New York City Should Stop Paying Corporations to Widen the Digital Divide

In today’s world, internet access is infrastructure. Like other utilities such as water or electricity, it should be operated for the public good.

New York City can make this happen, but challenges abound. For instance, a 2025 report found that 22% of families in the Bronx don't have internet at home. A 2020 assessment found that one-third of Black and Hispanic New Yorkers can't get online at home. And those who do have service are paying high prices. New Yorkers deserve better than what we're getting from our internet companies.

Internet access isn't optional anymore. Without it, kids can't do homework. Parents can't apply for jobs. Families can't access healthcare or government services. The digital divide isn't just about convenience, it's about whether people can participate in modern life.

A quote attributed to Martin Luther King Jr. says, “Budgets are moral documents.” What moral statement are we making when we choose not to invest in crucial public internet infrastructure? Do we want a city where your zip code determines whether you can get online? Where corporations decide which neighborhoods are worth serving? Or do we want a city where everyone has access to fast, affordable internet because we've decided it's a public good?

For decades, the city has tried to solve this problem by giving money to companies like Verizon and Spectrum, hoping they'll build in underserved neighborhoods. It hasn't worked. Since profits are lower in these areas, companies refuse to invest. When they do show up, prices stay high and service is inconsistent.

Even well-intentioned programs have failed to solve the issue of internet access. Take Big Apple Connect, which promised free internet to public housing residents. The city pays Spectrum and Altice $24.95 per unit per month —roughly $38 million per year total— to connect 330,000 residents. Meanwhile, the 2020 Internet Master Plan proposed $2.1 billion of spending over 25 years to achieve universal broadband. So for about 45% of the yearly cost of the Internet Master Plan, Big Apple Connect only connects about 4% of New York’s 8.5 million residents.

The Internet Master Plan had started contracting with local companies, including People's Choice Communications, a worker-owned cooperative that had already installed equipment providing free service to public housing. That program was abandoned by Mayor Eric Adams in favor of continued partnerships with the same major cable companies. The pattern is clear: as long as internet infrastructure remains in private hands, it will be built and operated for profit, not for people. That reality is underscored by the fact that Big Apple Connect, in addition to being an inefficient giveaway to Spectrum, ended up connecting New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) security cameras directly to NYPD surveillance systems without public disclosure or resident consent.

On the other hand, public-owned initiatives right here in New York City have shown success. The Department of Housing Preservation and Development’s (HPD) Neighborhood Internet (formerly known as Liberty Link) pilot, operating in partnership with the New York Public Library, seeks to serve 2,200 households across affordable housing buildings in the Bronx and Upper Manhattan. Unlike Big Apple Connect, this model provides a lost-cost broadband option, from installation to service. The service costs the city just $5 to $15 per household per month to operate once infrastructure is in place, according to staff estimates. Compare that to Big Apple Connect, which pays Spectrum and Altice $24.95 per household monthly with zero public infrastructure to show for it.

Public broadband means the City owns the physical infrastructure: the cables, the connections, the backbone of the network. Multiple private companies can then compete to provide service over that infrastructure, driving prices down and quality up. The City controls the infrastructure while benefiting from market competition for services.

New York City has everything it needs to further build out this infrastructure. With City budget negotiations underway, now is the moment to secure funding for public broadband infrastructure. We already own fiber optic cables throughout the city. New York State has allocated significant broadband funding through its ConnectALL office, drawing from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act's $42.5 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. We have legal authority to require companies to install infrastructure when they dig up streets for other projects. We have local contractors and experienced workers ready to do the installation. What we need is the political commitment to make it happen, and the Mamdani administration has the opportunity to do so.

The path forward has two parts. First, immediate relief: deploy emergency hotspots to families with no service, support community networks like NYC Mesh that have proven they can deliver reliable service, and reconnect with local providers such as People’s Choice Communications, Starry, Flume, Sky Packets, and Brooklyn Fiber ready to serve underserved neighborhoods right now.

Second, build long-term infrastructure. The city should own the network and create open competition for service providers. We should coordinate internet cable installation with street construction that's already happening—it cuts costs dramatically. We should enforce existing contracts with companies that aren't delivering what they promised. And we should ensure that any infrastructure work creates good union jobs.

Other cities across the country have made this switch. Municipal networks in Chattanooga, Tennessee, and Lafayette, Louisiana deliver fast and cheap internet. They've created jobs, attracted businesses, and generated revenue for other city services. They prove it can work.

New York has the resources, the need, and the opportunity. Public broadband isn't a radical experiment—it's a proven solution to a real problem affecting thousands of New Yorkers right now.

The question is whether we'll build the infrastructure our city needs, or keep hoping that private companies will suddenly start serving everyone fairly. That hope hasn't worked for decades. It's time to try a new vision that does.

The authors wish to extend their thanks to the members of the Internet for All Working Group who provided feedback for this piece.