Proposal For: BROADBAND STRATEGIC PLAN- FEASIBILITY ...

Proposal For:

BROADBAND STRATEGIC PLAN- FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS

Per RFP 8179

Submitted by:

Uptown Services, LLC

CONTENTS

I. CONSULTANT BACKGROUND ...............................................................................1

II. PROJECT APPROACH ..............................................................................................2

A. TASK 1: CITY OF FORT COLLINS ASSET REPORT AND MAPS (S) ..........................................2B. TASK 2: TARGET BROADBAND STANDARD(S) REPORT ........................................................5C. TASK 3: BROADBAND SERVICE MARKET DEMAND REPORT ................................................6D. TASK 4: FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................11E. TASK 5: STRATEGIC, FINANCIAL, OPERATIONAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL RISKS AND

OPPORTUNITIES REPORT ..................................................................................................................15TASK 6: BROADBAND STRATEGIC PLAN SYNOPSIS AND RECOMMENDATION REPORT .....................15

III. SCOPE OF SERVICES.............................................................................................. 16

IV. PROJECT MANAGER.............................................................................................. 16

V. PROJECT TEAM ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES................................................ 17

VI. SUSTAINABILITY .................................................................................................... 18

VII. PROJECT BUDGET.................................................................................................. 18

VIII. RELEVANT EXPERIENCE...................................................................................... 19

A. EXAMPLES OF SIMILAR FEASIBILITY STUDY PROJECTS WITH REFERENCES .......................19B. RELEVANT FUNCTIONAL EXPERTISE .................................................................................21C. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT EXPERTISE ............................................................................24

IX. ADDITIONAL MATERIAL – CONSULTING PHILOSOPHY .............................. 25

X. ADDENDUM CONFIRMATION.............................................................................. 25

XI. APPENDIX ................................................................................................................. 25

A. PROJECT TEAM RESUMES ..................................................................................................25B. UPTOWN CLIENT LIST .......................................................................................................25

The City of Fort Collins

PROPOSAL FOR BROADBAND STRATEGIC PLAN - FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS

1

I. Consultant BackgroundUptown Services (Uptown) is in its 16th year of providing broadband consulting to the municipal and publicpower sector. We support our clients with leading edge feasibility studies, business planning/strategy advising,engineering and implementation support services across a full range of functional areas. We work with existingbroadband operators as well as entities considering deploying these systems. Our services and expertise coverthe full potential of this industry including local telephony, video entertainment, high speed Internet access, andsmart grid. While we understand the full range of broadband network technologies, the vast majority of ourbroadband consulting experience is with fiber networks.

A brief company history and experience of our firm’s role in planning, engineering, implementing, or operatingnext generation FTTP systems is presented in the table below. Over the last 16 years, Uptown has established astrong track record as a consulting advisor to numerous municipal broadband systems across a full range offunctional expertise cover planning, business case development, financial analysis, market research and analysis,business operations, system design, technical planning, and system start-up and implementation.

With this experience, Uptown has established credentials in serving the municipal broadband industry across arange of important and successful projects, and has developed a comprehensive set of advisory skill sets toprovide ‘big picture’ perspective for the City’s strategic planning project.

Demonstrated Expertise Detail

We have launched 6 fiber systems as partof the start-up team and advising orcompleting functional tasks across allareas.

Uptown was the implementation consultant for Sallisaw, OK(2005); Morristown, TN (2006); Pulaski, TN (2007); Tullahoma,TN (2008); Wilson, NC (2008), and Longmont, CO (2014). Thesesystems are successful and are ‘case study’ systems referenced bythe FTTH Council and Broadband Communities. Longmont isnearing its one year anniversary of FTTP and has achieved 45penetration of Internet service where available.

We have implemented very successfulturn-around plans with existingbroadband systems that needed toimprove their operating performance

Example: Uptown worked with Columbia, TN to overhaul theirproduct pricing and packaging, implement technical upgrades, andlaunch voice services. The result was a reversal of subscriberdeclines and an increase of annual cash flow by $200k

We have designed and engineered the fibernetworks of both last mile and middlesystems

Uptown has been contracted to engineer last mile and middle milefiber systems for the City of Wilson, NC, Cedar Falls Utilities,Concord Municipal Light Plant, City of Dover, OH, San LuisValley REC, Delta Montrose Electric Association, LongmontPower & Communications and The City of Beverly Hills. We haveeither completed or are under contract to complete over 1,500 milesof plant and 100,000 passings.

We have designed and engineered SmartGrid and broadband wireless systems

Uptown has engineered and implemented advanced meteringinfrastructure and smart grid systems for Tipp City, Ohio andConcord Municipal Light Plant (MA). We have also engineeredCedar Falls Utilities’ broadband wireless system for their ruralbroadband stimulus award.

We serve in an ongoing advisory capacityto some of the most successful fibersystems

Example: Uptown serves in an ongoing advisory capacity withBristol Virginia Utilities on the video service strategy

We have completed over 40 municipalbroadband feasibility studies

These feasibility studies have been used as the basis to raise over$220M in funding to build new fiber networks



2

We have developed a leading-edgequantitative market survey approach toevaluate the unique fiber potential of eachspecific community

Uptown has conducted 24 comprehensive broadband marketresearch studies using quantitative market research and total sampleof 9,400.

We have negotiated the original videoprogramming agreements for fibersystems

Uptown negotiated and secured the programming contracts forSallisaw, OK (2005); Bristol, TN (2005); Morristown, TN (2006);Pulaski, TN (2007); Tullahoma, TN (2008); Wilson, NC (2008);Chattanooga, TN (2009); Opelika, AL (2012); and NortheastOklahoma Electric Cooperative (2014)

We have devised and implementedsuccessful marketing and sales programs

Uptown has designed and implemented marketing and/or salesprograms for several new and existing FTTP systems

We have served as an expert witness andtestified as such in court actions involvingmunicipal broadband

Uptown principal Dave Stockton has served as an expert witness on3 municipal broadband federal cases

II. Project ApproachA. Task 1: City of Fort Collins Asset Report and Map(s)

Uptown will evaluate the City’s current broadband network capabilities. To the extent possible, we willcompare the City’s existing network with the incumbent provider’s network for possible synergies and/or gaps.Uptown will perform a technical evaluation of the City’s existing fiber-optic network resources and its ability toexpand to provide broadband services. This analysis will reflect existing fiber strand availability, fiber strandcharacteristics, geographic usability and cable route space capacity. In conjunction with the fiber network,Uptown will also evaluate the City’s Tropos Wi-Fi capability to identify efficiencies and future capabilities.

1. Deliverable: Evaluation of Current Network CapabilitiesUptown will evaluate and characterize the City’s current broadband network capabilities. This assessment willinclude analysis of City GIS information and other public data sources available at the time of the study.Uptown will work to catalogue the relevant fiber cable, conduits, structures, equipment and sites that could beused in any future broadband implementation. By being based on Boulder, we will be in a position to do muchof this work in person, without the cost of airfare or hotels. This affords us the ability to spend more time on siteworking with City staff and reviewing paper documents as required (e.g. subdivision plat maps or plotted papermaps).

Per the City’s requirements, Uptown will characterize key assets in the context of their applicability to differentbroadband implementations. For example, how would fiber scarcity (or abundance) impact the City’s preferencenetwork architecture in the future? Short haul fiber applications as less sensitive to fiber strand make up, but wewill confirm the City’s ability to use Dense Wave Division Multiplexing (DWDM) technology based on the typeof fiber that is currently owned by the City.

The analysis will compare and contrast the City’s assets and the network that it might enable with the networksof phone and cable incumbents. Uptown has worked for several municipal utilities that have built and operatedstate of the art cable television systems (hybrid fiber coax or HFC). We understand the upgrade path availablefor HFC systems and have completed numerous cost studies and business cases for these clients. This gives usthe inside knowledge to understand what a cable company would be considering in response to a FTTPoverbuild.

Finally, Uptown will review the current Tropos system in Fort Collins. We have worked with several clients onwireless strategies, including a stimulus implementation for Cedar Falls Utilities (Iowa). This experience hasmade us familiar with the realities of Wi-Fi systems. In addition to consulting experience with municipalities,Uptown also started a Wi-Fi testing company called “WiVerifi.” WiVerifi completed third party validationtesting for most of the leading city-wide wireless networks that were deployed in the mid-2000s. Our testingincluded Portland, San Jose, Santa Clara, Lompoc, Philadelphia and several other cities. Most of the systems



3

tested were Tropos networks. Through this experience, we became very familiar with benefits and drawbacks ofa mesh network, so we are highly qualified to evaluate the Tropos network in Fort Collins.

2. Deliverable: Consideration of Innovative Design and ConstructionApproaches

Uptown served as the owner’s rep for the Sallisaw Municipal Authority (SMA) FTTP deployment in 2004.Since that time, we have worked with many more clients that have successfully deployed FTTP networks. Overthis period of time, we have completed over 40 feasibility studies and engineered over 1,500 miles of FTTPsystems passing over 100,000 homes and businesses. Uptown starts each assignment with a review the latestenabling equipment and outside plant technologies and construction techniques. Some approaches showpromise, but aren’t quite ready for deployment. Other products or techniques are hyped to be promising, but failto materialize in reality. We will consider the leading design and outside plant construction approaches as partthe City’s feasibility study.

a. Analysis of Innovative Underground Construction Techniques

Given the high percentage of underground plant in the City, it will be essential to find the optimal approach forunderground outside plant path creation. Uptown will complete a careful assessment of easements, rights of wayand soil conditions to determine what underground construction approaches are available to City. Uptown hasextensive experience with horizontal directional drilling and missile boring around the country. We have alsokept a careful eye on micro trenching over the past 10 years. We have completed in depth analyses for severalclients over the past five years. The applicability of micro trenching for the City will depend heavily on therequirements of the public works department relative to ongoing road, gutter and sidewalk maintenance. In anycase, Uptown is very attuned to huge impact that underground path creation costs will have on the financialviability of this project. We will complete an in-depth analysis of innovative construction approaches based onthe factors present in Fort Collings and share those findings with the City.

b. Analysis of Innovative Last Mile Design Approaches

Uptown has been designing FTTP systems for over 10 years. While our designs are state of the art, they alsostrike the optimal balance of being future proof, craft friendly and economical. Over the years labor rates haveincreased and material costs have stabilized or declined. Attaining the “spliceless” drop install has always beenthe unachievable when it came to the optimal mix of factors - until now. As the system architect for Longmont’sNextLight system, Uptown developed a bundle of building blocks in concert with two key vendors that enabledan economical connectorized network. Our approach eliminated 40,000 splices and trimmed over $2M from thelast mile capital budget. Installers do not need to carry $7,000 splicers and they aren’t required to open and closesplice enclosures to complete a standard residential or commercial install. This would not have been possiblewithout Uptown’s relationships with leading suppliers in the FTTP industry. Uptown also completed this workas an out of scope effort prior to commencing with the actual design.

