News
FirstNet should not rely on state and local governments as key network-infrastructure partners, Mirgon says
LAS VEGAS—State and local governments will have key roles in the usage and adoption of the FirstNet system, but history indicates that they are not reliable enough to be major infrastructure partners for the nationwide public-safety broadband network, according to Richard Mirgon, a consultant and former president of the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials (APCO).
“You can’t depend on states and locals for long-term, guaranteed service,” Mirgon said last Friday during an IWCE session examining potential public-private partnerships.
As evidence, Mirgon noted problems that have arisen in three states—Colorado, Nevada and Mississippi—that established statewide LMR systems based on one business model, only to have their state officials and/or lawmakers call for significant changes during the past few years.
“They built networks for public safety and said, ‘You come, and we’ll provide,’” Mirgon said. “All of a sudden, the legislature has said, ‘Why are we paying for this? We want the user to [pay for it].’”
That philosophical change has proven to be problematic in Mississippi, Mirgon said.
“Mississippi specifically had the problem of trying to raise fees to broaden the system, and they couldn’t raise the fees,” he said.
In addition, history has shown that states constructing networks has not led to interoperability, Mirgon said.
“We built proprietary systems in the states,” Mirgon said. “Even when we got P25, we deployed it, and we still can’t talk to each other. We’ve got to be doing it better, and we can’t do it on the state and local levels.
“Now, I will concede to the point that there’s some excellent infrastructure out there that can be used, and there are probably some states that have got some processes that can be used. And there will come a time to expand this network … that you will have to use local resources. But, again, it comes with a lot of pitfalls, a lot of regulatory issues, legislative issues and financial issues.”
And the instability of state governments pales in comparison to the politics of local government, where the opinions of a relatively small number of people can have a significant impact on policy. As an example, Mirgon cited Los Angeles, where the Los Angeles Regional Interoperable Communications System (LA-RICS) is seeing its planned public-safety LTE network jeopardized by firefighter concerns that cell towers deployed near fire stations would be a health hazard.
“Three years just to work with site acquisition and try to figure out how to deploy it, and one of the biggest impediments were the firefighters unions,” Mirgon said. “Their comment was simply a matter of, ‘We think the RF on the building is going to give us cancer.’ Whether you believe it or not, it was an impediment to the process.
“FirstNet cannot take that kind of time to move forward, because part of the success of this network is being able to have users paying fees that bring in revenue to be able to refresh and deploy in those areas where the economic model may not be as positive as it is in places like New York City and LA.”
While speaking before the Senate Commerce Committee on March 11, FirstNet Chairwoman Sue Swenson noted the fact that the LA-RICS project revealed that leveraging government-owned assets would not be as simple as expected, but she did not provide any details about the matter during the hearing.
There is no one way to build
There is no one way to build this network. If local and state governments have sustainable infrastructure appropriate for NPSBN utilization-it can and should be used.
Public entities have stood up and supported LMR RAN networks for decades. I strongly disagree with the premise that FirstNet is some new way of doing things that cannot be done any other way.
For example the carrier model does not have a very good record of adequate surge capacity, and survivability equal to public safety response needs. If they did we would not be doing this undertaking now. FirstNet is “SO” convinced that no one else knows how to build a public safety network (regardless of the vintage of technology) which is an absurd perspective.
Perhaps the private carrier model influence on the FirstNet Board has blinded them to opportunities. It is offensive to public safety to say this network cannot be built and supported by public safety.
Clearly, the best solution would be a hybrid of public and private assets and joint commitment-period. FirstNet needs to change their own biased paradigm that only a pure carrier like model will succeed.
Take the good from both public and private and build the network. To close out usable infrastructure and assets from either public or private sources will only decrease Opt In (buy in), and increase the development and sustainability costs.
Colorado’s project has been hampered more by FirstNet’s preeminent lack of interest, and their total lack of support for a public modeled system to succeed. FirstNet never intended for a public model to succeed, as that would challenge the rigid bias within its ranks.
And it’s going to be easier
And it’s going to be easier to NOT leverage government-owned assets? Have fun with that business model.
I believe Mr. Mirgon should
I believe Mr. Mirgon should do his homework before making blanket statements. Currently, there is one full-jurisdiction wide public safety LTE network that is operational; the Adams County Colorado pilot project. Of the 18 sites utilized in the project, 17 of them are publicly owned assets. Additionally, we were able to stand up a demonstration Public Safety LTE network in Vail Colorado in 3 weeks by using existing infrastructure that was developed by a public-private partnership. LA-RICS is but one project, in one region of one state that has its own unique circumstances. If anything, Mr. Mirgon’s logic only solidifies the argument that this network will only be built out by working with local and state entities to identify their unique circumstances and develop accordingly. Just as Mr. Mirgon’s blanket assessment fails when put up against the facts, FirstNet’s blanket approach will fail when put up against realty.
Its way past time to end this
Its way past time to end this First Net nonsense.