay television provider.  The cable company has mailed letters to non-cable TV customers in the northeast pitching substantial discounts on cable TV service price-locked (but no commitment term for you) for two years and includes free DVR equipment, DVR service, and a second set top box with digital cable TV for $49.99 a month.  They’ll even credit back the cost of any early termination fees charged by another provider over the course of the first year of service.

(click to enlarge)

The promotion is intended primarily for customers who already receive service from another provider, but new customers can call 1-855-364-7797 and ask for the offer without the competing provider early termination fee rebate.  If you do receive service from another provider, there are various requirements and steps to follow to qualify for up to $200 in termination fee credits.  Visit SwitchtoTWC or call them to learn the details.

Neither of these promotions work for existing Time Warner Cable customers.  If you already subscribe, discounts will be offered when you threaten to cancel service.  Retention deals from Time Warner Cable can be as aggressively priced as new customer promotions.  We have found retention offers made during the initial call to request a service disconnection are often not very aggressive.  Most representatives try and pare back your package before starting to offer retention pricing (which gradually gets better the more times you reply, “is that the best you can offer?”)

Our best recommendation is to call and request to cancel service 2-3 weeks from today and wait for a Time Warner Cable retention specialist to call you (answer those mystery caller ID calls — it could be Time Warner).  The reps that call you directly often deliver the most aggressive retention deals.  If nobody does reach out to you, call Time Warner yourself a few days before the disconnect is scheduled and ask them to make you an offer to rescind your disconnect request.  You may find some serious savings taking this approach.  If not, you still have time to rescind your disconnect request on your own before the plug gets pulled.

Julia Chastin is old enough to know that life sometimes makes you wait, but three hours is ridiculous.

Chastin (her maiden name, to protect her privacy), is a customer of Shaw Cable in Fort Macleod, Alb.  Her Internet service went down last weekend when the neighbor’s overzealous application of a “weed whacker” went awry and damaged her cable connection.  Chastin called Shaw Cable to report the problem, and there began her life in call queue hell.

“Usually companies who make you wait will tell you if their lines are especially busy, which is fine because I can just set the telephone on the speakerphone and go about my business until someone answers, but this turned a phone call into an afternoon adventure,” Chastin says.

In total, it was two hours, fifty-three minutes before a human being finally came on the phone, but only briefly.

“I heard this fumbling sound like someone’s headset was coming off, some mumbling and laughter, and then the line disconnected,” Chastin reports.  “I was furious.”

Chastin is not alone.

“Shaw’s hold times are legendary here in the west,” says Rob Kelvey, a Shaw customer near Vancouver.  “You can easily wait on hold an hour or two before someone answers, and that is day or night.”

Kelvey reports Shaw teases customers with an option inviting customers to accept a call back from a Shaw representative instead of waiting on hold, but it doesn’t work.

“I have used this option at least three times in the past year or so and it has never worked once.”

The problem isn’t just noticed by customers.  A recent polite editorial in the Grand Forks (B.C.) Gazette called out Shaw’s ridiculous hold times and poor customer service:

There are probably many people out there who have had to call the cable company when a TV or Internet-related problem arises only to be put on hold and not just recently.

It is not unusual to be put in a phone queue, especially when it comes to customer service, but the sometimes extraordinarily long wait times can even test those with the greatest of patience.

“Three hours isn’t patience, it’s perseverance,” retorts Chastin.

Customer Service Scoreboard bottom-rated Shaw, based on several hundred responses from customers.  More than 300 were critical of Shaw; only 17 people shared positive experiences with the company’s representatives.   The website rated Shaw Cable a dismal 29 out of 200, putting them firmly in the “terrible” category.

“Sometimes it really is faster to walk to a local Shaw Cable office to report problems instead of calling them on the phone, an ironic fact for a telecommunications company,” says Kelvey.

Shaw officials will occasionally tweet apologies for extended hold times and suggest customers use their online chat customer support feature or their Facebook page for assistance.  But some customers found Shaw’s online chat had “hold times” as well, sometimes as long as 40 minutes.

