FeedDon’t tie WiFi plans to anti-crime cameras
March 21, 2006 in The Wire
I’m glad to know that the city is now openly discussing municipal WiFi. What displeases me it learning that there’s some effort to link
Folks, the city tried
Why not give the money that would go to these cameras to Peoria’s neighborhood organizations so they can continue to print neighborhood newsletters, money that was cut from the last budget?
March 21st, 2006 at 11:17 am
Hey it all fits. Socialized interent - omni-present cameras….
March 21st, 2006 at 11:20 am
Vonster, I have to congratulate you. You posted a comment less than a minute after I hit the “publish” button. You must have been sitting at your computer hitting the “refresh” button in your browser ever few minutes waiting for me to comment on that article.
Don’t you have a life?
March 21st, 2006 at 11:37 am
Don’t make me go there, blog boy….
March 21st, 2006 at 11:43 am
BTW, you never explained why it’s BAD for the city to get into the hotel business competing against existing business but it’s GOOD for the city to be in the internet business competing against existing business.
Toss aside the usual canards and give me the straight dope.
March 21st, 2006 at 12:05 pm
Goodness knows nothings fights crime quite so well as a newsletter. Gangbangers beware!
March 21st, 2006 at 12:48 pm
Snark, when was the last time you saw a camera in pursuit of a perp?
March 21st, 2006 at 2:01 pm
I’ve already said that I’m not a fan of increased government surveillance, but if that pays to get wireless internet access to problem areas of town in a way that everyone in that area can get internet access… I can live with it. I know that internet access != a computer in every home, but a computer doesn’t = internet either. You have to start somewhere and with full systems as cheap as $299 (even less if you go used), a computer starts looking more affordable when it doesn’t require another $30 a month for broadband.
If there was funding to develop an outreach program to teach neighborhood associations how to use a CMS like Drupal and give them free websites, would anyone be interested?
Bill, would you insist on exercising your right to post eye candy on peoriapundit.com if it meant you wouldn’t be asked to participate in a program like this?
March 21st, 2006 at 2:25 pm
OK, so you’re saying you do want other people’s tax money subsidizing internet access for “the poor” thereby making access an entitlement?
March 21st, 2006 at 2:31 pm
Kevin: Before I answer, let me ask for clarification.
There is talk of creating an online forum through something like Drupal, and in order to be asked to participate, I would have to give up posting pictures on MY ONE DOMAIN, which I own and operate myself?
March 21st, 2006 at 2:35 pm
Vonster: Actually, we are talking about POSSIBLY using people’s tax money to subsidize Internet access for EVERYBODY, much like we use people’s tax money to subsidize roads, bridges,airports,trains, etc.
March 21st, 2006 at 2:36 pm
Fair question.
How about Joseph P. Smith - abducter and killer of 11-year-old Carlie Brucia in Sarasota, FL? The abduction was caught on film. He’s now in prison…and hopefully suffering miserably.
Here’s another great story from Madison.
It’s like anything else. If you know how to use them, they work.
March 21st, 2006 at 3:04 pm
Thanks for coming clean.
This is one reason I oppose this. We are creating yet another in an endless line of ENTITLEMENTS. I don’t need the gubmint to subsidize my broadband and I don’t expect those who don’t give a rat’s ass about the internet to pay for it either.
March 21st, 2006 at 3:07 pm
Actually, I’m in favor of the cameras. Good point, Snarky. And there’s enough network infrastructure already deployed in Peoria to connect almost all of ‘em WITHOUT WiFi. Cool.
March 21st, 2006 at 3:23 pm
Oh, OH! I’ll take this one!
Because cheap/free/socialized Internet is something BILL likes.
Remember, it it isn’t good for Bill, it isn’t good for anyone.
March 21st, 2006 at 3:25 pm
Don’t forget - it isn’t “other people’s money” - It is money from the poor. Remember, “rich people don’t pay taxes.”
March 21st, 2006 at 5:54 pm
I agree cameras can be effective, but so can strong neighborhood associations. Part of being a strong neighborhood association is having good communication and good training. Newsletters are one form of that communication. Newsletters can be used to inform the neighborhood of those who are moving in and out, tell them when the next association meeting is, invite them to be a part of the citizens police academy, etc. — all things that help residents participate in keeping their neighborhoods crime-free. I don’t think we should have to trade one for the other, though, as Bill’s post implies.