Uptown will review the latest innovations for FTTP systems as part of the City’s study. This process will startwith discussions with City staff related to network requirements such as spliceless installs, structure size andfiber placement. We will then work with leading vendors to discover any new or innovative building blocks thatmight help to achieve the City’s given objectives. We will include City staff in this process which will givethem an opportunity to learn about the latest FTTP capabilities and provide critical feedback to Uptown as thereference architecture takes shape. The fact that Uptown is a short drive from Fort Collins, will make it easierfor us to meet face to face for these important ad hoc discussions.

3. Deliverable: Reference ArchitectureUptown brings a very detailed level of understanding of broadband technology, and fiber networks in particular,to this assignment. We see the role of understanding technology at two levels; the inherent capabilities of agiven technology and the competitive threats and opportunities associated with it over time, and the practicalcost/budgeting requirements associated with a particular technology when applied to a specific client system.The latter dimension involves actual applied experience in designing fiber systems and the ability to intersect thetechnology with the financials required to deploy it.



4

Broadband is an extremely capital intensive endeavor, so we need to make sure the financials include an accurateestimate of the cost to deploy the proposed broadband system throughout the community. The purpose of thistask is to define the appropriate technology strategy for the Client and then to develop a capital budget usingadvanced engineering methods.

Neil Shaw first evaluated broadband technologies as a new hire at Northwestern Bell in 1987. He continues toevaluate the evolving standards and how they apply to different client situations. Broadband technologies havematured a great deal since Uptown implemented their first system in 2004. Standards have emerged for Gigabitpassive optical network (GPON) and active Ethernet last mile systems. Uptown has worked with both types ofnetworks and can speak to the capabilities and costs involved.

Uptown will develop the network architecture recommendation for the Client based on the aforementionedanalysis and the following factors:

Applicable Smart Grid system requirements Triple play services requirements Support of open access / open services business model as required Ability to leverage existing infrastructure Deployment cost and life cycle costs Point on the cost curve Point in technology life cycle Upgrade path Overall cost of ownership Bandwidth capabilities Standards compliance Optical budget

The system architecture recommendation will consist of the technology specific recommendations for thebroadband systems required to support the Client’s broadband objectives and requirements. Uptown’srecommended technology approach will be used as the basis for developing the capital budget for the businessplan.

4. Deliverable: FTTH Sample DesignsUptown will develop broadband sample network designs as part of the development of an accurate capitalbudget. The design will accommodate current needs and be scalable enough to provide for future needs withoutwholesale equipment replacement. Outside plant items such as rights-of-way issues, pole attachments, and otheritems required for successful implementation will be addressed. Other issues such as network redundancy,equipment, ancillary equipment such as vehicles and other equipment not directly used in the transmission of thesignal will be addressed.

The sample design phase involves evaluation and development of the optimal outside plant design approach forthe proposed broadband system. Uptown will work with Client staff to define the best mix of building blocksand their sizing for all critical outside plant components. We will also identify with staff the appropriate sampleareas to be evaluated in detail. Our process for completing this task is detailed next.

a. Characterization of Service Area

A good broadband design should accommodate and leverage the unique characteristics of the local service area.Uptown will work with Client staff to collect important information including, but not limited to the following:

1. Total residential passings;2. Total commercial passings;3. Total Multiple Dwelling Units (MDUs);4. Total road miles;5. Total miles of electric plant;6. Percentage overhead vs. underground (direct buried vs. conduit);



5

7. Availability of pole space for additional fiber cable (power space vs. telecom space);8. Square miles of service area;9. Location of all key Utility assets;10. Existing fiber routes;11. Location of local exchange carrier (LEC) central office (CO);12. Location of any other telecommunications points of presence (i.e. long haul carriers)

b. Selection of Sample Design Areas

We will jointly determine what areas (up to three service areas of 250 passings or less) are best representative ofthe entire service area and then complete a detailed design of them. This information will then be used todevelop weighted capital requirements for the full service area.

c. Node Sizing

Depending on the size of the service area and the broadband system used in the study, the Client may need todeploy nodes to house active electronics. Uptown will discuss this approach with Client staff and go over anyrestrictions on these locations. Uptown will also review active node configuration alternatives that have beeninstalled in various broadband networks. Finally, Uptown will estimate the number of passings and subscribersper active node. This node sizing will be based on the combination of the desired configuration (footprint / formfactor), distance from head end and likely penetration of homes passed for the Client’s services.

d. Deliverable: Sample Designs

Uptown will provide detailed ESRI-based maps of each of the selected sample design areas.

e. Deliverable: Capital Budget

Uptown will provide a line item capital budget including quantity and unit cost information for each major pieceof equipment or materials required for a system-wide broadband deployment. This budget will includeexpenditures related to outside plant materials and construction, fiber transport equipment, broadband equipmentincluding network interface devices, customer premises equipment including set top boxes, head end systems,building renovations and any other major expenditures (vehicles, test equipment, etc.). This will serve as a keyinput for the financial analysis task.

B. Task 2: Target Broadband Standard(s) ReportUptown will define and justify reasonable standards (capacity, throughput, quality of service/reliability, etc.) formultiple applicable classes of next generation broadband services and summarize our recommendation on aBroadband Standards Report. To accomplish this, Uptown will define the services to be offered with respect tocapacity (downstream and upstream), features and functionality, packaging, tiers, rate card pricing,discounting/bundling, terms of service restrictions, and Service Level Agreement parameters (for the relevantclasses of service (e.g. high cap services).

The next generation broadband services that will be quantified will include:

Service Market Service Parameters

HighCapacityDataServices

Medium-Large

Commercial &Institutions

Dedicated high-capacity Access and Transport services rangingfrom 100Mbps to 10Gbps+

InternetAccessServices

Residentialand

Commercial

Internet Service Tiers Downstream and upstream speeds

Features



6

VideoServices

Residential

Limited Basic Expanded Basic Digital Packages Digital Tiers Premiums PPV/VOD Standard Set Top Boxes High Definition/ DVR Set Top

VoiceServices

Residentialand

Commercial

Access Line Fees Feature Packages Long Distance Packages

Triple PlayBundles

Residential 2- and 3-service combinations, discounts, and term limitations

C. Task 3: Broadband Service Market Demand ReportPer the RFP, Uptown will conduct market research with the purpose of:

Identifying unique needs (services) by sector of population and/or geographical area. Estimating demand and take-rate assumptions by sector(s).

To accomplish this, Uptown will assess the market demand for services enabled by a broadband system. Thisdemand analysis will utilize local and statistically valid quantitative market research and will feed into thefinancial analysis (Task 4) as inputs for the residential segment. Additionally, Uptown will conduct qualitativeresearch in the form of depth interviews to assess the demand and needs of the commercial and institutionalsegment. Uptown will work with City staff to finalize the survey instrument to be used. All of our clientsapprove all research activities and survey designs prior to use.

This task will be completed using both primary (local market) quantitative telephone surveys and qualitativedepth interviews to evaluate local market conditions. The structure of the research as applied to the requirementsper the RFP are summarized in the table below:

MarketSegment

ResearchMethodology

Research Parameters

ResidentialConsumers

QuantitativePhone Surveys

Sample size of 400 with 95% Confidence Interval (n=400) 10-12 minute survey Screened for telecom/broadband decision maker and employment bias Weighted by age decile to project to census distribution of population

Small andMediumSizedBusinesses

Sample size of 50 with 95% Confidence Interval (n=50) 10-12 minute survey

LargeEmployers

DepthInterviews

Depth Interviews of 30-45 minutes each1

Sectors included: Large Businesses Healthcare service providers

Non-ProfitInstitutions


Sectors included: Local government and non-profit organizations

1 In person at interviewee location, with phone interview if scheduling conflict



7

K-12 Education Higher Education

PropertyDevelopment


Sectors included: MDU owners and managers Stakeholders across specific geographic areas:

Downtown Fort Collins North College Avenue Midtown and the Mason Street Corridor Mountain Vista Subarea Harmony Corridor

1. Quantitative Research MethodologyThe research survey will be conducted according to acceptable research standards for achievement of randomand independent sampling of the universe population. Uptown’s quantitative research approach utilizes formaland empirically proven techniques to ensure that both the data and the analysis are of the highest quality.

a. Scope of Survey

The quantitative survey will cover the following major areas:

Identification of current broadband services being used, from which provider (market share), andmonthly spending.

Satisfaction with current services and areas for improvement.

Willingness-to-pay at a 10% discount to incumbent offerings and analysis of expected take rates(penetration) for each service.

An identification and rating of service attributes.

Identification of areas of improvement relative to current services

Ranking of importance of broadband to the community and identification of ideal service provider

b. Response Design

Uptown carefully designs response options to ensure they are symmetrical and meet accepted research standards.We exclusively use Likert scales for purchase intent questions. Further we include open-ended response optionsin our surveys to gather specific information where needed (e.g. “What could be improved with your currentbroadband services?”). Open-ended question cost more to include because they require labor costs to code theresponses, but we strongly believe they improve the quality of the research.

c. Screening Criteria

Uptown uses screening questions at the start of every interview to insure that the respondent is not biased due totheir employment. For example, we screen out all client employees and all incumbent employees. We alsomake sure we are talking to the decision-maker for these services in the home or business.

d. Residential Survey Sample

Residential sample size will be 400. A 95% confidence interval will be achieved for the residential quantitativeresearch survey. With a universe of approximately 46,000 households, an error rate of +/-4.88% is realized witha sample size of 400. We exclusively use phone surveys to remove bias from the sample. It is our strong beliefthat mail response surveys do not achieve a random sample. Also, the research firm we work with uses softwarethat ensures a random sampling form the list that is loaded onto the autodialer.

e. Important Survey Metrics

The length of the phone survey will be 10-12 minutes.



