Commemoration of the 20th Anniversary of the Chernobyl Disaster – with Lessons for the Triangle
When: Wednesday, April 26th, 7 to 9 pm
Where: McDougle Middle School,
900 Fayetteville Rd., Carrboro
Hosted by NC WARN: Click here for more info
Images from NC-WARN and 180mph.com
One of the issues the soon to be disbanded Technology Committee discussed in the last year was a proposal for digital signs along our bus transit routes to report bus ETAs.
Just a week after voting to dissolve the group, the Town is poised to make an extremely expensive technology mistake.
While other municipalities, like Portsmouth UK, with 305 buses, and Cedar Rapids, with a planned 50 bus deployment, are getting security, digital ETA and both fixed and mobile Internet access, we’re about to spend $950K of Federal monies on a proprietary, single-use system from NextBus, Inc.
From the April 23rd HeraldSun:
Kurt Neufang, interim director of Chapel Hill Transit, which serves Chapel Hill, Carrboro and the UNC campus, said the digital information signs will help make the system more convenient for riders. Neufang said he hopes the signs will be installed and working by August.
“We’re trying to get it done before the beginning of the [fall] semester,” Neufang said.
Federal money helped fund the bulk of the $949,025 project, he said.
Nothing like over paying big bucks for the privilege of proprietary technology lock-in.
Why “for a few dollars less”?
Cedar Rapids is spending $125K on their 7 mile long system covering more stops, with security, mobile access and the capability for their Motorola mesh network to carry police, fire and other first-responder network traffic.
Another example of the wasted opportunity: St. Cloud, Florida
So, for about twice the cost of 14 digital bus stop signs the community of St. Cloud is getting town-wide ubiquitous FREE high speed broadband.
Just a great example of how a citizen’s board can intervene before the Town makes a seriously expensive technology expenditure mistake.
I’ll be trying, as a citizen, to get our Council to try an approach that maximizes the use of these funds, to reconsider NextBus and to substitute a solution that delivers much more for the citizen’s dollar.
[UPDATE:] Saw this article on St. Cloud’s initial rollout. There’s been a few bumps on the road but the first 45 days of service are quite impressive: “50,000 users sessions…just 842 help line calls….3,500 registered users and 176,189 hours of usage.”
The Technology Board discussed educational strategies for making sure the citizenry’s initial expectations aligned with the reality of any initial technology rollout.
[UPDATE:] Spoke with Cedar Rapid’s Five Seasons Parking and Transportation about their system. Short story: ETA works, realtime security video doesn’t, few folk using mobile Internet capability, educational effort ongoing. Portsmouth UK is a model I think we should investigate seriously.
The ‘net is the new Town Commons and the commons are under attack from the same feckless monopolists that charge us $200 billion in excess fees under the ’96 Telecommunications Act provisions to provide high-speed symetrical broadband but instead pilfered the bucks.
The latest offense? Throttling ubiquitous access to ‘net-based services.
Local audio activist and muni-network proponent BrianR has covered the salient issues quite well.
If you want a 2-minute video synopsis, here’s a clip from MyDD.
A Chapel Hill municipally-sponsored network will help keep the commons free for all. Next month, if all goes well, a public forum will be held on the benfits of citizen-owned communications.
Via Bora at Science and Politics
Julius Robert Oppenheimer was born at New York City on this day in 1904. In school he took the math and science classes befitting his early genius, but he really thrived on languages. He was known to learn a language just to read a single book in the original language, and he once accepted a speaking assignment in the Netherlands that allowed only six weeks to learn the language before his presentation. He graduated from Harvard, but language was no barrier to getting his PhD in Germany before taking teaching positions at Berkeley and Cal Tech. He was tapped to head the Manhattan Project to build the first US atomic bombs, but like many of the brilliant characters involved, he chose to examine the ethics of creating such weapons. In the anti-communist furor of the early fifties, Oppenheimer was stripped of his security clearance, which ended his influence on science policy:
This is a world in which each of us, knowing his limitations, knowing the evils of superficiality and the terrors of fatigue, will have to cling to what is close to him, to what he knows, to what he can do, to his friends and his tradition and his love, lest he be dissolved in a universal confusion and know nothing and love nothing.
There must be no barriers for freedom of inquiry. There is no place for dogma in science. The scientist is free, and must be free to ask any question, to doubt any asssertion, to seek for any evidence, to correct any errors.
We knew the world could not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried. Most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture, the Bhagavad Gita: “I am became Death, the destroyers of worlds.” I suppose we all thought that, one way or another.
As long as men are free to ask what they must, free to say what they think, free to think what they will, freedom can never be lost and science can never regress.
The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true.
– All from J. Robert Oppenheimer, 1904 – 1967
Where are today’s Oppenheimers?
With the current mad-ministrations reckless desire to wave a nuclear wand over Iran, and its history of scientific disregard, I guess even an modern-day Oppenheimer might not even be able to dissuade them from their madness.
With one stroke, the Mayor proposes to eliminate two committees whose roles have been controversial at times. Both committees are far from done with their tasks, so it’s hard to understand why Foy wants to kill them off.
