Here’s an excerpt from an email, sent to me by Tim Maylone, Cherry Capital Connection – a local Internet provider.

The debate highlights the digital divide in rural America. About 26 million people have no access to broadband, which has become a vital platform for finding jobs, attracting businesses, securing health care and acquiring an education.

Many live in rural areas: About 60 percent of rural households, compared with 70 percent of urban households have high-speed internet connections, according to the U.S. Department of Commerce.

Large Internet service providers say they don’t deliver high-speed wired Internet to many rural areas because it’s not as profitable. In response, more than 150 communities have built their own networks, taking a page from communities who built municipal power systems a century ago to ensure residents had access to affordable electricity. Some deliver fiber-optic cables directly to residents’ homes with Internet speeds faster than DSL or cable.

But some local/regional Internet providers object that a utility solution is not fair to existing Internet providers.

There is quite a struggle underway, involving governments and Internet providers about how best to deliver affordable high-speed Internet service to underserved rural areas. We have a version of that struggle going on here, where the major players are:

• local governments: villages, townships and counties
• Internet providers: Cherry Capital Connection, for example, and Charter Communications

What is the best way forward for our corner of northern Michigan? I invite your comments.

This Friday, the Conservancy is opening up that land to future partners – and possibly new uses.
It’s launching a Request for Proposals (RFP) for partnership opportunities for the future development and/or management of programs, projects and/or the property, says Sarah Naperala, a Conservancy staffer and member of the Maple Bay Farm leadership committee. It is possible that the end result could be multiple organizations and individuals involved in the support of the Conservancy’s farmland protection program.

Along with the sunflowers and the house, there is also a sugar shack, pole barn and root cellar on the property. All of these structures will remain, says Naperala, and the “viewshed” will be protected – in other words, no new structures will be built as part of any future partnerships.

The goal is for the farm to be a “key community asset,” complementing the adjacent county-owned Grand Traverse Maple Bay Park and Natural Area. Note: That adjacent 400 acres offering passive recreation and access to East Bay is not part of the RFP.          The Ticker

Anyone interested in rehabilitating the old barn? I’m interested in exploring uses, costs and funding.