8

The survey sample will be conducted with decision makers of entertainment and communicationsservices for their household/business.

Sample file to be provided by Client (e.g. Electric Utility Customer File or Property Tax Database)

The survey will include an up-front screener question to ensure that employees of the City or one ofthe incumbent providers are not included in the sample.

f. Survey Scope

The survey scope shall generate the key local market data required to enable an accurate financial analysis to beprepared and will be conducted using professional research practices and standards.

The survey will identify current usage of broadband services

The survey will identify current spending patterns for broadband services

The survey will measure the current satisfaction levels among the incumbent providers for Cable TV,Internet access, and local phone service.

The survey will measure the performance of the following key players on the above attributes:

Incumbent Cable Television Providers (MSO’s)

Incumbent Local Phone Companies (ILEC’s)

The survey will quantify the interest and purchase intent (willingness to switch) for broadbandservices if offered by an alternative provider.

Our approach to survey design will be consistent with professional techniques to ensure data validity. In thisway, the Client is assured of viable research data and the quality of the financial inputs derived from it:

Sampling (randomness and confidence interval)

Response design (e.g. Likert Scale, other)

Overstatement adjustment (purchase intent forecasting)

Screening criteria (e.g. not an employee of an incumbent)

2. Deliverable: Analyze Service Offerings of Incumbent ProvidersUptown will analyze the local providers of broadband and telecommunications services (phone, video, andInternet access) used by the residential and business markets. The incumbents studied will include at aminimum:

Incumbent Local Cable TV Providers

Broadband Internet Access Providers

Incumbent Local Telephone Providers

Uptown will identify the local offerings of the existing providers. We will also analyze the pricing of currentservice offerings. In completing this task, Uptown will complete a side-by-side comparison of each majorproduct, or product package, within each product category (LOB) to the appropriate benchmark incumbent andidentify any corresponding price discount or price premiums.

3. Deliverable: Consumption PatternsUptown will determine the current usage behavior for each broadband service. Specific usage information willinclude:

Cable Television

% of households using no pay TV service

% of households using Cable TV service



9

% of households using Satellite TV service

% of Pay TV households using analog TV service

% of Pay TV households using digital TV service

% of Pay TV households using High definition TV service

Internet Access

% of households without a PC

% of households with a PC but no Internet

% of households using Dial-Up Internet service

% of households using Cable Modem Internet service

% of households using DSL Internet service

Market share of Internet providers

Local Telephone

% of households using Wireless as a substitute for Wireline

% of households using VoIP

Number of lines per household

4. Deliverable: Customer SatisfactionUptown will interpret the role service satisfaction levels play in market demand for alternative broadbandservices. This data can be cross-tabbed with other data to provide insight into the drivers of satisfaction.

Uptown will determine the current satisfaction ratings for each service category and provider. Specificsatisfaction data will cover:

Satisfaction Scores by Service category

Cable TV

Satellite TV

Dial-Up Internet

DSL Internet

Cable Modem Internet

Local Telephone

5. Deliverable: Determine Market DemandUptown will define the opportunity for launching broadband services in Fort Collins in terms of potential sizeand market share penetration rates. Uptown has developed a reliable methodology for predicted marketpenetration if the City were to launch a broadband service. Details of the approach and its accuracy arepresented below.

a. Willingness to Pay

Uptown will identify the purchase intent of the residential market for each of the three services and thewillingness to switch form an incumbent provider to the City. To extend the ‘shelf-life’ of the research andensure correct interpretation by respondents who may not be aware of nominal price points by the incumbents,we use a “10 Percent Less” reference point to the existing incumbent services.



10

b. Overstatement Adjustment

In our experience, Uptown is unique in its use of Overstatement Adjustment within the municipal broadbandsector. Overstatement Adjustment is a time-tested empirical method for determining eventual market penetrationof a service being evaluated using quantitative market research. This technique has been around for over 30years and was pioneered in the packaged goods sector by firms such as Proctor & Gamble. The technique wasdeveloped as these firms realized that research respondents, for various reasons, overstated their purchaseintentions during research as compared to the eventual penetration of a product that was subsequentlycommercially launched. This technique involves adjusting the respondent statement downward to reflect actualpurchasing behavior when someone is actually choosing to pay for a service. In other words, we factor down theresponses to generate a more accurate penetration forecast. Uptown will use a 5-point Likert scale as theresponse options for purchase intent, and these will then be factors for overstatement adjustment.

6. Deliverable: Benchmarking Research ResultsIn completing 25 municipal broadband quantitative surveys in the last 10 years, Uptown is uniquely qualified tobenchmark the Client penetration estimates and other research findings against other Uptown quantitativeresearch studies. Uptown will provide comparable data to clarify where the Client stands in comparison to othermarkets relative to demand for alternative broadband.

Our intent in reviewing these metrics is to assess the Client business case for reasonableness and achievability.This analysis attempts to answer such questions as; are the operating targets achievable compared to the actualperformance of similar ventures in this industry? How strong are the purchase intent levels compared to otherfeasibility study quantitative research results?

This analysis will be completed such that Client staff will receive benchmark metrics for the key marketvariables on these dimensions:

a. Purchase Intent (research-based)

Uptown will use a minimum of 20 relevant and comparable quantitative surveys within the last 10 years tographically depict how the Client’s survey penetration metrics compares to these other markets. The range ofpenetration estimates will be provided and the Client will be plotted within that range.

b. Satisfaction Levels (research-based)

In a similar fashion, Uptown will use the same comparable quantitative surveys to graphically depict how theClient’s survey satisfaction metrics compares to these other markets. The range of penetration estimates will beprovided and the Client will be plotted within that range.

7. Deliverable: Depth InterviewsThe objective of the depth interviews is to qualify the current and future capacity needs, unmet needs, issueswith the currently available broadband service/infrastructure, and interest and level of support for thedevelopment and implementation of gigabit speed, high-capacity fiber broadband infrastructure. Some of thoseinterviewed could be potential customers as a major commercial account, or they could be a person ofimportance in the community whose support of this project is desired. The City will be responsible for thefollowing tasks relative to the depth interviews:

Identifying the participants Approving the final interview list Recruit participants and scheduling the interviews

Uptown will complete twenty (20) in-depth face-to-face interviews within the stakeholder segments identified inthe Research Parameters above.

Information gathered will include but not be limited to:

Applications using broadband service Current use of broadband services and data networks regarding capacity, architecture and redundancy



11

Future use of broadband services and data networks regarding capacity, architecture and redundancy Experience with existing broadband service in the local area and satisfactions/deficiencies with current

service and providers Desired and/or expected expansion of broadband in the local/regional area Responsiveness to price decreases/increases or service improvements Beliefs about how broadband could/should impact future economic development within the

local/regional area

D. Task 4: Feasibility AnalysisUptown will analyze the financial feasibility of deploying a broadband network in the City and deliver a 15 yearpro forma forecast. As part of the greater financial analysis, Uptown will complete an analysis of the variousbusiness structure options available to the City for providing broadband services by exploring the strategic,financial, and organizational implications of each. Uptown will evaluate the potential business structure optionswith City staff to make sure all appropriate options are being considered and then go about evaluating thealternatives from both qualitative and quantitative points of view.

This deliverable will include all applicable capital costs, operating expenses, and revenues to operate an FTTPsystem as either a wholesaler or retailer. The following specific line-items will be included as required per theRFP:

Capital investment required (amount, timeframe, responsible party, etc.) Additional assets required (alignment with Asset Inventory) Potential Services and Partners (aligned with assessment and identifying strategic impact and cash

flows) Operations & Maintenance (amount, timeframe, responsible party, etc.) Repair Customer Service Installation Marketing SG&A (personnel, professional services, supplies, etc.) Financials (Net Income, Balance Sheet & Cash Flow) over ten (15) years

We will use our financial models to evaluate in detail the financial feasibility and outcomes for the business modelsbeing evaluated. Accordingly, the feasibility analysis methodology will allow creation of a market-drivendemand-planning tool that is flexible and allows for mutations of the various strategies depending on certainvariables, rather than a detailed business plan of a single option.

For those models which involve a private operator, Uptown will evaluate the viable wholesale price points thatwould need to be charged by the City to sustain financial feasibility. Additionally, we will then evaluate theexpected financial returns for the private operator. The objective would be to evaluate the “intersection” wherefinancial terms are viable for both parties.

Completion of this task will include an analysis of the following business structure options, and our methodologywill be compliant to the requirements issued in the RFP:

Option 1: Status Quo Option 2: Policy Change. Implement changes to municipal code, permitting, etc. to encourage

incremental private sector enhancement to broadband infrastructure and future preparedness. Option 3: Dark Fiber Leasing. Option 4: Municipality-Owned and Controlled. The City serves as the services retailer. The City

builds/owns/operates its own utility and directly retails the services being provided. It is expected that aCLEC partner would resell voice service to the City in this scenario if voice service is offered over thenetwork.

Option 5: Public-Private Partnership(s) The City serves as the services wholesaler in a public/privatepartnership model. The City builds and owns the fiber system utility and relies on an exclusive private



12

sector partner as the services retailer/provider to the end user. The private provider(s) could be eitherexisting major incumbents (cable and telco) and/or local and regional ISP’s.

Option 6: Hybrid Public-Private Partnership(s). A hybrid of Options 4 and 5 where the City directlyserves end users as a provider along with private sector provider(s).

Option 7: Open Access. A non-exclusive implementation of the public-private partnership model

NOTE: All 3 of the business structure options will be evaluated across the range of services mix beingconsidered. Based upon our experience, and as an enhancement to the RFP scope, these service combinationswould be:

Data only Data and voice Voice, video and data services.

Uptown will clearly define and identify the potential business structures available to the City represented by the3 options above and translate them into business models for the broadband network. The following dimensionswill help define and differentiate the available options:

Product strategy ramifications

Organizational staffing and resource requirements

Outsourcing needs and requirements

Operational roles

Customer service ramifications

Uptown has found these issues to be the most compelling when evaluating the business structure for a municipalbroadband venture. Each alternative brings with it certain advantages and disadvantages, which Uptown willdetail in a side-by-side fashion.

