I read a lot of material on a daily basis. Much of that material pertains to FirstNet. I have noticed something about all the hoopla in respect to Opt-In versus Opt-Out and I think most people don’t understand one crucial piece of the entire argument. Let me indulge myself a little bit.

FirstNet is crying out that any and all,States must comply with their interoperability characteristics when it comes to deployment and long-term operations. This is understandable given the nature of the law to create “one network” for Public Safety. The physical build-out of the network, the chosen vendor solutions, and the ability to adopt technical standards is not the issue here – I’m afraid this is where both FirstNet and the Opt-Out players have a failure to communicate. The fact is that the real argument is about each party using the network for their own advantage.

If a State decides to Opt-Out, and FirstNet wants to insure it gets the network that meets its needs as well, then as a designer of the network all I would do is isolate the FirstNet network from the rest of my network using the same footprint. In short, I would isolate the fiber, isolate backhaul and protect edge access for prioritized Public Safety solutions as Priority 1. You can build a lot of fiber into your network; you can also have duplicate backhaul solutions; you can even isolate and encrypt traffic demands right on the handset or radio interface. All other data traffic whether it be Utilities, Transportation, Agriculture or even commercial usage, would be Priority 2 or 3 depending on the States business model. The fact I’m trying to make is that what’s important is the accommodation for both networks within the same infrastructure – this is where everyone is missing the point.

The beauty of Band-14 being owned by Public Safety is not because they get their own isolated network, it’s because they get to be priority on the network they own. Without secondary or tertiary use of the network the Public Safety Broadband Network won’t work — they need the revenue to get the “fully-funded” and “self-sustainment” mandate in the law. The physical demands of hardening and coverage only complement each parties network desires – all boats rise with the tide. The technology is perfectly designed, in fact was designed, for the prioritization, classification, protection and isolation of data traffic patterns. There will be only one physical network, as described in the law, it’s just FirstNet will have its own fiber, its own backhaul, and it’s own encrypted access for the Public Safety Broadband Network – which was the plan all along. FirstNet will even have its own awarded contractor to build their solution as well, but so will the State. The State will use the excess capacity, or “other” assets for their own good, which includes the spectrum. What we are trying to do here is capitalize on the use of the spectrum for what it is intended to be used for – provide more bandwidth than any one stakeholder can use and to generate enough revenue that makes everyone happy.

So everyone stop getting all up in arms about the FirstNet versus the Opt-Out States, the fact remains that it’s really only one infrastructure. If FirstNet wants its own building to support the State’s Public Safety entities, its own fiber, its own access, then so be it have your new contractor deploy it for you. Meanwhile, the State can capitalize on the use of the infrastructure to consolidate its own Public Safety needs, in an adjacent building to FirstNet’s, for the purpose of the State to take advantage of benefits – through a Public Private Partnership – in consolidating State First/Secondary Responders and commercial broadband services throughout its coverage areas. Seems to me to kill two birds with one stone. FirstNet gets its backup solution for communications nationwide and the State gets to use the assets to create jobs, bring in investment and generate revenue for other needed services. Who would complain about that? I would recommend that FirstNet allow the State to build its own network first though, else FirstNet will run out of money fast and with no means to bring in more.

Just some guy and a blog….

We have seen this before with such ventures as Utopia in Utah and Nevada, the SF-RICS, LA-RICS and now the Kentucky Wired Program. They never came close to achieving what they set out to do and some have bitten the dust. It’s all about the business model and how you construct your Public Private Partnership (P3).

The competing bid by Sterne Agee is still the way all the States should follow when trying to deliver their broadband needs. There needs to be a cooperative strategy that includes the wireless Public Safety Broadband Network with the fiber broadband aspect of the deal, doing so increases the amount of services and customers the network can use. It will provide the State with a hardened infrastructure so that its economic engine can thrive while at the same time generating enough revenue to attract private investment. But, there were other issues like the structure of ownership as well.

The only way to get a solid P3 to work for any State, is the need to create an entity that is not reliant upon just one or two entities. We saw similar problems with the BT project in the UK called AirWave, whereas BT was the sole provider of investment for the takeover of the Nation’s Tetra network. The entity itself needs to be able to drive itself and not reminiscent of a game of Jenga. If Governor Bevin wants to get broadband to their rural areas, then they should study the competitive bid from Sterne Agee  – available through FOIA.

