A study just came out recently that presented a comparison between a city-owned wireless network versus a corporate-owned platform. The Institute for Local Self-Reliance and the Media Alliance says that with regard to the proposed EarthLink/Google-owned network in San Francisco, a city-owned model would work better because the original investment would be paid back in 4 years, and that nearly $23 million in revenue would be generated over the first 10 years of its existence.
However, is a city the size of San Francisco (or larger cities, for that matter) equipped to take on the responsibility of managing a muni WiFi network? At this point, the answer is "No"--are cities ready and willing to hire staff and set aside funds to oversee a wireless network 24/7? Not very likely, at least for the near future.
While it would be nice to have this type of project managed "in-house," it would seem that city officials would rather leave the responsibility to someone who has an idea of what they're doing and will have to answer for any difficulties, which most city officials would rather shy away from.