1. Deliverable: Financial Analysis of Each Business StructureUptown understands that each market presents a unique combination of opportunities and challenges andUptown’s financial modeling approach has the flexibility to explore all the possibilities the market presents.Uptown will use this capability so that City staff will be able to see complete pro forma results for all thescenarios. This tool allows Uptown’s analyst to present an unlimited number of scenarios simulating multiplecombinations of network architectures, business structures (wholesale/retail), service sets, and pricing/penetration curves. Uptown can make a change affecting any or all the scenarios and show the results inminutes, not days.

By modeling the outcome from a purely quantitative perspective, the normal biases and philosophies that lead topublic/private partnership issues in the long-term can be assessed up front. This approach will put the City in thebest position to assess the viability of the business models being considered in their go-forward strategy. Withthis approach, Uptown will complete a scenario analysis within its financial models to quantify and present theCity with a back-to-back comparison of each business structure from a financial perspective. The financialmetrics that will be addressed will be:

Working Capital Requirement Bond Amount Total Funding Requirement Total Revenue (Year 15) Total Expense (Year 15) Operating Income (Year 15) Cash Flow with Debt Service (Year 15) Cumulative Cash Flow (Year 15) Net Present Value (Year 15) Return on Investment (Year 15)



13

2. Deliverable: Business Structure RecommendationBased upon the findings of the financial and strategic analysis addressed by Uptown, a specific businessstructure recommendation will be made. The recommendation will address the optimal business structure for theproposed fiber network venture. The final business case pro-forma will be built using the specific assumptionsrelated to this structure alternative.

Uptown is strictly independent when it comes to advising clients on the issue of business structure. Unlike otherfirms that have come down squarely on the side of open access or wholesale, we maintain a neutral positiongoing into each assignment. We believe that clients should understand the detailed financial outcomes of eachbusiness structure option, and for this reason we provide a complete financial analysis of all potential structuresavailable to the Client. Our client list includes some of the largest retail and open access system operators in themunicipal broadband market today. This puts us in a position to provide truly unbiased advice on this decision.

3. Deliverable: Revenue ForecastUptown will create a revenue forecast based upon the retail or wholesale service that would be offered. Thebusiness case will include penetration and pricing input as derived from the market research for each businessmodel being considered by the Client. The revenue forecast will account for each business structure optionbeing considered, and therefore will reflect retail revenues for the City under some business structures andwholesale revenues under others.

From the service set definition identified in Task 2, the likely revenue stream will be modeled. To accomplishthis, Uptown will identify and quantify the sources of revenue for the network and describe the portfolio ofservices the network will offer, either via the City or a Retail Partner(s). Uptown will financially model thebusiness structure options specified above. Consideration will be given to all three broadband services (video,Internet and phone) for the residential and commercial segments, as well as high capacity data services for thehigher end commercial market. Revenue will be quantified by line of business and all assumptions will explicitlybe detailed. The revenue model will include revenue projections for the fifteen-year study and include ratecomparisons and sensitivities.

The business case financial projections will cover a full range of the services that the City will/will not provide.These service combinations will be, but are not limited to the following scenarios:

Data only Data and voice Data, voice and video

4. Deliverable: Operating BudgetUptown will develop a detailed operating budget that covers the many different expenses involved with runninga broadband enterprise. The opex and capital inputs will be identified, and Uptown will review these with Clientstaff. The business case will include all appropriate inputs related to cost of goods sold and sales general &administrative (SG&A) expenses, including but not limited to the following:

Video programming

Internet backbone connection

Telephone interconnection or third party fees for outsourced dial-tone

Incremental staffing and applicable overhead loading

Help desk services

Vendor and vehicle maintenance

Professional services

Right of way fees

Advertising, marketing and sales

Billing and collections



14

Training

Financing expenses, et al

5. Deliverable: Capital BudgetUptown will fold the capital budget developed as part of Task1 into this section of the feasibility analysis. Per theRFP, Uptown acknowledges that the City of Fort Collins requires underground installation of all electric utility andtelecommunications infrastructure. Our basis and methodology for estimating the physical plant construction costassumptions used in the financial feasibility analysis is described in detail under the Task 1 scope.

Uptown generally targets a ± 10% level of accuracy for capital budgeting in a typical FTTP feasibility study. Inpractice, we have not exceeded this target for any client that has deployed FTTP based on an Uptown feasibilitystudy. Sallisaw (OK), Wilson (NC), Cedar Falls (IA) and Concord (MA) systems all completed their FTTP buildouts at or below the capital budgets developed by Uptown as part of their respective feasibility studies. Longmont’snetwork is 75% underground and with nearly 33% of the system being built, they are within 5% of the cost toconstruct per underground passing.

The business case will include the following capital items:

Outside plant construction costs to pass all homes and businesses in the proposed service area

Building additions, renovations or improvements

Fixed equipment capital for all head end systems, vehicles, test equipment and data center platforms

Variable capital per subscriber served including fiber drop, network interface unit, power supply, batterybackup, set top boxes, inside wire and contract labor

Upgrade budget for general network and subscriber level equipment

6. Deliverable: 15-Year Pro Forma Economic AnalysisUptown will complete, for a fifteen-year period of time, an economic feasibility assessment of providing theneeded communications services over a Client-owned broadband network. Revenue projections will includemarket penetration and price sensitivity.

The economic assessment will include at a minimum, all of the following:

Revenue Projections

Operating Expenditures

Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization (EBITDA)

Capital Expenditures

Peak Funding Requirements

Net Present Value of Cash Flows

Return on Investment (ROI)

Internal Rate of Return (IRR)

Annual cash flows

Working Capital Requirements

Uptown’s Full Service Network Business Model (FSN Model) will be used to conduct all financial analysis asrequired by the client. The FSN Model was developed by Uptown to evaluate the financial risks and benefits ofoffering voice, video and data services to multiple market segments (residential and commercial) over abroadband network. With over 240 inputs, this tool accounts for all variables that generate revenue, expense,and capital costs. The model has detailed sections for demand, revenue, expense and capital, including a detailedstaffing section. The FSN Model generates pro forma results for each scenario and Uptown provides side-by-side comparisons of key outcomes for all scenario runs (see next deliverable).



15

While Uptown will bring the power of the existing FSN Model to this project, it is fully expected that it will becustomized to meet the requirements of the Client. One of the primary tenets of Uptown’s business modelphilosophy is to remain flexible and allow for easy expansion and modification of the core model.

7. Deliverable: Funding SourcingUptown will work with City staff to identify viable options for financing the recommended fiber network. Everyclient has different objectives, borrowing capabilities and varying degrees of latitude (legislatively) when it comesto paying for such a capital-intensive undertaking. Financing is a critical part of the plan for any broadbandnetwork deployment and we believe that it is best to discuss the proposed approach in detail with the client’s bondcounsel or financial advisors prior to completing the business case. Projects based on financials that aredeveloped without participation of the appropriate advisors often become bogged down after the decision has beenmade to move forward with implementation.

E. Task 5: Strategic, Financial, Operational and Technological Risks andOpportunities Report

For each of the broadband service models evaluated in the Feasibility Analysis (Task 4), Uptown will complete aSWOT analysis with a minimum, but not limited to:

Significant strategic risks Significant financial risks (ex. stranded assets, interest rate volatility, etc.) Significant operational risks (ex. video resource requirements, co-location opportunities, etc.) Significant technological risks (ex. fiber obsolescence, coax or DSL breakthrough, microtrenching

opportunities, etc.) Significant opportunities that could be accepted, encouraged or exploited Known ways to minimize and mitigate risks

To complete this task, Uptown will conduct a strategic assessment of the competitive structures, likelymarketplace developments, technology developments, and resulting opportunities/risks. A combination ofprimary and secondary research and subject matter expert opinions (including our insights as former managers inboth incumbent telco and cable providers) will be sought and incorporated into a summary of the positive andnegative local market competitive environment. Most importantly, Uptown will synthesize the foreseeableimpact – for each business structure evaluated - upon the viability of the City and/or its retail providers insuccessfully entering the broadband services market and competing effectively for market share.

Task 6: Broadband Strategic Plan Synopsis and Recommendation ReportUptown will provide guidance to the City on the financial viability of the fiber system based upon the pro formaoutcomes and financial sensitivity analysis. Uptown will evaluate the goals and strategies of the currentBroadband Strategic Plan and make further recommendations on strategies and/or tactics that would improve theplan by either reducing costs or decreasing financial risks.

Our analysis and reports will include, at a minimum, the following stated goals of the RFP:

An analysis of the goals stated in the City’s Broadband Strategic Plan. The area of emphasis should beon assumptions, timelines or expectations that need to be reconsidered or changed.

A multifaceted analysis of the data from Tasks 1-5 that highlights alignment or dissonance with theCity’s Broadband Strategic Plan as follows: Models evaluated Risks enumerated Opportunities identified Strategic plan alignment (City Plan, Downtown Plan, etc.) Inventoried asset utilization Market demand



16

Recommendation outlining a plan of how the City develops a holistic, long-term approach to achievingthe City’s Broadband Strategic Plan.

The primary format for our reports will be a high quality PowerPoint report to present the data, analysis, andfindings of the project, with supplements including applicable spreadsheets, maps, and other formats (e.g. marketresearch banner tables). Uptown will present the findings of our study to the City staff, the City Council, andkey stakeholders (as requested by the City staff) with our final recommendations based upon the results of theproject.

III. Scope of ServicesUptown consents to fully adhere to the sample Professional Services Agreement that was issued under Exhibit Ato the RFP.

The previous section presents our proposed Project Approach and mirrors the tasks identified in the RFP. Asummary of our compliance to each expected deliverable, along with any proposed modifications is presented inthe table below.

