In reality, there is a certain synchronicity to merging images of an era that saw the origination of television with the reality of fiber-optics “lightning express” [in this case, Lightband] into the future of telecommunications. It is the kind of creative, futuristic thinking that fueled 1950s imaginations in Disney’s Tomorrowland, that erupted and amazed in the futuristic exhibits at World Fairs. Many of us are old enough to have read about “the future” of technology in books by authors like Ray Bradbury or Isaac Asimov. Yesterday’s imaginings turned reality today.

Tuesday evening, the Clarksville Department of Electricity stepped into the future with the unveiling of their new logo, sign, branding and price information for their new Fiber to the Home (FTTH) services that place Clarksville, Tennessee on the cutting edge — nationwide. CDE Lightband is the culmination of years of planning and design, an informational campaign, and legalities including an endorsement by the voters of Clarksville on the referendum question that allowed this far-reaching development to occur.

CDE officials screened a brief video on state of the art high definition televisions that opened with images of cave art, moving quickly forward to those cumbersome console TV sets and the screens with rounded corners, on to early computers with a single “brain” filling an entire room, culminating with today’s pinpoint size fiber optic lines and microchips.

CDE President Kenneth Spradlin said that the CDE was founded 70 years ago based on  “consumer dissatisfaction with what was and a need to look to the future.” He added that a similar displeasure with existing services combined with the growing needs of a community poised for development and already experiencing massive growth made this project a idea whose time had come.

This is the largest deployment of fiber optics in America, according to Cornerstone Information Systems, another of the Project Partners.

“There are few projects anywhere [in America] as ambitious as this,” said Cornerstone’s David Smith. And with those words, a diverse group of city officials, community leaders and businesspeople toured the new facility on Madison Street, eyeing banks of towers, miles of wiring, office space, and potential studio space (not on the plans yet but a distinct possibility) large enough for the inevitable growth this service will experience.

Stephen Hopkins, Vice-President of Telecommunications, CDE Project Partners, said the first customers would be able to access this new network in March, 2008.

The design, construction and implementation of the city-wide project continues to involve companies such as Atlantic Engineering, TCC, World Wide Packet, ETI, Kassena, and Cornerstone Information Systems.

As for the service packages, more details will be coming soon but  judging by preliminary numbers Charter customers would see a savings of around $40 per month for their combined phone, internet, and cable TV service.

When will you be able to get the new CDE Lightband services?

Rotary Park Service Area

Rotary Park to Exit 11

• Construction Completion: January 2008
• Service Available: March 2008

Barkers Mill Service Area

Exit 1 to around Outlaw Field

• Construction Completion: April 2008
• Service Available: June 2008

Dunbar Cave Service Area

Exit 8 to Needmore to the Red River

• Construction Completion: March 2008
• Service Available: May 2008

New Providence Service Area

Red River to 374 and 101st includes Peachers Mill and Lafayette Roads

• Construction Completion: April 2008
• Service Available: June 2008

Primary Service Area (Downtown)

Downtown and APSU areas

• Construction Completion: April 2008
• Service Available: June 2008

Ladd Service Area

Fort Campbell BLVD north of 101st Division Parkway to Tiny Town Road

• Construction Completion: May 2008
• Service Available: July 2008

District Service Area

South Clarksville, roughly Madison to Highway 13 to 41A Bypass.

• Construction Completion: August 2008
• Service Available: October 2008

St. Bethlehem Service Area

101st Division Parkway to North of 1-24 around exit 4

• Construction Completion: May 2008
• Service Available: July 2008

East Service Area

Hospital Area to Red River and 374

• Construction Completion: October 2008
• Service Available: December 2008

Edgeton Service Area

Fort Campbell BLVD North of Tiny Town Road

• Construction Completion: May 2008
• Service Available: July 2008

The standard disclaimers also apply here…

Construction Dates and service availability time-lines are subject to change.

To confirm what area you are in check the map (PDF)

Clarksville Online’s Editor Christine Piesyk contributed to this piece also.

They already control your Internet connection and now want to use that gatekeeper status to be able generate more income for themselves by charging content providers for faster access to your Internet connection. If you speed up some, it goes without saying that you must slow down others. Net Neutrality is important to ensure that small independent sites like Clarksville Online can continue to compete and provide an important alternative voice to corporate media.

Clarksville, TN will not be at the mercy of these corporations with alternatives available like CDE’s Fiber to the Home service which is coming soon.

PBS’s program NOW did a show on this important subject. Lets take a look.

