Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Broadband topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City staff seek advisory services for "Broadband for San Francisco" project, weighing public and public-private models
Summary
City Department of Technology staff briefed LAFCO on a proposal to pursue advisory services for a citywide broadband initiative, describing equity and economic goals and two primary delivery models (city-owned dark fiber with ISP partners; P3 concessionaire financing); staff said the advisory scope includes a business case, procurement support, and negotiation assistance.
Brian Roberts, a policy analyst with the Department of Technology, briefed the commission on "Broadband for San Francisco," an advisory-services effort to evaluate options for bringing fiber to every home and business in the City and County of San Francisco.
Roberts said the project is guided by three principles: equity (ensuring all residents and businesses have access to fast, affordable broadband), jobs and innovation, and building a future‑proof network. "The guiding principles behind the project are equity...jobs innovation and growth, and investing in the future," Roberts said.
The advisory services under consideration would develop a business case, compare public and public‑private options, and—if the city decides to proceed—assist in procurement and negotiations. Roberts described two primary models under study: a model in which the city owns 'dark fiber' in the street and leases use to ISPs (examples cited: Westminster, where Ting serves as a partner, and Huntsville, where Google Fiber has participated), and a concession/P3 financing model in which a developer would finance, design, build and operate the network while the city retains ownership of assets. Roberts noted Chattanooga and Lafayette, Louisiana, as municipal examples and cited Sandy, Oregon and Utah's Utopia network as further points of comparison.
Commissioners asked how the SFPUC and CleanPowerSF would be involved and whether the Capital Planning Committee includes public or community representation. Roberts said those questions would be fleshed out during the business case phase; he said the advisory group reports to the Capital Planning Committee and that the committee's meetings are publicly noticed but typically staffed by city departments.
Roberts outlined a three‑phase scope: phase 1 (business case and options analysis), phase 2 (preparing and reviewing RFQ/RFP if the city opts to proceed), and phase 3 (assisting negotiations with shortlisted vendors). He said the business case phase would be completed in the first four months of the engagement and that staff expect to select an advisory vendor in November. The presentation was informational; public comment was opened and none was received.
Next steps: staff will continue the business‑case planning and return with further analysis and procurement recommendations if warranted.