Scope of ServicesDeliverable Compliance Statement

Proposed Changes,Modifications, or

Enhancements

1. City of Fort Collins AssetReport and Map(s)

Proposed methodology and deliverablesare fully compliant to RFP requirements

Enhancement proposed viaactual sample design of upto 750 passings

2. Target BroadbandStandard(s) Report


None

3. Broadband Service MarketDemand Report


None

4. Feasibility Analysis Proposed methodology and deliverablesare fully compliant to RFP requirements

Enhancement proposedvia range of service mixscenarios

5. Strategic, Financial,Operational andTechnological Risks andOpportunities Report


None

6. Broadband Strategic PlanSynopsis andRecommendation Report


None

IV. Project ManagerThe Project Manager for this study would be Neil Shaw. Mr. Shaw and Mr. Stockton both have extensiveexperience presenting to City Councils, utility boards, elected officials and conducting town hall meetings, andmedia interviews. Mr. Shaw is available to attend all City Council presentations and stakeholder events.

Mr. Shaw’s contact information is:

Neil Shaw, PrincipalUptown Services, LLC7324 Cortez LaneBoulder, CO 80303Office: (303) 554-5854Email: [email protected]



17

V. Project Team Roles & ResponsibilitiesDetailed information on the qualifications and background on each individual is presented below. The Uptownteam has the full range of resource skills and municipal broadband experience to complete all tasks of thisassignment. Please note that a complete resume for each team member is included in the appendix to thisproposal.

The Uptown team will also include the services of a full service market research firm for completion of thequantitative surveys. Pioneer is located in Atlanta, Georgia and has served Fortune 500 clients in a wide range ofindustries since 1979. Uptown has exclusively used this agency for 25 completed market research projects. Thisagency has been conducting market research since 1979 for many Fortune 500 firms. They have extensiveexperience within the telecommunications sector with clients including BellSouth, AT&T, MCI, GTE, SBC, andVerizon.

Our team brings substantial and diversified professional experience to this assignment. Section VIII furtherdetails the firm’s experience relative to all things broadband including community outreach, financial analysis,technical analysis, market research and analysis, and evaluation of business strategy options.

1. Neil Shaw

Title: Principal, Uptown Services Location: Boulder, Colorado Project Responsibilities:

Project Manager Asset Report & Maps Financial Feasibility Analysis Plan Synopsis

Industry Experience: 28 years of experience in telecommunications. He has held senior management positions atUS WEST, TCI, and Jones Lightwave. Uptown Services Principal since 1998.

Experience on similar projects: Neil has completed over 50 feasibility studies and 6 FTTP systemimplementations with municipal broadband clients during the last 15 years.

2. Dave Stockton Title: Principal, Uptown Services Location: Phoenix, Arizona Project Responsibilities:

Target Broadband Standards Report Market Demand Report SWOT Report Financial Feasibility Analysis Plan Synopsis

Industry Experience: 29 years of experience in the telecommunications, cable, and high-speed Internetsectors. He has held senior management positions at Northwestern Bell, US WEST, MediaOne, andAT&T Broadband.

Experience on similar projects: Dave has completed over 50 feasibility studies and 6 FTTP systemimplementations with municipal broadband clients during the last 15 years.

3. Don Thompson Title: FTTP System Engineer, Uptown Services Location: Longmont, CO (onsite for LPC implementation project) Project Responsibilities:

Asset Report & Maps Sample Designs

Experience on similar projects: Don has served major roles on FTTP projects for Cedar Falls Utilities,San Luis Valley Rural Electric Cooperative, and Longmont Power & Communications



18

4. Ryan Scott Title: FTTP Implementation Specialist, Uptown Services Location: Boulder, CO Project Responsibilities:

Asset Report & Maps Make Ready Analysis

Experience on similar projects: Ryan has completed system design, technical specifications, MDUoutside/inside plant design, and project management tasks for the LPC FTTP project.

5. Michael Hood Title: Vice President of Research & Design, Pioneer Marketing Research Location: Atlanta, Georgia Project Responsibilities:

Market Demand Analysis Quantitative Market Research

Experience on similar projects: Pioneer Marketing Research has conducted 25 market research surveysin the municipal broadband sector as an Uptown sub-consultant over the last 12 years.

VI. SustainabilityUptown employs the following practices to minimize its carbon footprint and support sustainability.

Paper-Free Workplace: We are fully electronic in creating and sharing our analysis and work product.We do not use printed material except for contract signatures (for our contract negotiation assignments)that are subsequently scanned and printed map sets (for our FTTP design assignments).

Home-Based Work Offices: Because we work out of home-based offices, our travel is limited toclient-site meetings and work tasks within our client communities. This saves substantial commutingmiles and limits vehicle use and carbon emissions.

Temporary Living Arrangements: For appropriate client engagements, Uptown has temporarilylocated personnel within the client community to minimize what would otherwise be extensive andongoing commuting to the client work site. For design and construction oversight assignments, Uptownhas located a staff resource on-site under yearly rental agreements. For system walk-out assignments,we have done the same under short-term apartment sub-leasing. These arrangements can save up to 50flights annually on long term projects.

VII. Project BudgetPer the RFP requirements, the matrix below presents the proposed cost and allocation of resources by task and teammember. If the City desires to exceed the 20 depth interviews proposed, those can be completed at an increments feeof $350 each (1.75 hours).

Task ResourcesHourly

RateHours Project Budget

1. Asset Report & Maps

Asset Inventory, SampleDesigns and Capital BudgetingAnalysis

Shaw $200 40 $8,000

Thompson $150 20 $3,000

Scott $100 40 $4,000

Report Shaw $200 10 $2,000

2. Target Broadband StandardsReport

Stockton $200 20 $4,000

3. Broadband Service Market



19

Demand Report

Res & Bus Quantitative SurveyDesigns, Analysis

Stockton $200 20 $4,000

Res & Bus Quantitative SurveyData Collection, Processing

- $20,000

Depth Interviews (20) Stockton $200 30 $6,000

Report Stockton $200 20 $4,000

4. Feasibility Analysis

Pro Forma and Business ModelAnalysis

Shaw $200 40 $8,000

Stockton $200 30 $6,000

Report Shaw $200 20 $4,000

5. SWOT Report Stockton $200 30 $6,000

6. Plan Synopsis &Recommendation

Shaw $200 15 $3,000

Stockton $200 15 $3,000

TOTAL 350 $85,000

In addition to the consulting fees specified above, normal and customary travel expenses will be billed at costand are additional to consulting fees. For this project, we estimate total travel expenses of $5,000. Any flightsrequired will be at economy class. Any rental car expenses will be incurred at mid-size level or below, and anyuse of a personal vehicle will be reimbursed at the IRS approved mileage rate. Project staff will manage hotelexpenses to reasonable levels by staying typically at a Hampton Inn or Holiday Inn Express.

VIII. Relevant ExperienceUptown has extensive experience in all functional aspects of municipal broadband consulting, and a complete

listing of our clients is included in the appendix to this proposal. We are presenting our credentials in three sections toconvey our relevant experience as it relates to this project:

Examples of similar feasibility studies we have completed with references

Relevant functional expertise with details on our experience in planning, designing, & implementing

broadband networks

Community engagement experience

A. Examples of Similar Feasibility Study Projects with References

1. Longmont Power & Communications

Contact Tom RoiniotisTitle General ManagerPhone (303) 651-8385Email [email protected] December 20012 – PresentProjectDescription

Dec. 2012-May 2013: Completed original business case and feasibilitystudy. Pro Forma used to issue $45M in bonds to construct last mileFTTP system.March 2014 and Ongoing: Completing the full 400 mile FTTP systemoutside plant design and construction management.January 2014: Retained as the implementation consultant or “OwnersRepresentative” through end of 2015.



20

CompletionTiming

Completed on time. An initial business case was completed in 3 monthsand a second task of completing quantitative market research completedin a second phase.

Deliverables Market Analysis/Competitive Assessment Quantitative Survey Depth Interviews Technology Strategy & Sample Designs Business Strategy & Business Structure Analysis Service & Market Mix Options Bandwidth Sourcing Options Video Sourcing Options & Analysis Business Structure Options 15 Year Pro Forma Results Sensitivity Analysis Funding Requirements & Funding Plan Final Recommendation

Outcome Approved by City Council and subsequent voter referendum. Proceededto deployment.

2. City of Hillsboro, Oregon

Contact Greg MontTitle Information Services DirectorPhone (503) 681-5401Email [email protected] City of Hillsboro Civic Center

150 E. Main StreetHillsboro, Oregon 97123-4028

Period March – June 2015ProjectDescription

Completed comprehensive FTTP feasibility study including analysisof business models and service set options.

CompletionTiming

Completed on time. We completed the Feasibility Study in 3 months.


Outcome Uptown recommended the City should not proceed due to marginalfinancial viability and sensitivity to Internet penetration



21

3. City of Beverly Hills, California

Contact David SchirmerTitle CIOPhone (310) 285-2581Email [email protected] September 2014 - PresentProjectDescription

Sept. 2014-May 2015: Completed comprehensive FTTP feasibilitystudy including analysis of business models and service set options.

Aug. 2015 and Ongoing: Currently completing

CompletionTiming

Completed on time. We completed the Feasibility Study in 3 months.This was followed by ongoing support to present and review the planwith their citizen-based technology committee, the City Financeteam, and the City Council.


Outcome Approval by the City Council for Uptown to proceed with additionalanalysis including system walk-out, make ready engineering, andpreliminary system design in advance of anticipated City Councilapproval of full FTTP implementation.

Funding decision expected December 2015.

B. Relevant Functional ExpertiseAs described in the RFP, the City is seeking a consulting firm to complete a fiber system feasibility study. As aconsulting firm, we have been engaged by numerous clients at the initial analysis and planning phase to completea comprehensive analysis of the available business structure, market conditions, and technology options todetermine the financial viability of investing in a FTTP network. Given our familiarity with projects of thisnature, Uptown has substantial industry experience to apply to this project. Examples of recent projectexperience that is directly applicable to the project defined by this RFP are:

1. Broadband Strategic Plans & Feasibility StudiesUptown has completed over 40 broadband feasibility studies since 1999, which gives us a uniqueunderstanding what it takes to build a first rate study. Uptown’s feasibility studies have been used as the basisfor funding several projects including Spanish Fork Community Network (UT), Alameda Power and Telecom(CA), Sallisaw Municipal Authority (OK), City of Wilson (NC), Tullahoma Utilities Board (TUB), the City ofSalisbury (NC), and the City of Longmont (CO).



