Submitted by Reader (not verified) on Sun, 08/07/2005 - 15:24.
Lafayette was not beaten by BellSouth at the legislature, nor at the local council vote, nor, finally, at the polls. BellSouth (and Cox) can be beaten, repeatedly and thoroughly. They cannot be beat by those who are too timid to try.
In fact, the question does not resolve to giving into some sort of nebulously defined public-private ownership that offers public resources in the service of private profit in deference to manifestly unfair restrictions on local decision-making. The answer rests in the willingness to fight. Lafayette fought for a publicly owned utility on the basis that BellSouth and Cox were "greedy monopolists" and won. They wanted control of their own destiny. I doubt if a passionate battle could have been fought and won in favor of a less well-defined alternative. And I doubt that BellSouth and Cox would have stood aside for any alternative that interrupted their respective monopoly markets whether the beneficiary was public or private. --So a battle being necessary, its best to fight for something that can rouse the community to fight in its own interests.
It really does matter who owns the network and not just in terms of economic development and local pride. It matters for the political fight to win the network in the first place. I really, really worry when folks who should be leading the fight appear to have conceded before the battle is begun.
A bit premature, No?
Lafayette was not beaten by BellSouth at the legislature, nor at the local council vote, nor, finally, at the polls. BellSouth (and Cox) can be beaten, repeatedly and thoroughly. They cannot be beat by those who are too timid to try.
In fact, the question does not resolve to giving into some sort of nebulously defined public-private ownership that offers public resources in the service of private profit in deference to manifestly unfair restrictions on local decision-making. The answer rests in the willingness to fight. Lafayette fought for a publicly owned utility on the basis that BellSouth and Cox were "greedy monopolists" and won. They wanted control of their own destiny. I doubt if a passionate battle could have been fought and won in favor of a less well-defined alternative. And I doubt that BellSouth and Cox would have stood aside for any alternative that interrupted their respective monopoly markets whether the beneficiary was public or private. --So a battle being necessary, its best to fight for something that can rouse the community to fight in its own interests.
It really does matter who owns the network and not just in terms of economic development and local pride. It matters for the political fight to win the network in the first place. I really, really worry when folks who should be leading the fight appear to have conceded before the battle is begun.