“Fort Macleod doesn’t offer a lot of options for Internet access, so waiting for Shaw is unfortunately the best option, but when I finally did manage to get someone on the phone, they heard from me good and I received a $20 service credit as an olive branch, which I appreciated,” Chastin says.

“I’d appreciate more not having to wait my life away on hold for hours even more.”

(Courtesy: Pando Networks)

Bears who fancy a good rub up against wireless Internet transmission towers were blamed for knocking out service for customers in the Potlatch area one day, a problem unique to rural communities who make due with whatever broadband access they can find.

Such is life in rural Idaho, deemed by Pando Networks to be America’s slowest broadband state, with average Internet speeds of just 318kbps.

Stop the Cap! reader Jeff in Pocatello is happy the big city New York Times has noticed Idaho’s online challenges.

“Please take notice of this newspaper article about our online experience here in Idaho,” Jeff writes. “While it underplays the near-total failure of our state legislature to recognize there –is– a broadband problem here, at least the rest of the country will understand just how bad Internet access remains in rural America.”

Jeff should know.  Pando Networks calls Pocatello America’s slowest Internet city.  It’s no surprise why.  Pocatello residents are stuck between a rock — the infamous Internet Overcharging leader Cable ONE (incidentally owned by NY Times‘ rival The Washington Post), and a hard place — Qwest/CenturyLink DSL.

Nobody does Internet Overcharging better than Cable ONE, which baits customers with high speed access and then ruins the deal with an $8 monthly modem rental fee, infamously low usage caps and a two-year contract plan that subscribers call a ripoff.

“Cable ONE never heard of a square deal because they break every consumer rule in the book,” Jeff says. “Although the company pitches speeds up to 50Mbps, they tie it to a two-year contract that only delivers one year at that speed.  After 12 months, they reduce your speed to just 5Mbps for the entire second year, and if you cannot convince the customer service representative to renew and reset your 50Mbps contract for an additional year, there is nothing you can do about it.”

THE Internet Overcharger

Cable ONE has written the book on usage limits.  Customers paying for “blazing fast 50Mbps speed” get to consume a maximum of just 50GB per month (100GB for triple play customers) before overlimit fees of $0.50/GB kick in.  Other Cable ONE plans include daily usage limits of just 3GB, which can make Netflix viewing difficult.

“Cable ONE makes you ration your Internet like satellite providers do, and it’s very irritating because they tease you with fast speeds you literally cannot use unless you are willing to pay a lot more,” Jeff says.

The alternative for most Idahoans is DSL, if Qwest/CenturyLink provides it.  In many areas, they don’t.

“You can be a mile out of Pocatello’s city center and be told there is no DSL, and those that do get it often find it working at 1-3Mbps,” he adds.

In a country now rated 25th in terms of Internet speed, Idaho is comparatively a bottom-rated broadband disaster area.  The state secured 11 federal broadband grants to deliver some level of service in communities across the state, at a cost of $25 million.

The Slow Lane

But ask some local officials about the quality of broadband in Idaho and you find a lot of denial there is even a problem.

The Times got a brusque response to their inquiries about broadband service from the executive director for the Bannock Development Corp., a business development group.  Gynii Gilliam told the newspaper things were just fine, at least for large businesses in cities like Pocatello.

“The last thing I need is a report that says we don’t have the capacity and speed, when I know it exists,” Gilliam said. She noted that Allstate Insurance was opening a $22 million call center in Pocatello and that the Federal Bureau of Investigation has a service center there. “We have not lost any business because of Internet speeds,” she said.

Which proves the old adage that you can have just about anything, for the right price.  The disparity between residential and business broadband — urban and rural — is particularly acute in mountain west states like Idaho.  Verizon was considering rural Wyoming for a multi-billion dollar high speed Internet data center, until it found it could purchase an alternative already up and running elsewhere.  Meanwhile, much of the rest of Wyoming has no Internet, slow speed wireless or DSL, or limited cable broadband in some larger communities.