22

Uptown business case financials have been used as the supporting financial analysis and justification for raisingover $220M in public funding for municipal broadband networks across 10 projects:

Spanish Fork Community Network - $7.5M in bond financing Alameda Power and Telecom - $33M in debt refinancing Sallisaw Municipal Authority - $6.9M in original financing City of Wilson, NC - $28M in original financing Tullahoma Utilities Board - $18M in original financing Salisbury, NC - $33M in original financing Clarksville Department of Electricity - $17.5M in additional financing Concord Municipal Light Plant - $4.5M town meeting authorization to borrow for smart grid network Cedar Falls Utilities - $27M in financing for FTTH upgrade of existing system Cedar Falls Utilities - $873K in grant funding for wireless and FTTH rural broadband expansion

project City of Longmont, CO - $45M in original financing

2. Broadband Planning & Strategic AssessmentsIn addition to the projects mentioned above, Uptown has completed a number of client projects with existingbroadband systems who are in need of strategic analysis and business plan support. These clients may beinterested in improving operating performance, expanding into additional services, expanding their systemfootprint, or requiring a detailed understanding of long term financing needs and options. In this case, Uptownbrings substantial industry benchmarking data and former operating experience to evaluate the options availableto the client and identify performance areas that can be improved. Some example projects involving businessplanning are:

Cedar Falls Utilities: Evaluated the ability and financial impact of expanding this HFC system intovoice services, deploying wireless services in an adjacent rural service area and upgrading currentsystem to FTTH.

Riviera Utilities: Evaluated the ability and financial impact of expanding this HFC system into Internetand voice services. Also evaluated potential system sale valuation.

Clarksville Department of Electricity: Created a 5-year business plan and identified incremental fundingrequirements which were subsequently approved.

Chelan County PUD: Completed financial analysis and benchmarking of operating performance andrecommended operational improvements. Explored a number of financial strategies and identified themost viable go-forward plan which was subsequently approved.

Shrewsbury Electric & Cable Operations: Completed financial analysis and product and technicalstrategy review of their existing broadband system.

Bristol Virginia Utilities: In progress assisting with a transition from QAM to IP video architecture fortheir existing broadband system and assisting with video product strategy.

Columbia Power & Water Systems: Completed a 5 Year Strategic Plan for their existing broadbandsystem.

3. Experience in Conducting Local Market Analysis

This project will require the broad insight of a consultant team that has conducted substantial market researchand has developed a detailed understanding of the “demand side” of the business model. We bring thatexperience to the project. Uptown has completed 24 comprehensive market research studies within themunicipal utility broadband sector since 2003. The total sample size of these studies is 9,400 households orsmall businesses. This robust library of research enables us to benchmark survey results and helps ensure thatmarket demand projections/revenues used in the business case are reasonable.

From these research studies, we have developed a comprehensive understanding of the consumer-side dynamicsthat influence the revenue potential of any broadband venture. While specifics will vary by market, the keythemes do not. Our understanding covers the following areas, and covers all three services (Cable TV, Internetaccess, and local phone service):



23

Incidence of Broadband services, including detailed consumption patterns by each service, fromwhich provider (market share), and monthly spending.

Satisfaction levels among the incumbent providers for and areas for improvement with existingbroadband services.

Identification and rating of the primary service attributes: Brand, Internet Speed, Bundling/Single Bill,Price, Customer Service, and Reliability.

Incumbent performance relative to these attributes. Expected take rates (penetration) for each service at price parity, 10% discount, and 20% discount and

corresponding demand curve. Preferences for receiving service from the Client, an incumbent, or a new alternative provider Demographic data of each respondent and type of user

4. Experience with Financial Modeling & Analysis

Uptown’s Full Service Network Business Model (FSN Model) will be used to conduct all financial analysis asrequired by the client. The FSN Model was developed by Uptown to evaluate the financial risks and benefits ofoffering voice, video and data services to multiple market segments (residential and commercial) over abroadband network. With over 240 inputs, this tool accounts for all variables that generate revenue, expense,and capital costs. The model has detailed sections for demand, revenue, expense and capital, including a detailedstaffing section. The FSN Model generates pro forma results for each scenario and Uptown provides side-by-side comparisons of key outcomes for all scenario runs.

5. Experience in Designing Broadband NetworksUptown has been developing broadband architectures and designing FTTP networks since 1999. Thisexperience spans the evolution of FTTP technology from the early days of active Ethernet to the current gigabitpassive optical network (GPON) standards. Neil Shaw has personally designed over 1,000 miles of fibernetworks for municipal and electric utility clients. Design approaches are tailored to the needs of the given clientand application. From backbone middle mile to end user last mile, we have the experience required to addresseach client’s unique requirements.

Neil Shaw has completed designs for five FTTP networks and two middle mile fiber backbones networks since2006. The firm is also in the process of designing the 400 mile FTTP system for the City of Longmont andFTTP systems for several communities served by San Luis Valley REC. Mileage and passing statistics forUptown’s design portfolio are listed next:

100 mile / 7,400 passing FTTP system for Concord Municipal Light Plant 200 mille / 15,000 passing FTTP system for Cedar Falls Utilities 100 mile / 6,500 passing FTTP system for the City of Dover, Ohio 300 mile / 24,000 passing FTTP system for the City of Wilson, NC 300 mile SCADA / FTTP backbone for San Luis Valley REC 100 mile SCADA / middle mile backbone for Delta Montrose Electric Association 400 mile / 39,000 passing FTTP system for the City of Longmont (work in process) 1,000 mile / 7,500 passing FTTP system for San Luis Valley REC (work in process)

6. Experience in Implementing Broadband NetworksOur role in providing implementation support is both broad (across all major functional areas) and deep(completing detailed tasks as part of the working team). In addition to having the implementation experience theCity would require should it proceed to implement an FTTP system, our implementation experience alsoprovides us with improved business case and planning skills through our understanding of the actual costs andbudgeting requirements to implement an FTTP system. Our role as consultants on these implementation projectsgives us ‘real world’ insight into the key financial and operating metrics that make for a more realistic feasibilitystudy.

Uptown has served as the implementation consultant for five FTTP systems. In this capacity we are involved inall functional areas of the new broadband division and are a key player on the start-up team. We not only advise,



24

but also complete functional tasks as a contributing team member while the new organization is still staffing (splease refer to the table below for specific task details). Uptown was the implementation consultant for thefollowing FTTP start-ups. These systems are successful and are ‘case study’ systems referenced by the FTTHCouncil and Broadband Communities:

Sallisaw, OK (2005) Morristown, TN (2006) Pulaski, TN (2007) Tullahoma, TN (2008) Wilson, NC (2008) We are currently the implementation consultant for Longmont, CO, which just became our 6th FTTP

implementation

C. Community Engagement ExpertiseAs described in the RFP, the City is seeking a consulting firm with proven experience working with public sectoragencies and diverse community stakeholders. Uptown has substantial depth in working with both localstakeholders and various public sector entities over its 16 years serving municipal clients. Especially within thescope of our implementations engagements, our clients rely on us to either assist them or take on community/keystakeholder meetings to leverage both our independent views and expertise.

Our demonstrated qualifications include the following: City Council presentations: Making presentations of feasibility study results, implementation project

updates, and strategic plans in City Council meetings and associated Q&A. Community outreach presentations: Making presentations of feasibility study results and strategic

plans at Town Hall meeting forums and associated Q&A. Development of community outreach informational materials: Assisting in the development of pre-

vote educational materials for referendums and bond funding measures. Local public sector institutions: Meetings across a full range of local governmental groups as part of

completing feasibility studies as well as implementation projects. These meetings range from inputmeetings regarding broadband needs and usage (e.g. depth interviews) to city departmental meetings toascertain current city assets and capabilities, needs, funding limitations, legal restrictions, public worksrequirements, etc.

State level public sector institutions: Meeting with state level regulators/comptrollers as needed forfinancial and regulatory approvals of Feasibility Studies and associated pro formas.

Federal level public sector institutions: Meeting with and participating in review meetings withfederal staff agencies as part of ARRA grant projects (BTOP and BIP).

Formal stakeholder organizations: Both readout and input meetings with local, grassroots committeesthat have established either formal or informal project involvement in a feasibility study orimplementation. These committees can be represented only by local citizens or be a more formal jointtask force comprised of both local municipal staff/leadership and citizens (typically representingeducation, technology, or local business enterprises).

Prospects and customers: Numerous meetings with local stakeholders, prospects and customersrelative to service and product policies, large business/institution custom quotes and proposals, andpotential local vendor partnership meetings.

Local media: Interviews with both local newspaper and local broadcast network television relative toboth Feasibility Study and implementation engagements.

Expert witness engagements: While not a subset of community outreach, our expert witness work hasenhanced our ability to interact with the above community and stakeholder groups when under pressure.Our expert witness work has involved very detailed depositions and trial testimony that has sharpenedour skill sets in answering questions and addressing detailed policy questions.



25

IX. Additional Material – Consulting PhilosophyOur mission is to provide our clients with the most accurate and complete assessment of their particular businesssituation so that you arrive at the right answer for your specific opportunity. The municipal and utilitybroadband sectors are the sole focus of Uptown’s consulting business. We feel this sets us apart from otherconsulting firms who are not specialists to these sectors and have a limited understanding of the specific needsand objectives of municipalities and utilities.

As stated above, our sole focus in completing this or any consulting project would be to represent your bestinterests. We are vendor neutral and advocate for our clients to further their interests relative to businessdecisions and strategies that protect their financial interest as well as any vendor negotiations and decisions thatinvolve client resources. We consider ourselves a client advocate or owners agent.

Our approach to broadband planning and feasibility assessment is conservative and practical. This approach hasbeen shaped by our experience as former managers in large broadband systems, as well as our work withmunicipal and electric utility clients that have launched broadband and smart grid systems of their own. As asubstantial investment by the community, we believe that a best-in-class feasibility study or business plan reviewhas the following characteristics, and these serve as our tenets in completing a study of this nature for clients:

Client involvement is critical at every step of the project so that they understand fully the market needs,services, technology and financials for the venture being considered.

It is accurate yet conservative in terms of forecasted revenues and market share. Sales and revenueresults must be achievable so that the financial returns materialize on schedule to service bond debt.

