If the Town of Mooresville doesn't use MI-Connection, why should we?

The Town of Mooresville owns an $80 million cable system (MI-Connection) that provides cable and Internet service and relies on subscriber fees to pay for the system. But the town itself does not use MI-Connection as its primary Internet service provider. Instead, it pays approximately $950 a month to MI-Connection’s "competition," Windstream Communications, Inc., for “network connectivity.”

Why? Apparently because MI-Connection is not currently capable of providing network connectivity for the Town of Mooresville. And even if/when it can provide such a service, the town’s Information Technology (IT) manager says that Windstream is so affordable for the town that "it would not make a very good business decision to drop them."

Approximately $150 of the $950 that the Town of Mooresville pays Windstream is used to connect Town Hall and the Police Department, said Town Finance Director Maia Setzer. About $793, she said, is used "between Town Hall and the ‘world.’”

Meanwhile, the town does not pay MI-Connection for anything, Setzer said, adding: “We used to pay Adelphia/TWC (Time Warner Cable) for a redundant connection at the Police Department for Emergency Operations Center reasons. The connections we had in place under Adelphia/TWC at several locations are still there and active.”

On June 11, the Report sent the following e-mail to MI-Connection General Manager James “Junior” Miller and copied all the Mooresville commissioners:

Mr. Miller and/or Commissioners:

I need some help understanding something that likely has a very simple explanation – I just don’t know it yet.

I found out yesterday from the Town of Mooresville’s finance director that the town pays approximately $950 per month to Windstream for “network connectivity” and that the town does not pay MI-Connection for anything but that “connections (the town) had in place under Adelphia/Time Warner at several locations are still there and active.”

I’m confused. Is the town “double-covered”? And if so, at least looking at the numbers, it appears that Windstream is the primary network connection for the Town of Mooresville. With the town owning an $80 million “fiber optic infrastructure system,” why aren’t we using MI-Connection – and MI-Connection only – for network connectivity? Is MI-Connection currently able to facilitate that for the Town of Mooresville? Will MI-Connection eventually be used for the town’s exclusive network connection? And if so, when is that projected to occur? Is it included in the current $80 million, or would that come with the additional $12.5 million?

Thanks for any clarification you can provide.

Miller did not provide specific answers in his response to the Report on June 17, stating only: “I have discussed ‘network connectivity’ with Mooresville’s IT department as it relates to the upgrade of the MI-Connection system. We are looking into this situation more in depth as the upgrade is underway in the Mooresville area. Also, MI-Connection will have more fiber in place to assist in their connectivity and requirements at that time.”

Davidson Town Commissioner and MI-Connection Board Member Evan Webster, when asked to clarify Miller's response, did not respond.

Meanwhile, Mooresville’s IT manager, Jeff Brotherton, says that the $80 million MI-Connection cable system, which the town purchased six months ago, is used “at the police department for redundant connectivity for patrol cars to access local and state databases" but that the town cannot currently use MI-Connection for network connectivity because "MI-Connection does not offer dedicated connections between locations unless it is fiber.

“MI-Connection is in the process of building out their infrastructure which will allow us to use fiber between our locations in the future; this build-out is not scheduled to be complete until early 2009," Brotherton says.

It is unclear if the upgrades that would be necessary to fully accommodate the town's needs are included in the $80 million that the town has already paid for the system ... or if those upgrades would be completed only if the town approves the additional $12.5 million that MI-Connection is expected to request at the July town board meeting.

"I would hope that we will use MI-Connection as our primary provider in the future," says Brotherton, adding, however, that "our pricing with Windstream is so good it would not make a very good business decision to drop them.

"We have discussed keeping our Windstream connections in place for Disaster Recovery," Brotherton adds. "Redundancy is very common and we don’t consider it 'double-covered.'"

Mooresville's interim town manager, Erskine Smith, adds: "We have a plan to convert (from Windstream to MI-Connection) assuming the MI upgrades are made."

So, what's the bottom line? The Town of Mooresville owns an $80 million cable system that provides Internet service. But we pay almost $1,000 a month to our own "competition" because it can service our current needs. Our own company can't.

But someday, we "hope" to be able to use our own system for primary Internet service.

Why should Mooresville citizens subscribe to MI-Connection for Internet service when the very entity that owns the system can’t, or doesn’t, use it?

Some may argue that the upgrades simply haven’t made it to Town Hall yet. Others may use this situation as justification for the town to approve MI-Connection’s upcoming $12.5 million request to "complete upgrades."

I, on the other hand, would argue that the towns of Mooresville and Davidson sank $80 million into the system six months ago and should have been a priority for MI-Connection.

Am I suggesting that the Town of Mooresville should invest $950 a month of taxpayer money into MI-Connection? Absolutely not. I am suggesting that if the town is going to dish out $950 a month for “network connectivity,” it should be dishing it out to its own company -- and certainly not to its "competitor" -- if for no other reason than to demonstrate to the public that it believes in MI-Connection and its future.