Even Gilliam admitted her home broadband account was nothing like the service Allstate Insurance was likely getting.

“It feels like it’s moving in slow motion,” she told the Times. “A lot of times I’ll start downloads and not complete them.” She said she was happy as long as she could get e-mail.

But not everyone is satisfied with an Internet experience limited to occasional web browsing and e-mail.

Qwest (now CenturyLink), is Idaho's largest Internet Service Provider.

“With countries like Latvia getting better broadband than we have, it’s only a matter of time before we start to lose even more jobs in the digital economy over this,” Jeff says. “This is one more nail in the coffin for rural economies in the west, which are being asked to compete with bigger cities and eastern states that have much better infrastructure.”

Pando found the northeast and mid-Atlantic states, excepting Maine, New Hampshire, and Vermont, have the best broadband speeds in the country.  The mountain west has the worst.

Rural states like Montana, the Dakotas, eastern Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, and Utah are the least likely to have widespread access to cable broadband, which can typically offer several times the Internet speed found in smaller communities with DSL service from dominant provider Qwest (now CenturyLink).  CenturyLink claims 92 percent of their customers have some access to broadband, but didn’t say at what speeds or how many customers actually subscribe to the service.

In Idaho, cost remains a factor, so CenturyLink is planning to sell low-income households a discounted DSL package.  Speeds and pricing were not disclosed.

Jeff says the real issue is one of value.

“Some in the Times article blame lack of access, while others claim it’s all about the cost, but it’s really more a question of ‘is it worth paying this much for the service we actually get’,” Jeff says.

“Cable ONE is simply deal-with-it Internet, with usage caps and contract traps that leave customers feeling burned, but their only other choice is Qwest, and they show few signs of caring about delivering fast broadband in this state,” Jeff says.

“I believe CenturyLink Idaho’s vice president and general manager Jim Schmit when he says, ‘We’re in business to make a profit,’ Jeff concludes. “There isn’t a lot of profit in selling Internet service in rural mountain states, so the company simply doesn’t offer it where they won’t make back their investment quickly.”

“The question is, should profit be the only thing driving broadband deployment in the United States?  If you answer ‘yes,’ Idaho is the result.  If you answer ‘no,’ and think it is an essential utility, profit shouldn’t be the only consideration.”

[flv width=”640″ height=”380″]http://www.phillipdampier.com/video/Cable ONE Countdown High Speed Internet.flv[/flv]

Cable ONE’s ad for 50Mbps leaves out a lot, including the 50GB usage cap and two-year contracts that downgrade service to just 5Mbps for the entire second year.  (1 minute)

Cox Cable customers in several states have been receiving e-mails announcing the availability of the company’s “Data Usage Meter,” which is generally a precursor to the implementation of an Internet Overcharging scheme.  For at least two families, ignoring that usage meter temporarily shut down their Internet access when they reportedly exceeded their allowance.

Our view of what Internet Overcharging with usage caps really means.

Dear Cox High Speed Internet Customer,

We’d like to take this opportunity to announce the availability of the Data Usage Meter. This new feature provides an easy way to check monthly household high-speed Internet data usage at any time. Monthly data usage is the amount of data that users send, receive, download or upload each month for movies and videos, photos, web surfing, email, gaming, and other files.

Each of our packages has a specific data usage amount. The amount depends on your Cox High Speed Internet package and corresponds to the speeds provided with the package. Our speediest package provides the highest usage amount. You are currently subscribed to the Premier Package which has a monthly data usage amount of 250 Gigabytes (GB). This is equivalent to streaming about 138 standard definition movies, or 83 high definition movies in a month.