Capital funding requirements, including working capital, must be realistic and accurate such that initialbonding is sufficient to support the project until it can fund itself from current operations.

Financing options and limitations that are specific to client requirements, preferences and debt-loadcapabilities must be addressed during the project.

Incremental impacts to existing organizational resources must be identified and funded. The entry intoa competitive and technology-intensive sector requires new human resources functions, skills, andleadership culture.

Specific vendor capabilities and requirements, partnership terms, and the interoperability of thenumerous involved parties that serve as the ‘components’ of a fully operational broadband system needto be accounted for in the operational and budgetary assumptions of the business case.

Strategic options relative to business models, pricing, and other strategy decisions are best servedthrough data-driven financial analysis versus conceptual preferences.

X. Addendum ConfirmationUptown hereby acknowledges receipt of the ‘Addendum No. 1’ to this RFP issued October 19, 2015.

XI. AppendixA. Project Team Resumes

B. Uptown Client List

EMPLOYMENT HISTORY Uptown Services, Inc. (Denver, CO, 1997 – present)President and Founder Responsible for advanced broadband technology practice for consulting firm focused on municipal and public power sector. Assist clients in all stages of the product introduction process - from strategy development and business case, through product development and product launch.

TCI Internet Services, Inc. (Denver, CO, 1996)Vice President - Commercial Internet Services Responsible for product development, marketing, distribution and implementation of commercial Internet services (@Work) provided over TCI’s cable television infrastructure.

Senior Director - Consumer Internet Services Responsible for product development, marketing, distribution and implementation of consumer Internet services (@Home Network) provided over TCI’s cable televi-sion infrastructure.

Jones International, LTD. (Denver, CO, 1994 – 1996)Vice President - Marketing & New Business Development (1994-1996) Responsible for establishing Jones Lightwave, Ltd. (JLW) as a regional network provider for telephone, video and Internet services. Also responsible for day to day operation of JLW competitive access networks in Tampa, FL and Atlanta, GA.

Director - New Market Development (1994) Responsible for expanding com-petitive access provider (CAP) operations into new markets. Also responsible for all business planning, market development, technical design, and sales functions on a national level.

U S WEST Communications (Denver, CO, 1987 – 1994)Account Manager - Strategic Accounts (1993-1994) Managed national Sears and IBM account relationship. Prepared and presented large telecommunications contract proposals to Sears and IBM headquarters groups.

Group Manager - New Product Development (1991-1993) Managed the development and introduction of new products for the interex-change carrier market including; Calling Card Validation Service, 800 Data Base Service, and ISDN Access Services. Served on team that redesigned several key marketing processes in U S WEST.

Group Manager - Enhanced Services Center (1990-1991) Managed vertically integrated operations department. Responsible for project management, engineering, installation, system administration, and maintenance for Voice Messaging Services.

EDUCATION University of Colorado at Denver (1995)MBA, Marketing Emphasis

Neil V. Shaw

7234 Cortez Lane Boulder, CO 80303

303-554-5854 (Office)[email protected]

Iowa State University (1986)BS, Electrical Engineering

CAREER HISTORY

Uptown Services, LLC (Atlanta, GA, 2002 – present)PrincipalCo-owner of a broadband telecommunications consultancy serving municipal and public power companies.

AT&T Broadband (Norcross, GA, 1999 – 2002)Vice President of Marketing and SalesAT&T Broadband was the nation’s largest cable operator serving the digital video, high-speed Internet and local telephone sectors. Responsible for developing and executing all marketing and telesales activities within the Atlanta operating region serving 600,000 subscribers. Directly manage staff of 20 marketing professionals and an outsourced telesales center with 250 seats. Manage departmental budget of $10 million. Responsible for annual revenue target exceeding $400 million. MediaOne, Telenet Operations - Belgium (1996 – 1999)Director of Consumer MarketsExpatriate assignment in Belgium at Telenet, a joint-venture to provide broadband telephony and high-speed Internet to 2.2 million homes. Responsible for all mar-keting activities towards the residential market. Reported to the Chief Operating Officer. Supervised a staff of 14 and a budget of $4 million.

US WEST, Inc., Strategic Marketing (Denver, CO, 1994 – 1996)Associate DirectorPosition responsibilities were to direct market strategy projects and provide con-sulting for internal clients within the operating divisions on domestic and interna-tional projects. US WEST CommunicationsGroup Product Manager - Custom Calling Services (Phoenix, AZ, 1992 – 1994)Responsible for the largest product group in the division with $250 million in an-nual revenues. Managed a staff of two and an annual budget of $4 million. Lead Product Developer - Voice Messaging (Phoenix, AZ, 1985 – 1991)Lead a 35 member cross-functional team in the development, trial, and commer-cial launch of US WEST’s residential Voice Messaging product. Responsible for product design, market research and strategy, product testing, product pricing, and advertising and promotion development and execution. Staff of four and R&D fund of $3.5 million and advertising budget of $4 million.

EDUCATION

Arizona State University (1991)Master of Business Administration

University of Minnesota (1985)Bachelor of Science, Economics and Statistics

David P. Stockton

150 Sage Run TrailDuluth, GA 30097

678 [email protected]

Donald H. Thompson23 Denver Way #3, Longmont, CO 80503 (916)580-4402

Qualification Summary:

I have a BS in Electronic Engineering from Cal Poly and over 35 years of experience developing products and services forthe telecommunications industry, including management and executive positions. I’ve been involved in engineeringthroughout my career with experience in business planning, management and working with customers, manufacturing,accounting, legal and human resources. My skills and experience make me an expert at investigating customer requirementsand developing solutions to meet those requirements.

PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE

Uptown Services, LLC.; Denver, Colorado & Sacramento, CA 2/98 to Present

A consulting services company helping businesses in the telecommunications industry develop new products and services.

FTTP System Engineer (2010 to Present)My specialty has been developing software tools to improve the quality and speed of the fiber optic system engineeringprocess. This includes tools that utilize Visual Basic, Python, Access, Excel, and ESRI’s ArcMAP GIS system.

In 2014 and 2015 I helped design fiber optic systems for Longmont, CO and the San Luis Valley in Colorado. From 2010through 2013 I worked on site in Cedar Falls, IA assisting with the implementation of a new Fiber-To-The-Premise (FTTP)system. I was responsible for preparation of documentation for the build crews, answering questions and resolving issuesabout the system design, and updating the design and documentation to deal with changes in the field (e.g., newconstruction). I maintained the system documentation in their computer system and responded to all kinds of requests forinformation about the system and the progress of implementation.

Consulting Principal (1998 to 2005)Another prior major assignment was development of databases, applications, and processes to support the operations of theNorth American Numbering Plan Administration (NANPA) that administers the telephone numbering system for the US.Includes analyzing both the data and the business requirements to troubleshoot problems and develop solutions involvingboth automation and people processes. Primarily used Excel, Access, Visual Basic for Applications, and Oracle.

Imagelink Technologies, Inc.; Boulder, Colorado 8/96 to 2/98

Develops, manufactures, and markets a line of PC based videoconferencing products for use over ISDN, fractional T1/E1,LAN and TCP/IP connections.

Vice President of Engineering and Operations (8/96 to 2/98)Managed all technical aspects of the company including Strategic Planning, Research & Development, Customer Service,Manufacturing and MIS. Managed the release of a new generation of products that improved performance, increasedstandards compliance, and reduced costs by a factor of three.

Jones Lightwave, Ltd.; Denver, Colorado 6/95 to 8/96

Originally owned and operated fiber optic links that provide large corporations access to long distance carriers bypassingthe local exchange carrier. Recently, developed a strategy and business plan for providing telephony and high speed dataservices to homes and businesses over two-way fiber and coax CATV systems.

Vice President of Services Development (6/95 to present)Part of a small team that developed a strategy and business plan for providing telephony and high speed data services tohomes and businesses over two-way fiber and coax Cable TV systems. Lead responsibility for developing the data servicesplan, the network plan, the organizational plan, and the initial implementation project plan. The team produced the newbusiness plan and several board presentations in record time and set a new company benchmark of quality in a businessplan.

Jones Futurex, Inc.; Rocklin, California 9/83 to 6/95

Develops and manufactures data security products including add-in boards for PCs, systems and application software; andstand-alone devices. These products protect confidentiality and integrity of data for both communications and applicationssubsystems.

Vice President and Chief Technology Officer (7/92 to 6/95)As General Manager of the Systems Integration Services business unit with profit and loss responsibility. Formed thisbusiness unit after 6 years of success performing engineering services contracts within the engineering department.Successfully completed more than 12 hardware and software development projects ranging in size from about $5,000 to

Donald H. Thompson Page 2

$1,200,000 and involving from one to fifteen people (direct, indirect, and contract) including project managers, engineers,tech-writers, and support people. Included evaluating customer needs, developing and selling proposals, negotiatingcontracts and changes, project management, managing the relationship with the customer, and collecting payments. Alsoincluded strategic planning, budgeting, and profit/loss management. Developed a reputation with customers of providingcreative, high quality solutions under tight schedule and cost constraints which kept them asking us to do more.

As General Manager of the FAX Security business unit, added through acquisition, from initial concept through the firstyear after completion of the acquisition. Included planning and executing the transfer of the unit into the company, re-staffing key positions, release of new products, and restarting the marketing effort. The first years sales after acquisitionexceeded any previous year. After the first year, the unit was turned over a staff member.

As Chief Technical Officer, continued to provide strategic leadership of the company’s technology development andimplementation including: participation in ANSI; development and maintenance of company software standards; anddevelopment and motivation of the technical personnel.

Director of Engineering (11/85 to 7/92)As the technical leader of the company, reporting to the president, managed the development of hardware and softwareproducts, user manuals, and engineering documentation. The department also provided technical support to customers,manufacturing, and sales. The Engineering Department included up to six software engineers, two hardware engineers and adrafter.

Negotiated technical aspects of various development contracts, both as a buyer and a seller. Discussed requirements withpotential customers, conceived solutions to meet both technical and business needs, then prepared and presented projectproposals. Responsible for budgeting, planning, recruiting, training, and evaluating performance. Established companypolicies and procedures for product releases, configuration control, engineering change control and field problem reporting.Significantly improved project scheduling and product quality. Directly participated in the design of several hardware andsoftware products.