Click here to view the embedded video.

The Save the Internet Campaign compiled a frequently asked questions (F.A.Q) to help explain why Net Neutrality is important, why you should care, and steps you can take. Check it out:

What is this about?

This is about Internet freedom. “Network Neutrality” — the First Amendment of the Internet — ensures that the public can view the smallest blog just as easily as the largest corporate Web site by preventing Internet companies like AT&T from rigging the playing field for only the highest-paying sites.

But Internet providers like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are spending millions of dollars lobbying Congress to gut Net Neutrality. If Congress doesn’t take action now to implement meaningful Net Neutrality provisions, the future of the Internet is at risk.

To learn more, read Network Neutrality: Fact vs. Fiction

What is Network Neutrality?

Network Neutrality or “Net Neutrality” for short, is the guiding principle that preserves the free and open Internet.

Net Neutrality ensures that all users can access the content or run the applications and devices of their choice. With Net Neutrality, the network’s only job is to move data, and not to choose which data to privilege with higher quality service. Net Neutrality prevents the companies that control the wires from discriminating against content based on its source or ownership.

Net Neutrality is the reason why the Internet has driven economic innovation, democratic participation, and free speech online. It’s why the Internet has become an unrivaled environment for open communications, civic involvement and free speech.

Learn more in Net Neutrality 101.

Who wants to get rid of Net Neutrality?

The nation’s largest telephone and cable companies — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner — want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won’t load at all.

They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video — while slowing down or blocking their competitors.

These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services — or those from big corporations that can afford the steep tolls — and leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.

What’s at stake?

Decisions being made now will shape the future of the Internet for a generation. Before long, all media — TV, phone and the Web — will come to your home via the same broadband connection. The dispute over Net Neutrality is about who’ll control access to new and emerging technologies.

On the Internet, consumers are in ultimate control — deciding between content, applications and services available anywhere, no matter who owns the network. There’s no middleman. But without Net Neutrality, the Internet will look more like cable TV. Network owners will decide which channels, content and applications are available; consumers will have to choose from their menu.

The Internet has always been driven by innovation. Web sites and services succeeded or failed on their own merit. Without Net Neutrality, decisions now made collectively by millions of users will be made in corporate boardrooms. The choice we face now is whether we can choose the content and services we want, or whether the broadband barons will choose for us.

What’s happening in Congress?

Congress is now considering a major overhaul of the Telecommunications Act. The telephone and cable companies are filling up congressional campaign coffers and hiring high-priced lobbyists. They’ve set up “Astroturf” groups like “Hands Off the Internet” to confuse the issue and give the appearance of grassroots support.

On June 8, the House of Representatives passed the “Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006,” or COPE Act (H.R. 5252) — a bill that offers no meaningful protections for Net Neutrality. An amendment offered by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), which would have instituted real Net Neutrality requirements, was defeated by intense industry lobbying.

It now falls to the Senate to save the free and open Internet. Fortunately, Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) have introduced a bipartisan measure, the “Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006″ (S. 2917), that would provide meaningful protection for Net Neutrality.

On June 28, the Snowe-Dorgan bill was introduced as an amendment to Sen. Ted Stevens’ (R-Alaska) major rewrite of the Telecom Act (S.2686) [now HR.5252]. The committee split down the middle on the measure, casting a tie vote of 11-11.

Though meaningful Net Neutrality protections were not added to Stevens’ bill, the fight for Internet freedom is gaining serious momentum as the bill moves toward the full Senate later this year. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has threatened to place a “hold” on the entire legislation unless it reinstates Net Neutrality and prevents discrimination on the Internet.

Heading into August recess, the Senate Commerce Committee reclassified the Stevens bill as the “Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunities Reform Act” (HR.5252) to speed it to conference committee should it pass.

Call Congress today: No senator can in good conscience vote against Internet freedom and with the telecom cartel.

Isn’t this just a battle between giant corporations?

No. Small business owners benefit from an Internet that allows them to compete directly — not one where they can’t afford the price of entry. Net Neutrality ensures that innovators can start small and dream big about being the next EBay or Google without facing insurmountable hurdles. Without Net Neutrality, startups and entrepreneurs will be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay for a top spot on the Web.

But Net Neutrality doesn’t just matter to business owners. If Congress turns the Internet over to the telephone and cable giants, everyone who uses the Internet will be affected. Connecting to your office could take longer if you don’t purchase your carrier’s preferred applications. Sending family photos and videos could slow to a crawl. Web pages you always use for online banking, access to health care information, planning a trip, or communicating with friends and family could fall victim to pay-for-speed schemes.

