IF MAYOR GAVIN Newsom's proposal to bring low-cost WiFi to the entire city is such a great idea, why is he keeping the details secret? And why, if this is going to benefit anyone other than well-off people who want to use their laptops all over town, is he relying on big Silicon Valley firms to drive the agenda?

Those are serious questions – and until the mayor can answer them, his proposal is going to remain, at best, dubious.

Newsom has made universal WiFi a major part of his mayoral agenda. He promised to move on it last year, and then two months ago suddenly announced that he wanted public comments and proposals in 45 days. So far, two dozen cutting-edge tech firms, including Google and Earthlink, have responded with plans that would involve some sort of public-private partnership.

Google gave the mayor a 100-page business plan that would include free basic service along with a fee-based premium plan. But only a few pages of that proposal are available for public review. The rest, the Mayor's Office and the city attorney say, is confidential proprietary business information. Same goes for the other proposals. One, from AnchorFree, which has set up a WiFi network in Union Square, is so secret that the public can't see a single word.

That's a terrible way to start this process and an indication of the problems that are almost inevitable if Silicon Valley companies are running the show. The high-tech world thrives on a culture of secrecy. None of these firms are charitable operations – they're looking to make money, and if the record of the past 15 years is any indication, they'll do it by appealing to the young, savvy, and well-heeled consumer.

That's the opposite of what San Francisco ought to be doing. For starters, this entire process ought to be taking place out in the open. It's hard to believe that 95 percent of everything Google sent the mayor is really that proprietary – and if it is, then it's hard to imagine why the city should be doing business with the company. Newsom and City Attorney Dennis Herrera need to take a clear and hard line with these outfits: Proposals for a city contract as important as this one can't be done with Silicon Valley-style secrecy. If Google can't deal with that, too bad.

Equally important, the Mayor's Office needs to be clear that this is, and has to be, a city-run project. San Francisco has a terrible record with public-private partnerships – and the idea that the city would be going into business with a company that can't even share the basics of a business plan with the public is unacceptable. Ideally, the city ought to create a municipal WiFi utility and run the entire system itself: In a few years, that utility could operate cable TV, phones, and broadband and create a national model for public control over what is rapidly becoming one of the world's most important pieces of civic infrastructure.

The supervisors should tell the Mayor's Office that they won't approve any half-baked secret deal with an outside company on a fast-track time line. In the meantime, the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force needs to hold a hearing on why these records still have not been released, particularly since the request for input said all comments would be public and the Sunshine Ordinance requires extensive disclosure of contract proposals.

Done properly, a citywide broadband system could go a long way toward bridging the digital divide, could be a major boon to the local economy and local small businesses, and could put San Francisco out in front, leading the way on defining a national issue. A secret little deal with Google won't do any of those things.