I have been enjoying Mr. Hudson’s articles, particularly those concerning the expansion of broadband to areas of the county. In yesterday’s article, he is beginning to touch on a factor that hasn’t been explained to my knowledge.
How many of the homes in the affected areas will really benefit from broadband?
Would it not be more effective to direct grants to areas not already served?
Many of the homes for which grants have been obtained are in middle to upper income areas. Many are second homes. How many of these homeowners already have a high speed internet connection via satellite? By the time broadband is actually available, how many homes will opt for that service?
In Aspen Springs, and similar lower income residential areas, satellite is not economically feasible for many working families. Visionary is not available as it must be “line of sight” to a tower. Centurylink is over subscribed, unreliable and slow. No good alternative exists.
The $8.1 million to be spent getting broadband to 561 homes south of Highway 160 breaks down to $14,400 per home, for well-off owners that may not even take advantage of the opportunity. I feel sure that more “bang for the buck” could be received by projects in lower income, family areas where the free market has not yet answered the need.
Kelly Evans
Pagosa Springs
The Pagosa Daily Post welcomes submissions, photos, letters and videos from people who love Pagosa Springs, Colorado. Call 970-903-2673 or email pagosadailypost@gmail.com