Laserfiche WebLink
South Bend Redevelopment Commission <br /> Regular Meeting—June 14, 2011 <br /> 6. NEW BUSINESS (CONT.) <br /> C. South Bend Central Development Area <br /> (3) continued... <br /> Mr. Varner said he would like more <br /> information on this. <br /> Mr. Inks tried to clarify the issue. This <br /> proposal from Radiant is not for the <br /> Metronet. This is to the City of South Bend. <br /> We are considering an eventual improvement <br /> in the downtown that makes the downtown a <br /> more appealing place to do business and <br /> hopefully increase the number of businesses <br /> we have in the downtown. The Metronet <br /> allows us to take this approach to addressing <br /> the issue. So, in essence, we're saying that <br /> the Metronet is an asset that allows us to do <br /> something that, without the Metronet, <br /> wouldn't be possible. With the radios we <br /> could tie into the Metronet and accomplish <br /> what we want. Without the Metronet, this <br /> approach doesn't work. So, the Metronet <br /> becomes an asset we're taking advantage of <br /> in the downtown. He isn't sure if there is a <br /> fee arrangement. He hasn't heard of one yet. <br /> Mr. Varner said that there is. If you want to <br /> get on the AT&T site through the Metronet, <br /> AT&T has to buy fiber access from <br /> Metronet. It is the same with any of the other <br /> providers. And they are all paying taxes. <br /> Metronet does not. He thinks we're allowing <br /> some unfair competition for people that are <br /> paying taxes. If one of these large providers <br /> (Comcast or AT&T) decided to go <br /> somewhere else because South Bend is <br /> undercutting them, it wouldn't surprise him. <br /> Mr. Leone said that he thinks that not only is <br /> there an advantage to local business, but also <br /> 39 <br />