Well, well…it seems Mr Steven Brill hit a nerve. I have toiled with the rebuttals from Public Safety (NPSTC), but I’m afraid they are missing the point. It has been more than 4 years since “FirstNet” started – a fact nobody can deny. What NPSTC needs to understand is that it’s not about Public Safety at all. What Mr Brill is trying to convey is that a federal program to deliver such a complex broadband solution nationwide is in disarray. I did not interpret Mr Brill’s comments as an attack on Public Safety, but rather on the lack of real insight into creating the network.

I’ve been in the industry for 30 years and have never seen a network constructed from such a lofty position with such ambitious goals without first coming up with a business plan. I would never tell a Fire or Police Chief how to construct a police force and how to manage them, and you can take my advice or not, the fact remains we can’t construct a broadband network from the top-down by a bunch of lawyers. FirstNet was given the task to build the network FOR Public Safety, but if FirstNet hasn’t even constructed a single State by now, how do we expect they will get all 50 plus 6 territories? FirstNet should have built consensus on a business plan that everyone would have accepted before it started vying the carriers for information. It’s not FirstNet’s fault, it’s the lawmakers who think that they can write a law, have the President sign it, and then everything will just magically happen. As I stated from the very beginning, we need a business plan. Coming up with an “objectives based RFP” is not a business plan, it’s an invitation for the carriers to come in and takeover. So if there is anybody to blame for the past 4 years, and nothing to show for it, it lays directly at the feet of FirstNet…not Public Safety.

Any network veteran will tell you that this whole solution should have started small and based on an entrepreneurial spirit of creativity scripted within a business plan that builds efficiencies into product introductions to meet the demands of its users. As I hinted to from the very start, FirstNet was never going to succeed taking this route and I’m afraid it is only going to get worse from here.

FirstNet will award their RFP to a carrier consortium and program manager – someone like AT&T partnered with General Dynamics purely because of its size and scope. This will only create more confusion, animosity and resentment throughout the market to which Public Safety will be on the receiving end, especially if “Public Safety” thinks that 4 years is not long enough to build even one State solution. Such blindness only makes Public Safety look like they don’t know what they are doing – which is exactly the case – they don’t. After all, I wouldn’t try to design, build, operate and maintain a Police force, thus I don’t expect Public Safety to know how to build a broadband network, especially one so complex. But it was Public Safety that put their trust in FirstNet — it is FirstNet that is not delivering here.

FirstNet failed to realize that you can’t build this network from the top down and it definitely can’t be built without even analyzing your market of users and the product offerings you need to sell. You can spend all the money you want on putting together a federal level organization to design, build, operate and maintain the entire nationwide solution, that doesn’t mean anyone at the State level will trust that you have what’s best for their local presence. You can’t just come in and expect Public Safety is going to buy an add on service to which they are already getting for cheaper. It doesn’t matter what the Public Safety guys say they need. Such interaction between the Federal and State governments will never fall under the decision matrix of Public Safety – it will always fall upon the Governor level (another layer that isn’t in the business of building broadband networks). The Governor will always do what’s best for the entire State and its fiscal standing. The fact remains that the State will be responsible for its portion of building its own network…it’s written in the law…they just don’t know how much yet.

If NPSTC has anyone to complain about, it should be the stewards of their solution – Mr. Brill is just stating the obvious from an outsider’s point of view. Anyone who has been closely tied to everything going on with FirstNet are positioned well within the frying pan and thus have a hard time trying to get back out. Essentially, Public Safety is so informed that they have lost focus on the bigger picture and what the perception is from the outside. For example: large government program worth Billions, not being advertised to well to the general public, and being pushed forward during an election cycle. It’s easy to see how someone can state how bloviated this has become.

In the end, there is one thing for sure…. FirstNet needs to change….and they need to do it now if they want to survive through this election cycle. Did you ever ask yourself why it is written in the law that FirstNet would be an “Independent Agency” within the Federal Government? I can tell you it wasn’t because they had confidence in the federal way of doing business, else they wouldn’t have wanted it “Independent”. At this point though, FirstNet, needs to scrap its notion of building a large carrier type of solution and focus on the States (a State) to design, build, operate and maintain a true infrastructure solution from the ground up that supports broadband. FirstNet also needs to sever its ties to the carriers and come clean. The carrier business model will not work in this instance – apples and oranges. If you want the carriers to improve, just introduce competition and I can guarantee you they will move on.

But what the hell do I know I’m….

Just some guy and a blog….