Independent voices and political groups are especially vulnerable. Costs will skyrocket to post and share video and audio clips, silencing bloggers and amplifying the big media companies. Political organizing could be slowed by the handful of dominant Internet providers who ask advocacy groups or candidates to pay a fee to join the “fast lane.”

Isn’t the threat to Net Neutrality just hypothetical?

No. By far the most significant evidence regarding the network owners’ plans to discriminate is their stated intent to do so.

The CEOs of all the largest telecom companies have made clear their intent to build a tiered Internet with faster service for the select few companies willing or able to pay the exorbitant tolls.Network Neutrality advocates are not imagining a doomsday scenario. We are taking the telecom execs at their word.

So far, we’ve only seen the tip of the iceberg. But numerous examples show that without network neutrality requirements, Internet service providers will discriminate against content and competing services they don’t like.

• In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers from using any rival Web-based phone service.
• In 2005, Canada’s telephone giant Telus blocked customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to the Telecommunications Workers Union during a labor dispute.
• Shaw, a big Canadian cable TV company, is charging an extra $10 a month to subscribers in order to “enhance” competing Internet telephone services.
• In April, Time Warner’s AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com — an advocacy campaign opposing the company’s pay-to-send e-mail scheme.

This type of censorship will become the norm unless we act now. Given the chance, these gatekeepers will consistently put their own interests before the public good.

Won’t more regulations harm the free Internet? Shouldn’t we just let the market decide?

Writing Net Neutrality into law would preserve the freedoms we currently enjoy on the Internet. For all their talk about “deregulation,” the cable and telephone giants don’t want real competition. They want special rules written in their favor.

Either we make rules that ensure an even playing field for everyone, or we have rules that hold the Internet captive to the whims of a few big companies. The Internet has thrived because revolutionary ideas like blogs, Wikipedia or Google could start on a shoestring and attract huge audiences. Without Net Neutrality, the pipeline owners will choose the winners and losers on the Web.

The cable and telephone companies already dominate 98 percent of the broadband access market. And when the network owners start abusing their control of the pipes, there will be nowhere else for consumers to turn.

Who’s part of the SavetheInternet.com Coalition?

The SavetheInternet.com coalition is made up of hundreds of groups from across the political spectrum that are concerned about maintaining a free and open Internet. No corporation or political party is funding our efforts. We simply agree to a statement of principles in support of Internet freedom.

The coalition is being coordinated by Free Press, a national, nonpartisan organization focused on media reform and Internet policy issues. Please complete this brief survey if your group would like to join this broad, bipartisan effort to save the Internet.

Who else supports Net Neutrality?

The supporters of Net Neutrality include leading high-tech companies such as Amazon.com, Earthlink, EBay, Google, Intel, Microsoft, Skype, Vonage and Yahoo. Prominent national figures such as Internet pioneer Vint Cerf, Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig and FCC Commissioner Michael Copps have called for stronger Net Neutrality protections.

Editorial boards at the New York Times, Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury News, Seattle Times, St. Petersburg Times and Christian Science Monitor all have urged congress to save the Internet.

What can I do to help?

Sign the SavetheInternet.com petition.

Call your members of Congress today and demand that Net Neutrality be protected.

Encourage groups you’re part of to sign the “Internet Freedom Declaration of 2007″.

Show your support for Internet freedom on your Web site or blog.

Tell your friends about this crucial issue before it’s too late.

* Save the internet’s network neutrality FAQ included without permission. Cartoon by Matt Wuerker  originally created for http://www.itsournet.org/  used here with minor modifications.

FIBER OPTICS, Lighting our Future video. Hear local residents talk about how the Chelan County PUD’s fiber network in Washington State is working for them (6-minutes).This video is also applicable for other communities, like ours who are considering, or planning on building, a municipal fiber network.

CDE has a 70 plus year track record of proven ability to deliver low cost, reliable, electrical services to the residents of Clarksville. They will use that experience in delivering the telecommunications services that the voters of Clarksville will authorize them to deliver in November.

They are building the fiber network not because of the additional services, which will be used to reduce the costs of building, maintaining, and operating the network. Instead they will be laying fiber to enhance their ability to deliver advanced electrical products and other services that cater to the user like select billing. Catering to the customer is something that is alien to Charter Cable.

