Our weeklong virtual conference, Ars UNITE, kicked off today with an examination of how city and town governments are going the extra mile to improve residential broadband.

After our feature on the topic—“Fed up, US cities take steps to build better broadband”—we hosted a live discussion with four experts: Blair Levin, a former FCC official who oversaw the development of the National Broadband Plan under President Obama and now the executive director of the Gig.U fiber initiative; Christopher Mitchell, director of the Community Broadband Networks Initiative at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance; Will Aycock, operations manager of Greenlight Community Broadband in Wilson, North Carolina; and Ted Smith, chief of the Civic Innovation office in Louisville, Kentucky.

To wrap up day one, let’s take a look at what readers and experts had to say. After a summary, we’ll post a lightly edited transcript of the live discussion.

“I personally believe that municipalities should create the infrastructure, but not sell the service,” macromorgan wrote in the comment section of our feature. “It should be open for any and all companies (even including the incumbents) to provide service over the publicly owned fibers.”

During the live discussion, several readers wanted to know what can be done to improve rural broadband.

Jean-Luc asked, “How long does the panel feel it's going to take for Telecoms, including Cable companies, to wake up and see how far behind they are in the data services they provide when compared to the rest of the world, or at least realize that capping data is only going to hurt them in the long run?”

“In my experience, they are very good at seeing and acting on of behalf of their own self-interest,” Levin answered. “What is interesting is that the telcos have changed their point of view of the benefits of upgrading to fiber, or at least it appears so. Of course Google Fiber and city efforts have a lot to do with that. The next couple years will be telling.”

We also discussed whether municipal fiber networks are generally profitable. Mitchell noted that “a few networks generate far more revenue than expenses—Thomasville, Georgia and Spanish Fork, Utah are prime examples. The norm is for a network's revenues to be roughly in balance with expenses after accounting for depreciation. The overwhelming benefit of community networks is not from monetary profit, though—it is from having a stronger business climate, keeping more money in the pockets of residents through lower bills, having much better customer support, and keeping more money in the community rather than sending millions of dollars to Philadelphia or New York or Dallas [the headquarters of Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T].”

One reader asked what keeps public broadband networks from deteriorating as some water and sewer networks have. “Data networks, unlike sewers, are generally profitable if done right in the first place,” Smith replied. “The money to upgrade flows from the growing demand for the service.”

Greenlight in Wilson, North Carolina was created after the community was unable to get what it needed from private Internet service providers.

“We initially reached out to incumbent providers in our community to explore ways we could partner to bring this infrastructure to our citizens,” Aycock said, when asked if Wilson pursed other options. “Unfortunately, we were unable to find a model that worked at the time so we had to build it ourselves.”

The challenges of improving broadband in rural America and hard-to-reach areas came up repeatedly. “I think cooperatives—both rural and electric—are the best opportunity to serve those areas,” Mitchell said. “Or a county that commits to serving everyone with a muni network. The alternative is to subsidize a provider like Frontier or CenturyLink that has refused to invest in their networks or provide good customer service.”

“Many municipal electric providers also have infrastructure in surrounding rural areas,” Aycock pointed out. “This is true in Wilson, and we have begun the process of expanding the fiber network out of the City into these more rural areas of the county.”

Although plans for many fiber networks have been announced, Levin said it’s far too early to declare success. “I am very excited about the fiber announcements, but no one should uncork the champagne,” he said. “If Google changes its mind, if cities don't focus on the long term (which is hard), or if the fundamental economics shift, due to, for example, mergers changing the economics of related businesses, like multi-channel video, the competitive picture could change and the announcements could end up never becoming real. But we are in much better position than we were a year ago.”

The complete transcript

As promised, here’s a full transcript of today’s discussion with the experts. It has been lightly edited for clarity, and questions from Ars and Ars readers are bolded for easier browsing.

Jon Brodkin: Hello Ars readers, welcome to our expert panel on how cities and towns are working to make broadband better.