Is it because they’re both pushing the envelope?
I sit on both committees, so, from the inside, I find it quite a strange idea that they’re done with their tasks.
Maybe it’s a measure of the Mayor’s inattention to these committee’s work. Hard to say, though I do look forward to his explanation on April 10th.
What are these committees actively doing?
The HWCC has constituted several sub-committees to review equity, environmental and transportation issues.
For instance, the environmental committee is working on a proposal requesting that UNC do a complete, scientific environmental baseline for HWA and its surrounds. We also are researching environmental metrics to apply. Once the baselines and metrics are established, the environmental effects of Carolina North, positive and negative, can be measured over the next 100 years. UNC has an unique opportunity to study “green technologies and techniques” and using the Carolina North project as a driver for research and development.
Without the HWCC, who will advocate for that grand vision on behalf of the citizenry?
As for the Technology committee, yes, municipal networking is moving forward but that’s just a small part of the technology portfolio. Our town is way behind the technology curve and town management, to date, has shown no real interest in moving us forward.
For instance, it was the committee that identified technology-related cost efficiencies and savings in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. Besides that, the committee has discussed and proposed a number of enhancements in: open document standards, open access to governmental data, open infrastructure, accessibility, bi-directional citizen communications, self-service operations, etc.
A number of these proposals have been approved by Council but their implementation lags.
And, to be fairly blunt, whether from disinterest in the subject, lack of time or inability, most of the Council has paid little attention to understanding and utilizing common-place technologies to drive costs out of service delivery, enhance citizen participation in governance, create transparency and generally improve the overall performance of government.
Without the Technology Committee, who will suggest and advocate for these technology-related improvements?
TO: Town Council
FROM: Kevin Foy, Mayor
SUBJECT: Conclusion of Service: Horace Williams Citizens Committee and Technology Committee
DATE: April 10, 2006
The Horace Williams Citizens Committee was established in October 2002 to assist the Council in preparing for deliberations with the University of North Carolina regarding the development of the Horace Williams property.â€
The Technology Committee was formed in 1998 and charged with advising the Council on the formation of a technology plan, including the formation of a town-wide network.
Both Committees have benefited from the work of dozens of citizens, council members, and town staff, and have put countless hours into their work. The Horace Williams Citizens Committee Report and the recent presentation on Wireless Internet from the Technology Committee are evidence of the time and effort involved.
Having completed their missions, I petition the Council that we thank all existing and former committee members for their dedication and public service, and that we now conclude the service of the Technology and Horace Williams Citizens Committees, effective June 30, 2006.
………
If you’re interested in the effective use of technology to enhance our local governance or in retaining a strong, local and non-political voice in the Carolina North mega-development, I suggest you contact the Mayor and Council by April 10th – ask them to keep these citizen voices active.
Cross-posted from Audio Activism
In an effort to bring a free public WiFi network to Chapel Hill and to let our elected representatives know how we feel I’ve created an online petition.
To: Chapel Hill Town Council
The time has come for the Town of Chapel Hill to build a free, community-owned, public municipal network. The network should have wireless access and provide an open, unfiltered, and unmonitored connection to the Internet available to ALL people. It must be maintained by a local nonprofit for the people of Chapel Hill. Not by a private business or corporation.
We request that the Chapel Hill Town Council act swiftly to bring this service to the people.
Sincerely,
The Undersigned
It will be presented to the Town Council as soon as posible. If you are a citizen of Chapel Hill please go to http://www.petitiononline.com/chwifi/petition.html and sign it. Thank you!
From tonight’s agenda, Chapel Hill’s new communications plan the opening paragraph emphasizes a friendly openness:
The Town Council believes that open communication with all citizens is an important community value. The Town of Chapel Hill makes a consistent effort to be a helpful, accessible, consistent, unintimidating and human source of information; and works to assure that those served always feel welcome.
Further on the staff elaborates on
A communication program built on strong themes is more effective than a program with scattered and unrelated messages. Key themes will be communicated frequently in a variety of ways, using simple, repetitive messages. Messages gain power from consistency and repetition.
…
· The Town of Chapel Hill is an ethical, effective and well-managed government.
· Town tax dollars are spent wisely.
· Town staff and the Town Council are public information ambassadors.
· The Town of Chapel Hill is an open organization, and citizens know how to access information.
…
But when asked to preserve some previous openness, the Town Council deferred. The request was simple enough, restore one citizen to the Council’s email distribution list tonight and ask staff to develop a process so any of our citizens can join in the very near future.
As a member of the list, the Council receives timely bite size flash reports on the advisory boards, bulletins on police and fire incidents, complaints and compliments from citizens (very illuminating) and fresh agendas. Access to the list nearly halved the amount of time I spent researching relevant material.
Unfortunately, a simple, no cost, nearly no effort request for an action conforming to both the spirit and the legality of the State’s open records laws has become a bit of a quagmire.
Any other citizens want broad, timely access to the exact same information our Council receives?