March 21st, 2006 at 7:11 pm
The City of Peoria getting into the wi-fi business… As much as a techie like myself would love the ability to get on the Internet anywhere in Peoria, I can’t for the life of me understand:
1. How in the world this is NEEDED in Peoria.
2. What in the heck I would do if I COULD get on the Internet while sitting on the Riverfront/Glen Oak Park/the EVIL Bradley sports complex…
3. What business a City government has in getting involved in this.
If the Civic Center is bad, so is this. If the Gateway Building is bad, so is this. If the propsed Hotel is bad, so is this.
And no, Internet does not fall in the same category as road/bridge maintenance or even rail service.
March 21st, 2006 at 8:33 pm
Keep in mind that the term ‘muni wi-fi’ can be misleading. Many such projects are actually private ventures that don’t rely on your/my tax money at all. In that case, what downside can you see?
March 21st, 2006 at 10:55 pm
Cameras can be helpful, used properly. Los Angeles used them along with Weed and Seed funding to completely turn and crime riddled and drug infested area around. I brought back a dvd on the program from LAPD. Unfortunately so many initiatives are started because folks are excited and then there 1. little follow through, 2. no accountablity, 3. no data gathered and results made available. And newsletters are an important means of communication…also you never know, some of the gang bangers could get a nasty papercut from them. There was money put into the budget for neighborhood newsletter, I believe quite a bit. What surprised neighborhood associations was that it was staggered by the number of years associations had gotten them. Most frustrating is that neighborhoods were not solicited for input regarding changes in a program that directly effected them. We found out at a city council meeting as they voted on it. Not a good way to build trust between we and they. (extra points for the bugs bunny reference)
The mayor has found his litter guy to begin resolving this problem. this is a good thing. Again, a huge neighborhood concern. Neighborhoods were not invited to the table by city staff, until the Neighborhood Alliance pretty much suggested to city staff that perhaps it would be a good idea to be included. Was there simply going to be another mandate and then an expectation that we are suddenly invested? Folks, things could be done much more effectively if people are included in the process. It creates investment, pools ideas and resources, etc. Communication is very very poor. wow that was a tangent, hoping not to get sliver getting off my soapbox.
March 22nd, 2006 at 7:44 am
Neither do “the poor”
March 22nd, 2006 at 8:52 am
What else does a guy who doesn’t allow comments on his own blog have to do?
March 22nd, 2006 at 8:54 am
What else does a guy who bans commenters he doesn’t like have to do? Do you ever plan to be an officer, Freddy?
March 22nd, 2006 at 8:55 am
And what a huge non-sequitur Freddy. Geez!!
March 22nd, 2006 at 8:57 am
From the king of non-sequiters, that’s quite a compliment.
March 22nd, 2006 at 9:03 am
Justify that comment Bill. Name one.
March 23rd, 2006 at 8:57 am
For those interested in what other midwestern cities are doing re: muni wifi, my town Madison WI (I’m a former Peorian) just got the downtown, near east & near west sides up and running. Here’s are some links on how it’s being done. http://www.madcitybroadband.com/
http://www.madison.com/wsj/hom.....mp;ntpid=2
March 23rd, 2006 at 9:13 am
Then where are the damn wheelbarrows!
March 23rd, 2006 at 9:37 am
How much public money went into it and how many jobs were lost among the existing access providers?
March 23rd, 2006 at 10:06 am
Cameras aren’t perfect either, Rauol.
March 23rd, 2006 at 10:56 am
Per the article:
Q. What company is providing the service?
A. Cellnet, working under the local brand name Mad City Broadband, will build and maintain the network as a wholesaler.
Q. Why isn’t it simply a free, open network?
A. The city can’t afford it, Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said.
Some cities have proposed city-funded networks that would work much like a public utility. But that would require substantial taxpayer investment, Cieslewicz said. Madison’s project requires no taxpayer investment.
But by the end of April, two local Internet service providers - Merrimac Communications and ResTech - will be the primary providers.
March 23rd, 2006 at 1:06 pm
I knew you couldn’t.
March 23rd, 2006 at 1:48 pm
No subsidy for “the poor”? Have you contacted the existing local providers to see how many layoffs they expect?
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:26 pm
Cellnet owns and operates the wifi network, but is not an ISP. They are basically wholesaling the product to two Madison based ISPs - Merrimac Communication and ResTech services. How many job losses? Any losses will be made up via the jobs gained by Wifi adding to quality of life and job atmosphere in Madison. Better quality of life = job creation.
March 23rd, 2006 at 3:34 pm
Yup. The streets can go to hell and gangs can rule the neighborhood but hell as long as we got WiFi………. LMAO