The vast majority of our customers do not exceed their usage amount in a month and Cox does not charge you an additional fee if you exceed it. However, if you find that you are exceeding the usage amount for your package, you should check for the following potential causes:

An unsecured wireless home network. If your wireless router does not have security enabled, others outside your home may be using your Internet service. Cox provides a free tool to test the security of your home network. The Home Network Security Check can be accessed by logging into your account via myaccount.cox.net which will place you into Internet Tools. From there, simply select the Home Network tab

A computer virus. If your computer is infected with a virus, it may be transmitting large amounts of data without your knowledge. Cox strongly advocates Internet safety and security. That’s why we offer all of our High Speed Internet customers free security software that will help protect your computers. Cox Security Suite Powered by McAfee® will shield you from many viruses, spam, phishing and spyware. It even comes with parental controls.

To download your copy in just a few minutes, simply visit myaccount.cox.net and select the Security Suite tab in Internet Tools.

If after checking for these problems you find that you are still exceeding the usage amount, you may want to consider upgrading to another package that more closely matches your use of the service. Cox’s top High Speed Internet package includes 400 GB per month.

To view your current data usage, follow these easy steps:
1. Visit myaccount.cox.net
2. Sign in with your primary Cox username and password
3. Select the “Data Usage Allowance” tab on the left bar

The Data Usage Meter shows daily and monthly usage for your account starting with the beginning of your billing period. The monthly view shows the usage by month determined by the date of the end of your billing period. Over time, you will be able to see your household usage over the previous 12 months. The Data Usage Meter is only available to primary account users and secondary user accounts with billing access.

Cox usage caps fly in the face of some of the company's ancillary broadband products, one of which claims to offer "unlimited backups." It's not "unlimited" with a usage cap in place.

Cox customers have been technically under an Internet Overcharging scheme limiting usage for well over a year, but enforcement of those usage caps has traditionally been light, with only the most egregious users occasionally getting phone calls from the cable operator.  Some Cox markets still do not have a functioning usage measurement tool.

But there is growing suspicion that may be about to change.  Some Cox customers in Georgia, Arkansas, and Kansas report Cox is contacting them about Internet usage, and in one case in Georgia, shut off an account after the family exceeded their allowance by just 3GB.

“I was 3GB over my 200GB [allowance] and my Internet was temporarily suspended till I called Cox,” writes Stormside, a customer in Warner Robins, Georgia. “They had a ticket number on me and transferred me to [another] department. I was given the spiel about their policies saying they can suspend or cancel my Internet service if I continue to go over the cap.”

After promising to more closely monitor usage, the account was restored.

Cox says you can send 84 million e-mails with their Ultimate package.

Another customer in Pensacola, Fla. experienced the same thing.

“They disabled my Internet due to the cap, and I had to call to get it back up,” shares Compaq255 on the Cox Forum on Broadband Reports.

The usage caps Cox may increasingly enforce leaves customers with two options:

1. Reduce usage to remain within usage allowances;
2. Upgrade to a faster speed package, with a correspondingly larger allowance.

Stormside intends to do the former, Compaq255 the latter.

“I was going to upgrade to the higher package anyway,” Compaq255 says.

Many Cox customers have no idea the company limits their Internet usage, because the usage allowance is only disclosed in buried fine print contained within the company’s lengthy legalese–Acceptable Use Policy.  For customers like Janet Handshire, a Cox customer in Alma, Ark., the first usage cap disclosure she noticed was in a company e-mail.

“Cox sends e-mail to us all of the time, mostly promoting their various services, but I noticed this one because of all of the text,” says Handshire. “I was surprised to discover we even had a usage cap with Cox, and I am completely uninterested in visiting their usage page all the time to figure out whether I am okay with them or not.”

Handshire says she already pays nearly $200 a month to Cox for their triple play package and can’t believe the company is now becoming stingy over Internet usage.

“I have five boys and a husband in this house,” she says. “I already keep track of all the bills and now I have to start tracking how much everyone around here is using the Internet?  I don’t think so.  They are treating this like it is a limited precious resource.”

“The one thing we’ve learned following the broadband story in this country is Internet access is already a cash cow for these companies, but they keep asking for more,” she says.

Current usage allowances with Cox range from 30GB a month for their “starter” package to 250GB a month for their Premier Package.  An Ultimate package in some areas offers even faster speeds with a 400GB allowance, but it’s not available everywhere.