Just got finished reading Steven Brill’s article entitled “The $47 Billion Network That’s Already Obsolete” (Sep 2016) Mr. Brill makes some obvious claims of federal government waste and unraveled requirements that have become the hallmark of a federally driven program. I don’t know about you, but have you notice that when anyone suggest the government has a solution for a problem, everyone rolls their eyes to the back of their heads?

The very same topic has been covered throughout my blog since the beginning – only now people are starting to notice. Maybe it’s the upcoming elections; maybe the fallibility of federal programs; or maybe it’s just plain old greed. The fact is what it is – we’re 15 years after 9-11; we’re 4.5 years since the law was passed; we’re 4 years since FirstNet was created and we still have nothing to show for it.

Had this one little man’s idea of pushing the Opt-Out, using the Public Private Partnership, been listened to in the first place, we wouldn’t be here. At the minimum we would have seen one, if not two, of our first State’s coming online already. I had envisioned as much as ten States having at least 75% of their networks completed….but noooo…..what an asinine idea for anyone to believe that such a grand solution, for such a complex requirement, could possibly come from a lonely little blogger, especially one that the Federal Government couldn’t come up with on their own? Well, I told you so. The fact is, and Mr. Brill points this out, the network that FirstNet is touting is in fact “obsolete” already. Welcome to 5G! And by the way, its gonna cost you more!

The fact remains the same, the only way this is going to get built is from the ground-up through a State initiative. With the kind of cuts that will be forthcoming, with a new administration, I can almost guarantee you that FirstNet’s budget will be cut and the States will be given the go-ahead to construct their own Public Safety Networks on the D-Block spectrum on their own dime. If that doesn’t happen, then the carriers will improve their own bottom-line ten-fold – and Public Safety will get nothing that they don’t already have. There is a solution though.

FirstNet needs to get ahead of the game and create templates for design, project schedules and frameworks for State driven RFPs, then help organize the State’s to start construction of their own Opt-Out solution. If FirstNet doesn’t take these steps, then their very existence will be scant for future dealings – in short, you don’t take these steps you will be disbanded. What do you honestly believe the outcome is going to be when FirstNet announces a carrier relationship solution for Public Safety Broadband? Do you think it’s all going to be hunky-dory and everyone is just going to go along with the plan? Do you think it won’t become a contention of legal debate for years to come? Do you really think it won’t be impacted with a change of administration? The only thing FirstNet has created so far, is a centralized socialistic voice of one-size-fits-all. If FirstNet wants to show any hint of success, it needs to start engaging the States to build their own solution and stop screwing around. Just because the carriers believe that if they delay, and demonstrate contention in the ranks, that they will get the spectrum through an “I told you so” event, they will be sorely mistaken.

FirstNet is the end-game for any national carrier that tries to take its reigns away from Public Safety. The political quagmire associated with trying to build such a network solution will be catastrophic for even the largest of carriers. Can you imagine all the lawsuits if States are pushed towards such a solution? FirstNet has the makings for the worst financial boondoggle in the history of the United States – if not the world.

What about the States though?

Well, each State has the ability to use its own resources to advertise a Public Private Partnership(P3) RFP to construct their statewide solutions. Through the P3 the State will get its funding, its self-sustainment, its ownership control, revenue, and a solid Public Safety infrastructure for the foreseeable future. As I have stated in past articles, a State doesn’t need FirstNet – FirstNet needs the State.

If FirstNet continues down this path who loses? Public Safety loses. Who wins? The carriers do. The carriers will eventually get all the spectrum because “they are the only ones that know how to build a broadband network” – right? I’ve been in the telecom industry for 30 years, the carriers don’t even build their own networks. What makes you think they can do any better than just an entrepreneurial blogger? After all, it was a lonely little railroad worker, turned scientist, that created the first telegraph networks that became the catalyst to all the world’s telecommunication infrastructures. It wasn’t the government that decided it needed to talk to other stations along the railroads. The government didn’t just put out an RFP expecting everything would be great. It was a lonely little citizen who felt he needed to create a solution for a problem he faced daily. You can’t get more “ground-up” than that. Today’s FirstNet solution is no different. Stop thinking about the end-game, the entire solution, and the limelight of control — start focusing on the seed and where you need to plant it.

I continue to push the idea that the State needs to take hold of its own destiny and move on. Stop waiting for something from the federal government that will never come. The FirstNet solution is so misconstrued, that its downfall will be a long slow collapse of bureau-crap-tic solutions festering away with the stench of wasted money, time, and resources only to be savored by long-term overly paid government workers that will have nothing to show for it but a pension of poor healthcare benefits.

Just some guy and a blog…..