Study Category: Our Communities’ Future Needs and Interests

Many technologies are driving the need to continually improve on fiber broadband networks, such as increased use of video, Smart Cities applications, and other technologies. Both residents and businesses view Internet access as essential and this has elevated the importance of network infrastructure for the community’s economic vitality and resiliency (See findings under Key Question #1 for data and discussion on these topics). All the local governments in Multnomah County are now embarked on a municipal broadband feasibility study to determine how they may cost effectively expand broadband reach and capabilities. They also must continue to expand the institutional network capacity per connection for many of the sites (See Finding 5.5).

Private companies must continue to expand and enhance their networks as well. All cellular wireless carriers are moving forward with 5G implementation. Its initial impact will be in denser areas, where a number of communications technologies, infrastructure and services are already available, in order to provide “densification” and higher capacity for 4G networks and emerging 5G applications. However, eventually, much like 4G, as initial capital investments are recouped, 5G-enabled applications will move further into less dense portions of the network. Wireline providers continue to look at driving fiber deeper into their systems in order to provide higher capacity, more reliability, and more symmetrical communications. In fact, some, like Frontier’s new owner Northwest Fiber, LLC, known currently through the brand name “Ziply”, are at least at this point, looking to upgrade Frontier’s infrastructure by developing more fiber-to-the-premise implementation. 

Local governments note that they must keep pace with technology, both internally and for delivering services, based on the volume of services they provide and the level at which their residents and businesses are adept at using communications technology to access these services. Multnomah County focus group participants noted they can’t be on the “bleeding edge” of technology but must be at or near the “leading edge” while providing services online, in-person and through written materials. Their perception, expressed also by the City of Portland and the City of Gresham focus group participants, is that they must keep up with new technology, including Smart Cities technologies, in order to serve their diverse population. The smaller cities of Troutdale, Fairview and Wood Village expressed the need for similar capabilities and to invest in new technology because they perceive that some residents and businesses will demand that. However, they also have to be prepared to provide services in-person for those that aren’t online or digitally literate. 

Telemedicine applications are certainly more commonplace now due to the COVID-19 pandemic than in the past. Even prior to the pandemic, two interviewees from Oregon Health Sciences University said their field anticipates telemedicine will continue to increase to better serve an aging population, with not only remote telehealth service, but monitoring services related to “aging in place”. Since more people have now experienced telehealth and telemedicine services because of stay-at-home order and the focus of the medical community largely on response to COVID-19, it’s more likely both patients and health professionals have become more comfortable and that for many telemedicine and telehealth service use will rise based on convenience, lower cost, and a high degree of accessibility. However, for those that lack Internet access and/or appropriate devices, telehealth services will remain a challenge. 

 Esper House notes that many underserved populations already experience issues with current communications technologies and are likely to experience as much or more difficulty with new technologies, and don’t necessarily see themselves taking advantage of them. For example, “schools and organizations that serve communities of color see communication technology challenges among families, which can affect educational and later professional growth and development. These challenges include prohibitive cost of accessing tools, unstable life circumstances, lack of knowledge about support and services, and lack of role models or leaders of color in technology industries”. Accordingly, these types of challenges need to be overcome first for current communications technologies. At least in some part, new communications technologies will only exacerbate the problem and expand the list of non-adopted technologies.

The public policy debates over local authority for cellular wireless companies to use of the local public right of way for 5G technology demonstrates the value of public assets in the roll-out of new technologies. A myriad of Smart Cities applications will need to access public right of way and assets as well. Most of these applications will rely on sensors located on assets such as streetlights, utility poles, and other vertical structures to, for example, count, monitor and control traffic flow or measure air particulates at multiple locations. Sensors, in conjunction with geospatial technologies and A.I. will also allow, for example, automated, driverless vehicles, or access directly to local government services without necessarily accessing the Internet.

As wireline providers upgrade their networks, such networks largely use the public right of way (rather than private property) to deploy communications technology services. This will require an expansion of infrastructure, as well as above-ground devices for communications network switching, network powering, service drop connections, and other system components.

Overall, this infrastructure, both wireless and wireline, is the backbone of the applications and services that will drive the future use of end-user devices for any particular communications technology.

Although data indicates local governments will need a variety of communications technologies going forward, those most likely to support transparency, effective service provision, and sharing information are weighted heavily towards video, geospatial technologies, sensors and other artificial intelligence (A.I.)-based Smart Cities technologies.

All the local governments in Multnomah County are providing information by video either over the cable access channels or through YouTube, Facebook, and other social media outlets. As video continues to be the number one source for news and information for nearly all demographic groups,168 local governments will need to increasingly cover public meetings, press conferences, and other public events as well as provide information on a host of their services via video; especially video that is viewable on everything from a large screen to a small format smartphone.

The City of Gresham is a good example as they have a digital media producer and small studio and work with MetroEast to develop video programming. They noted video is used for both external and internal purposes, and it is growing in importance as a way not only to communicate to residences and businesses, but also communicate within the City. They also noted that audio podcasting was an increasingly useful way to deliver information because of its popularity, the number of available distribution outlets, the small amount of network bandwidth used versus video, and the ability to quickly and effectively focus on a particular topic, including in multiple languages.

Gresham also discussed the importance of geospatial technologies, including developing open data applications and planning information that is more easily displayed and discernable by a wide range of the community. For example, they discussed use of 3-D modeling based on geospatial technologies for planning projects which allows “story-maps” to be created that show both the past and the future chronology of a particular site, from groundbreaking to full development. They noted that this allows connections with the community “in a very graphic intensive way”. This information can then be provided electronically as a download from the City’s website or used in presentations and in-person meeting spaces where online communication for information that is data intensive would not be easily accessible. Portland Public Agencies talked about the importance of video communications as well, including, for tutorials, training, video blogs, and other social media uses of video.