Competition is competition; it doesn’t matter that CDE is a public entity, if it saves the consumer money and provides more reliable service. 

In Fayetteville, TN Charter cables delivers their expand basic cable service to residents for $28.30 per month. In Clarksville, TN it’s $49.50 per month. The only difference is in Fayetteville, TN  Charter has competition from the local power provider. That’s a savings of $21.65 per month or $259.80 a year. I don’t know about you but I sure could find a use for that money.

Charter receives benefits from being a private company that CDE doesn’t get, and visa versa. But, you won’t hear CDE whining about them being at a disadvantage with Charter, and in certain areas they really are. I frequently hear Charter whining about the possibility of them having to “GASP” actually compete. Competition is the lifeblood of capitalism. Without it you have a monopoly, duopoly, or oligopoly none of which benefit Clarksville residents

CDE doesn’t receive taxpayer funds. This 88 million is not being taken from the City budget or from your property or sales taxes. It’s actually 56 million over 20 years; the 88 million figure quoted by Charter includes interest over the 20-year term. If CDE pays it off quicker than 20 years then the costs will be reduced. I bet you will find this venture will generate enough money to pay it off much quicker than that.

Out of 665 Public power systems offering telecommunication services, only 4 have ceased offering them. That’s .006%, which have stopped offering their telecommunications services. 99.994% are meeting their cities expectation or exceeding them.

CDE has promised that they will deliver the same level of service with their telecommunications services, as they do for their electrical service. Service will be available 24×7x365. If you have a problem at 3am they will fix it that day. This means no 3-week outages as are commonly experienced with Charter cable. That promise covers their Video, Data, and Telephone services.

The taxpayers are not obligated with a revenue bond. Oh but Charter will say but taxpayers are ratepayers. Which is true if you twist the facts. But in reality that is the primary difference between a Revenue bond, which CDE is getting, and a General Obligation bond.

I may have this number off somewhat as I am quoting it from memory but 83-84 cents of every dollar you pay to CDE goes to pay for the electricity purchased from TVA. So only 16-17 cents of every dollar goes to delivering the service, paying employees, for maintenance, and upgrades on their delivery network.

CDE’s current debt load is an amazingly low $7.9 million. Most electrical companies run debt loads between 100-200 million. Sounds like CDE can live in a budget, unlike Charter, which has a 19 Billion-dollar debt load.

CDE revenues come from city residents, and I would much rather see our hard earned cash going to benefit the local economy than being shipped off by Charter to Washington State and Paul Allen’s bank account.

CDE is a local business, operated for local people, by local people. They deserve the chance to provide us the advanced services that we as a community need for the future. Charter had their chance, and they failed Clarksville and it’s residents on their services, price, and reliability.

If Charter meets consumers demand for new products, if their service is reliable, and/or they charge less, then they can successfully compete against a public entity. They are currently doing so in 7 municipalities in Tennessee and they are making a profit in each one. Charter has not left one single market where a public entity is offering telecommunications services.

Charter’s services are not currently reliable. Charter’s services are not priced competitively. Charter’s product offerings lagged behind other areas in Tennessee and the nation, that is until CDE started talking about building Fiber to the Home and offering additional services. Charter neglected our City. It’s time they paid the piper for that.

Private enterprise has proven that they are not interested in breaking Charter’s stranglehold on this town, so CDE has stepped up and offered to do so at the request of their customers.

It would be different if CDE was saying let us be the only provider of Telecommunications services for Clarksville residents. Not one single voter would approve that; even I would oppose that. But the voters should approve choice and competition in our local marketplace on November 7th. Vote yes for CDE to offer additional services.

We have all seen the ads by Charter opposing the Clarksville Department of Electricity offering Cable TV, Phone, and extremely high speed Internet services. They are misleading and for the most part inaccurate.

Charter is not arguing that competition is not good for the consumer and the residents of Clarksville. They are not arguing against the claims that their prices are high, or that they provide poor service to city residents. Instead Charter is attempting to use your fear to sway your reason, to make you vote against your own interests. The residents of Clarksville can not allow that to happen. Their argument basically boils down to spend as much money as you wish, on whatever you wish, just don’t allow CDE to compete with us.

CDE has told me that the arguments they are hearing against them entering the telecommunications business are almost identical to the arguments which City residents heard 70 years ago when Clarksville, TN bought out the private electrical provider and founded CDE. Can anyone say Deja Vu? Unlike the residents 70 years ago we can look at our own history for guidance. Watch this video and see what you think:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it.