Represented the company on four American National Standards (ANSI) Committees including being co-chair of a workinggroup and a primary author of three standards. Invited speaker at three national conferences on data security.

Project Manager (8/84 to 11/85)Managed the encryption products engineering group of hardware and software engineers. Directed development and releaseof the company's first successful security products. Participated in hardware and software design. Responsible forbudgeting, planning, and evaluating performance.

Associate Engineer (9/83 to 8/84)Led a project to design a specialized computer system to deliver a large database via satellite and Cable TV. Performed thesystem design, designed a high speed interface circuit, and participated in the software design. Also provided system designand market research support for an interactive information retrieval system for the cable TV market.

Halifax Engineering, Sacramento, California 1/82 to 7/83

Performed engineering services under contract to the Air Force at McClellan AFB.

Electronic Engineer (1/82 to 7/83)Investigated fiber optic communications for existing Air Traffic Control Systems. Designed an interface for a Bit ErrorRate Tester. Evaluated the design of a custom bit slice computer. Designed hardware and software for a micro-controllerbased signal detection system. Responsibilities included project budgeting and scheduling.

TRW/Vidar; San Luis Obispo, California & Melbourne, Florida 10/76 to 1/82

Developed and manufactured telephone central office and transmission equipment. Started as a Manufacturing TestTechnician and wound up as a Design Engineer developing hardware and software for a digital Telephone Central OfficeSwitch and providing support to the manufacturing department building the switch and related equipment.

EDUCATION

BS degree in Electronic Engineering received March 1981

California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California

RYAN F. SCOTT3115 5th StreetBoulder, CO 80304720.289.3770

HIGHLIGHTS:

Accurate, detailed, self-motivated and organized Able to perform complex tasks and critical thinking while analyzing problems Strong written and oral communication

WORK HISTORY:

FTTP System Implementation Specialist Current

Uptown Services, LLC Boulder, CO

Thorough knowledge of fiber optic systems and engineering architecture, broadbandimplementation, FTTH/FTTX requirements, and cabling standards

Demonstrated ability employing GIS mapping to design network infrastructure and managecomplex object relationship data while maintaining all engineering design standards

Completed over 75 miles of conduit and fiber design for Longmont Power and CommunicationsNextLight in Longmont, Colorado

Experience with HOA and commercial client interaction, as well as formalizing accessagreements in order to optimize fiber optic network

Implemented technical specifications on behalf of NextLight for all construction and installationof conduits, structures, and fiber management

Graphic Designer 04/10 to Current

RS Creative Boulder, CO

Database Archival Specialist 12/12 to 12/13

Chartrounds Edwards, CO

SKILLS:

Resourceful, imaginative, well-versed Effective at problem solving and empathetic to others Detail oriented and deadline focused Proficient in written and spoken Spanish

EDUCATION:

Bachelor of Science in Business Marketing

Minors in International Business, Entrepreneurship & Small Business Management

Montana State University - Bozeman, MT

SOFTWARE EXPERTISE:

ArcFM Fiber Manager, ArcGIS, Adobe Creative Suite (Photoshop, Illustrator, Bridge, After Effects),Microsoft Suite (Word, Excel, PowerPoint), Google Suite (Drive, Docs, Mail, Maps)

HONORS & AWARDS:

NCAA Division I varsity ski team member - full tuition scholarship 08/09 – 05/12

• 4th Place, U.S. National Ski Championship 01/12

• Member of US World Cup Ski Team 12/12

Michael Hood, Ph.D.

1075 Bouldervista WayLawrenceville, GA 30043 Phone: [email protected] Cell: 678-592-9872

Personal Information

Ph.D. in Sociology, with strong statistical background More than 15 years experienceconducting research and data analysis using SPSS Ten years experience inMarketing Research Strong analytical problem-solving and technical skills Morethan 12 years experience in public speaking and presentation of information to groups ofvarious size More than 15 years experience with Windows-based computer softwareand PC hardware and Seven years of management and leadership experience

Current Position / ExperienceTen years experience as a study director/project manager working with in-house clientsand external customers – both consultants/consulting firms and end-user clients.

Responsibilities: working with data collection (both telephone and mail-out) to producea correct data file and coordinate scheduling, building and checking data for quality, dataanalysis with SPSS and building crosstabs using WinCross, questionnaire review anddesign, and reporting results. I have extensive and advanced experience with SawtoothSoftware’s SSI Web online survey authoring package. Also responsible for maintainingcompany web sites, workstations and PC network.

QualificationsExtensive training and experience in statistical analysis using SPSSExperienced in research design, questionnaire writing, CBC design and analysisExperience with all aspects of the research process – design, proposal writing, datacollection, data analysis and report writingExperience with writing reports that are easy to read and understandMore than nine years experience as marketing research project managerExperienced in training and supervising field workersExperience with several PC based software programs, including SPSS, WinCross,

SSI Web from Sawtooth Software (web survey authoring), Sawtooth Software’sCBC design and analysis tools, MS Office, and Photo editingSeveral years experience with Windows-based PC systems and networking

Professional AccomplishmentsConducted surveys on smoking for Ga. DHR in Dawson and Habersham counties.Conducted consumer research for several companies, including MyClosingSpace.com

and Columbia House Latin Music Club.Published research articles and presented several other papers at professional

meetings.Awarded grant to study underage drinking and juvenile delinquency.Served on the Georgia Sociological Association Committee on Research.

Completed a program evaluation for the State of Florida, Department of Children, Youthand Families concerning a pilot medical program for medically complex children.

Designed report system for Florida’s Department of Health and Rehabilitative Servicesto track the performance of individual county office.

Member of Alpha Kappa Delta honorary fraternity.

Employment History1997 – Present Research Director, Pioneer Marketing Research (formerly, Data

Research Services, Inc.), Atlanta, GA1994-1997 Visiting Assistant Professor, Mercer University, Macon, GA1992-1994 Temporary Assistant Professor, Georgia Southern University,

Statesboro, GA1991-1992 Temporary Instructor, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge,

LA1988-1989 Program Evaluator for Department of Health and Rehabilitative

Services, State of Florida, Tallahassee, FL1982-1986 Production planning representative & estimating supervisor,

Moran Colorgraphic (printing), Baton Rouge, LASummer, 1980 Crew Leader, Bureau of the Census, Baton Rouge, LA

Academic CredentialsPh.D. in sociology, Florida State University, 1993M.A. in sociology, minor in Experimental Statistics, Louisiana State University, Baton

Rouge, LA, 1987B.A. in psychology, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, 1979

References available upon request.

Uptown Services, LLC Client List

The following municipalities or utilities are former or current Uptown clients:

1. Silicon Valley Power – City of Santa Clara, California2. Traverse City Light & Power, Michigan3. Concord Municipal Light Plant, Massachusetts4. Belmont Municipal Light Department, Massachusetts5. Taunton Municipal Light Plant, Massachusetts6. City of Palo Alto Utilities, California7. City of Pasadena, California8. City of St. George, Utah9. Spanish Fork City, Utah10. City of Longmont, Colorado11. City of Corona, California12. Fairhope, Alabama13. Riviera Utilities, Alabama14. Westfield Gas & Electric Light Department, Massachusetts15. City of Franklin, Virginia16. Milton-Freewater, Oregon17. City of Sallisaw, Oklahoma18. Alameda Power & Telecom, California19. City of Hamilton and Butler County, Ohio20. Los Alamos County, New Mexico21. City of Valdosta, Georgia22. City of Oconomowoc, Wisconsin23. Benton PUD, Washington24. City of Dover, Ohio25. City of Holland, Michigan26. Lenoir City, Tennessee27. City of Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio28. Bristol Tennessee Essential Services, Tennessee29. Morristown Utility Systems, Tennessee30. Morrisville Water and Light Department, Vermont31. City of Chanute, Kansas32. City of Salisbury, North Carolina33. City of Wilson, North Carolina34. Pulaski Electric Services, Tennessee35. City of Poteau, Oklahoma36. Tullahoma Utilities Board, Tennessee37. Russellville Electric Plant Board, Kentucky38. Cleveland Utilities, Tennessee39. Trinity Public Utilities District, California40. Paducah Power Systems, Kentucky41. The City of Portland, Oregon

42. Electric Power Board of Chattanooga, Tennessee43. Tennessee Valley Authority44. Nash County, North Carolina45. Cedar Falls Utilities, Iowa46. Fayetteville Public Utilities, Tennessee47. Jackson Energy Authority, Tennessee48. Kansas City Board of Public Utilities, Kansas49. Town of Ludlow, Vermont50. North Kansas City, Kansas51. Omaha Public Power District, Nebraska52. City of Opelika, Alabama53. Princeton Electric Plant Board, Kentucky54. City of Provo, Utah55. City of Tipp City, Ohio56. Truckee Donner Public Utility District, California57. Murray Electric System, Kentucky58. Mayfield Electric & Water Systems, Kentucky59. Bowling Green Municipal Utilities, Kentucky60. Lincoln Electric System, Nebraska61. Hopkinsville Electric System, Kentucky62. Village of Freeport, New York63. City of Laurinburg, North Carolina64. Chicopee Electric Light Department, Massachusetts65. Glasgow Electric Plant Board, Kentucky66. Kentucky Municipal Power Agency67. Farmington Electric Utility System, New Mexico68. Chelan County Public Utility District, Washington69. City of Hartsville, South Carolina70. Iowa Health Systems, Iowa71. Marblehead Municipal Light District, Massachusetts72. Shrewsbury Electric and Cable operations, Massachusetts73. Bristol Virginia Utilities, Virginia74. Columbia Power & Water System, Tennessee75. Northeast Oklahoma Rural Electric Cooperative76. San Luis Valley Rural Electric Cooperative77. Longmont Power & Communications, Colorado78. Siloam Springs, Arkansas79. MI Connect, North Carolina80. Delta Montrose Electric Association81. The City of Beverly Hills, California82. SolStar Network83. City of Hudson, Ohio

Date post:	05-Oct-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	4 times
Download:	0 times

Proposal For: BROADBAND STRATEGIC PLAN- FEASIBILITY ...

Documents