A.I. and sensor-based technologies for Smart Cities applications are clearly “the wave of the future”. These technologies allow for providing real-time information for parking, traffic flow, utility usage, environmental indicators, and other information, and utilize a small amount of bandwidth, so data can be direct from the sensor to a resident’s device. A.I. can also provide information in multiple languages, non-real time when City representatives are not available, and intuitively for those accessing an A.I. database.

A.I. will allow everything from obtaining a building permit to finding out about parks and recreational activities to quantifying large data sets to a single address (such as economic development data for a particular block or neighborhood). East County City representatives noted that in order for someone to feel comfortable dealing with an A.I. database, it should ideally provide information and respond to inquiries in a “human-like” fashion, such that residents would feel as if they were dealing with a real person.

As noted by both local government producers of content, as well as the community media centers’ staff, producers and users, one of the challenges, even with a single topic, subject area or focus of a message, is to reach the diversity of people in the community and have that message have the same meaning. This is where new and emerging technologies will provide some tremendous capabilities. For example, local governments and community media representatives discussed virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR) and X-reality (XR) as having the capability to immerse the content recipient in the same message in different ways. For example, VR and/or A.I. could provide virtual tours of Parks, museums, or historic neighborhoods responsive to an individual such as in different languages, with additional information depending upon how long the virtual user stops in a given location, or with functionality that supports differently-abled people. As indicated in Finding 3.2, Kiosks combined with A.I. have the power to provide information, in a way which supports better comprehension by people with differing abilities and needs.

Interactive content has largely focused on social media, online gaming, and other activities, but will be increasingly used to provide other types of relevant, local, and diverse content. For example, the 360-video site development 3D model discussed in Finding 3.3 can be architected such that the community can actually make adjustments to the model and submit those back to the Planning department for a very graphic representation of any ideas they have for changes.

As with any new technology, the challenge will be to make the content available in forms from the most basic to the most complex, accessible by a diverse audience, and through multiple platforms.

For example, while teleworking does not require high levels of competency, it does require technology tools and software, a broadband Internet connection, training, and a productive work space at home. As teleworking rapidly expands (as is the case due to the COVID-19 stay-at-home order), technology will evolve and become more sophisticated. The burden to “keep up” may fall to the individual. While these capabilities will be attainable for much of the population, keeping up will be a significant burden for those who indicate cost/affordability is their number one inhibitor to having necessary technology. Even when necessary technology can be obtained, associated training, a critical factor to technology adoption, must be sought after and provided.

For example, abilitynet.org, an organization that supports people living with disabilities in using technologies at home, at work, and in education, lists seven key areas where virtual reality can prove useful to people living with disabilities. This includes everything from trying “out of reach” experiences, such as climbing a mountain, to wayfaring in new locations, help improving motor skills and giving caregivers and others close to the person living with a disability a better idea of what that person might be going through by simulating their experience in a virtual world.

One rapidly advancing technology, Artificial Intelligence (A.I.), has the capability to benefit underserved communities. Key sector representatives including local government officials from the City of Gresham and Multnomah County, school district representatives,, and non-profit DIN members, talked about advances in A.I. and the Internet of Things (IoT) being especially helpful to augment human capacity, such as: assisting persons with disabilities; translating information into multiple languages; providing residents multiple ways to receive information through a Kiosk; and the like.  A.I. has substantial potential to remove barriers for those that provide services to and support underserved and diverse communities. It also has the ability to assist entrepreneurs in more cost-effective and efficient development of new products and services and enable wider and more comprehensible outreach to the community at large.

Advanced technologies require an investment cost, which may be easily affordable to the “haves”, but may not be achievable for the “have-nots”. Unless such technology is designed and applied through a creative, user-centered design process, especially in the personal-use environment, it could serve to widen the digital inclusion gap.

As discussed under Key Question #2, affordability is a significant determinant in whether someone can and will adopt communications technology.

In the Scientific Residential Survey, when asked what are the one or two communications products or services that they don’t have but really need, 82% of respondents indicated that they had everything they needed. The remaining 18% indicated a variety of communications technologies they would like to have now or in the near future, including affordable Internet, higher speed Internet/broadband, basic Internet service, and a cell/mobile phone. Households in this group earned less than $35,000 a year. 

In the Qualitative Public Survey, far more respondents (at 54%) indicated they did not have what they need, with the highest being affordable Internet (28%), high/higher speed Internet/broadband (16%) and connections to home security/heat/ac/” nest” at 10%. This was followed by television/cable TV service at 7% and the need for a variety of devices from cell/mobile phones to other wireless device/smartphone/tablet ranging from 2% to 4% of the respondents. Six percent (6%) of respondents said “Other” and responses ranged from choices in service providers to needs for services, applications, and content availability.

Adding to the findings under Key Question #2 concerning cost as the primary barrier to technology use and adoption, for respondents who identified they needed a technology they didn’t have, in both the Scientific Residential Survey and the Qualitative Public Survey, cost/affordability was the number one barrier to obtaining those technologies (49% of Scientific Survey respondents identified cost, followed by lack of available options/choices at 8%). For the Qualitative Public Survey respondents, cost again was the number one barrier (50%). For those who specified a technology they really needed, cost was even a higher barrier at 76%.

Chart 2: Reasons or Barriers Keeping You from Getting or Using Technologies You Don’t Have Now