UPDATED – CANCEL SECOND MEETINGS IN JULY & AUGUST

This entry was posted in Convention Center, Lancaster Newspapers, Police, Racism, Unsolved Murders. Bookmark the permalink.

WHO KNEW?    

     Since when are the individuals on the LNP editorial board experts on “smart growth?” Who knew they know so much? Oh, there is something else going on here. That will be coming in the next few days.

   

*****

***   Part of a comment into this site under this post is below (thank you)! It is so important to remember all of this: It was first presented to the public as costing $500,000 and 2/3 of the city would have inexpensive, high speed internet. Please make sure to read the comments under this post and thank you so much to the commenter.
The project was initially presented to the public via a LNP article on February 25, 2015 in which the city provided that the total public cost would be $500,000 and reach 2/3 of the city by the end of 2015. Initial rollout was obviously slower than advertised and at the end of 2015 the city was quoted as saying rollout to residents and businesses would be complete by the end of 2016. Rollout finally seems to have began in earnest in the spring of 2017. At some point during this delay the cost of the project skyrocketed, with no justification provided by city officials. As reported by LNP on March 1st 2017 the city had spent $1.7 million dollars on MAW and requested from approval from City Council for an additional 3 million dollars in loans to MAW. When seeking this funding approval, the City was adamant that there was little to no risk.
During the rollout (summer 2017) a series of serious mis-steps were reported that demonstrated MAW’s inability to handle this project including poor quality work, inability to maintain project schedules, and questionable IT practices.

**   LNP has quickly moved the below story off their homepage (click here). This was reported on this site several days ago. When is LNP going to hold these city officials accountable for this disaster? And what a misleading headline. The city is stating that MAW committed misconduct and wants the judge to confirm it!

*    The city council forum is here and the livestream of last night’s city council meeting is here.

LNP LIVESTREAM FAIL;
CITY COUNCIL SUCCESS!

      In a bizarre twist last evening, LNP had a livestream fail and city council, after an initial brief hiccup, had  livestream  success! And what did city council do last night – they announced their vacation! You read that correctly! And yes, they all voted “aye” for the $700 an hour lawyer. Vote these fools out!
It’s a busy day – please check back later today.

10 Responses to UPDATED – CANCEL SECOND MEETINGS IN JULY & AUGUST

  1. Anonymous says:

    I lost interest in the LNP Oregon village editorial when they started quoting Baldridge.

  2. Anonymous says:

    No loss. We have all that “infrastructure”.

  3. huh? says:

    Too bad a citizen can’t stand up at a council meeting and let loose with facts.

    Reason being is that good citizens attempted to do just that during the con center debacle and they were laughed at, ignored and shut down.

  4. my goodness says:

    So Frank, aka Mr MAW decided to take on PPL single handed. What is even more hysterical . Hysterical!!!! Where did Lancaster find this guy? What is even more hysterical is the number of residents that fell for this scam.

  5. anon says:

    https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10215621822093/ATTACHMENT%20F%20-%20MAW000264-MAW000707.pdf

    MAW’s decision to attach without authorization was a conscious decision based on the attached 10-page document prepared by MAW entitled, “PPL Make Ready Policy Brief.” In that document, MAW proposed to reject paying PPL’s make-ready charges, reject seeking FCC relief, and instead simply move forward with constructing MAW’s network without PPL approval. The final option was recommended because: (i) it would take years for the FCC to require compliance with PPL’s make-ready policy; (ii) in the meanwhile the network would be constructed and functioning; (iii) and once the network is in place it would be harder for PPL to justify compliance with its attachment policy. See PPL Make Ready Policy Brief at 8-10. This shocking recommendation to attach without permission called for MAW to notify PPL of its intent to construct the network, but MAW kept the entire process under wraps and never even
    notified PPL. See March 28, 2018 Transcript at 39-51.

  6. anon says:

    When council provides no oversight and the Mayor runs amok.

    from reddit a year ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/lancaster/comments/8gxdcs/judge_decides_to_allow_ppl_to_remove_unauthorized/

    The project was initially presented to the public via a LNP article on February 25, 2015 in which the city provided that the total public cost would be $500,000 and reach 2/3 of the city by the end of 2015. Initial rollout was obviously slower than advertised and at the end of 2015 the city was quoted as saying rollout to residents and businesses would be complete by the end of 2016. Rollout finally seems to have began in earnest in the spring of 2017. At some point during this delay the cost of the project skyrocketed, with no justification provided by city officials. As reported by LNP on March 1st 2017 the city had spent $1.7 million dollars on MAW and requested from approval from City Council for an additional 3 million dollars in loans to MAW. When seeking this funding approval, the City was adamant that there was little to no risk.

    During the rollout (summer 2017) a series of serious mis-steps were reported that demonstrated MAW’s inability to handle this project including poor quality work, inability to maintain project schedules, and questionable IT practices.

    Recently MAW’s spokesman has indicated that this ruling provides a path forward allowing pole attachments to be submitted to PPL via their attachment process and that PPL would be required to promptly review them. This most assuredly isn’t a “win,” as they are now formally been directed to follow the appropriate pole attachment process defined by PPL and Federal Law. Mayor Gray’s rational for requesting funding to support legal challenges presented to City Council on December 12, 2017 was that following these procedures and their associated “make-ready” requirements would be too costly for Lancity Connect. The Code of Federal Regulations (47 CFR Part 1, Subpart J) and FCC regulatory guidance (FCC 11-50) has been in place since 2011 to provide timelines for pole owners to review attachment requests, only deny them for legitimate engineering rational, and outline an appropriate dispute process. Again, if the appropriate processes were followed from project inception this entire issue could have been avoided.

  7. Ellen Pea says:

    Good old transparent Mayor Dickina.

  8. Ellen Pea says:

    LNP won’t question the elected as long as the elected act in the P’s best financial interests.

  9. my goodness says:

    If the mayor tells city council to jump they will ask how high prior to acquiescing. Now how much is the MAW boondoggle costing us taxpayers, counting all lawyers fees to date? If the city neglected to tell MAW that they may not put their equipment on PPL’s poles it is the city that is negligent. Not rocket science.

    • Anonymous says:

      LIP News should revisit in more detail the “secret” paper prepared by MAW in January of 2017 and provided to Executive Level City Employees for their review.

      That document constitutes documented proof available in the public domain of the City buying off on MAW beginning the install without PPL’s approval under the justification that by the time PPL caught them and went through adverse legal processes, the network would already be installed therefore much more difficult for the court to order removal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.