Today we're going to have four panelists: Blair Levin, a former FCC official who oversaw development of the National Broadband Plan under President Obama and is now executive director of the Gig.U fiber initiative; Christopher Mitchell, director of the Community Broadband Networks Initiative at the Institute for Local Self-Reliance; Will Aycock, operations manager of Greenlight Community Broadband in Wilson, NC.; and Ted Smith, chief of the Civic Innovation office in Louisville, KY. I’ll be asking the panelists questions but feel free to ask questions of your own.

I live in a small community in the heart of Wisconsin where there is very little broadband infrastructure actually developed. If a community wanted to develop their own municipal broadband offerings how should they go about doing it in places with poor infrastructure? Additionally, what do you believe should be done to increase broadband availability to citizens living in rural areas? I live 5 miles outside of town and my only Internet offerings are Dial-up, Satellite or a 3G based service. I'm currently using the 3G service and it's very good for what I need, but as time goes on the service won't be able to meet my bandwidth needs. Who do you think should be driving providers to reach out to those of us with such limited options? (via Sam N.)

Christopher Mitchell: Sam N - I'm familiar with Wisc and I'm sorry to say that the state has barriers to municipal networks. I hope you are able to let your elected officials know that the existing providers aren't meeting your needs. If you have rural electric or telephone coops (already there or nearby) then you can approach them. Many coops are offering fiber service in rural areas across the U.S.

Blair Levin: As to Sam N's question about rural, there are a number of federal programs that loan money to or subsidize rural deployments. While these are useful, I also think we should be doing more to experiment with using a lot of unused spectrum in rural areas, such as with white spaces, to upgrade the bandwidth offerings.

Rural telcos have successfully used federal programs to offer much better connectivity in some areas. There is still a lot to do with anchor institutions, such as schools and libraries. While we need a lot more fiber to those locations, we can also expand the high quality coverage with spectrum, as West Virginia did with a white spaces experiment.

Mitchell: @Sam M - you can also encourage your local government to begin investing in some fiber and conduit because the barrier is not total in Wisconsin. As in most places, the barriers discourage investment but often do not totally prevent it.

Ted Smith: Rural communities have some great advantages in that they can often leverage mechanisms like cooperatives to act as the financial and customer service facility to provide service. Of course working out rates will be the trick but the flexibility and lace of commercial resistance should be a plus.

Brodkin: Here's a question for Will Aycock. Operating a fiber network must be a complicated task. Was there a big learning curve and how did Wilson gain the tech expertise needed to pull it off?

Will Aycock: Although we were among the first municipalities to launch a FTTH [fiber-to-the-home] network, there were many who came before us and many FTTH networks were well established before we even got started. Organizations such as Pulaski, TN and BVU shared information and provided an example to guide the way. We have also been very fortunate to have many highly talented team members who have helped us learn as we go and make Greenlight a success.

What keeps these public broadband networks from deteriorating over time due to use of public funds? Water and sewer have deteriorated through out cities for the last couple of decades. What makes this public utility any different? (via Sandwichman)

Smith: Data networks, unlike sewers, are generally profitable if done right in the first place. The money to upgrade flows from the growing demand for the service.

Mitchell: @Sandwichman - Municipal electric utilities have over 100 years of evidence showing that local governments can maintain this infrastructure. Look at the privately owned telephone networks - the use of public funds has little to do with whether an infrastructure continues to meet community needs. The question is whether the infrastructure owner is accountable to residents and businesses.

Brodkin: Here's a question for Ted. Louisville recently awarded fiber franchises to three companies, including two that plan residential deployments. What is the current status of these projects and how is the city helping them forward?

Smith: In Louisville, we have made the initial decision to attract private telco's and open access operators. This means we have interested parties but the timeline is theirs since they bear ALL risk.

How long does the panel feel it's going to take for Telecoms, including Cable companies, to wake up and see how far behind they are in the data services they provide when compared to the rest of the world, or at least realize that capping data is only going to hurt them in the long run? (via Jean-Luc)

Levin: As to Jean-Luc's question about when will cable and telco's wake up to the benefits of upgrading their networks, in my experience, they are very good at seeing and acting on of behalf of their own self-interest. What is interesting is that the telco's have changed their point of view of the benefits of upgrading to fiber, or at least it appears so. Of course Google Fiber and city efforts have a lot to do with that. The next couple years will be telling.