It looks like Philadelphia is taking a hard look at providing free Wi-Fi in the metro area, according to this AP article. Whether or not Philadelphia follows through, there is a clear trend toward municipalities viewing Wi-Fi as a free public service.

Philadelphia estimates it would cost $10 million to cover 135 square miles. Technical details are sketchy, but I'm assuming a mesh configuration to keep wiring to a minimum. Since municipalities own the lampposts, they have the ideal infrastructure to build upon, rent free.

For those who say that municipalities have no business in the Internet access business (like, perhaps, Philadelphia-based Comcast), I say they have many reasons to be in the Internet access business. Here are a few things they can do with such a network:

• Support police and emergency service personnel with wireless broadband access. Police can download high-resolution photos in real time, instead of relying solely on low-bandwidth radio communications.
• Security services can be expanded, namely video surveillance.
• Low-income citizens can save their precious dollars for better uses. I believe this is the most important reason for deploying free Wi-Fi city-wide. The digital divide is real and is unfair. And for a city that wants all of its citizens to be educated and to have equal access to information, free Wi-Fi is a must. I realize that affordable Wi-Fi-ready devices are also required, but Wal-Mart is doing its part with a sub-$600 Wi-Fi-enabled laptop. Wi-Fi devices are getting more affordable, and quickly.

One final thought: Wi-Fi is inherently a short-range communications medium, making it not the ideal technology for such wide-range deployments. I suspect that many cities will also begin taking a close look at WiMAX; the technology isn't ready for prime time yet, but Wi-Fi is certainly paving the way for its success.