About 25 people gathered in the Fletcher Free Library, offering the Burlington Telecom Advisory Board words of advice on who the buyer should be and how the city should go about the selling the entity. The half a dozen people who spoke before the board depicted the local fiber-optic network as a valuable public good.
“A publicly owned company is a precious commodity and asset,” said Lauren-Glenn Davitian, executive director of CCTV Center for Media & Democracy, Burlington’s public government-access cable station. Losing community control would be “short-sighted,” she added, arguing that the city should maintain a “decision-making stake” in the utility.
The sales process may be the final episode in an drawn-out drama involving BT. In 2009, the administration of then-mayor Bob Kiss improperly spent $16.9 million in taxpayer money to save the floundering utility.
Citibank sued Burlington for $33 million, and in early 2015, Mayor Miro Weinberger resolved the legal dispute with a $10.5 million settlement agreement. Local financiers, under the company Blue Water Holdings, loaned the city $6 million to cover those costs.
As part of its deal with Blue Water, the city must sell BT by January 2, 2018 in order to reap the highest possible proportion of the sale price — 25 percent. After that deadline, the city will receive a decreasing margin of the total price.
Last year, the advisory board set forth a series of criteria for a prospective buyer, including affordable services, a local office, net neutrality and “a strong partnership with the city of Burlington.”
After a second public forum in February and approval from the Burlington City Council, the BTAB plans to create a list of interested buyers and officially launch the sales process in March. The board has proposed a June 1 application deadline. Finalists would then present publicly before the city council before it selects a buyer by the end of July.
At least one buyer has already expressed interest. Alan Matson, vice chair of Keep BT Local, said the local co-op will put forward an offer for the utility. The member-funded effort likely won’t put forward as substantial an offer as a private tech company would, Matson acknowledged. Still, he said, “We hope to be one of the finalists in July.”
Matt Cropp,* a member of Keep BT Local, said the co-op model would “build broad-based community wealth” and urged Burlingtonians to pitch in. He said he was willing to commit a portion of his retirement savings to the cause.
Steve Goodkind, who has criticized the arrangement from the start, urged the board to abandon the Blue Water deal. “That’s the devil in this thing. It needs to be gotten rid of,” he said.
The board made clear that not selling the utility isn’t in the cards. But they may consider reopening the process if they don’t find the right buyer, said Jane Knodell, a BTAB member who also serves as city council president.
“We heard from a lot of people tonight who wish that we weren’t in the situation we are in,” said Knodell. “We have a very strong set of criteria for the buyer. I think that we need to be very committed to these criteria. We need to make the right long-term decision for the city of Burlington.”
BTAB chair David Provost tried to assuage citizen concerns, noting that the board has crafted buyer criteria that emphasize local control.
“Everyone wants to paint a fear that if we move forward with a process, that we’ll sell BT to a huge conglomerate for the highest amount of money,” he said. “I don’t think the criteria reflects that.”
Provost added that the city would also seek to recover the $16.9 million dollars in lost taxpayer money. “None of us are happy that we’re in this position but when we started this seven years ago, that’s what we were dealt with,” he said. “The focus for me is to find the right partner, the right buyer.”
*Correction, February 1, 2017: A previous version of this story misidentified Matt Cropp.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Jane Knodell will sell out Burlington Telecom just like she sold out Burlington College property to Eric Farrell, like she sold the BTC to Wall Street millionaire Don Sinex, like she’ll sell out City Hall Park to Pomerleau, like she’ll sell out the Memorial Auditorium to UVM, like she’ll sell out refugees’ sanctuary statue to Donald Trump. Anyone see a pattern here? Vote this neo-liberal capitalist empty suit out on March 7th and vote in independent Genese Grill in Wards 2/3. Knodell does not represent Burlington values. She’s a tool for the 1%
Burlington had the resourcefulness and self-confidence to build something that we can all have pride in the ownership of. Burlington Telecom should remain in local control, and every effort should be made to ensure the local ownership effort is successful. Selling BT and other city infrastructure off privatization to escape liability makes us all into quitters. If we dont like the sound of that, we should each say so and do something about it, including vote for city councilors who stand up for our aspirations.
One would hope that given Burlington’s outstanding non-profit housing sector, the terrific City Market co-op, the 0 carbon footprint City owned electric system, and beautiful bikepath that a co-op purchase approach which can in good faith in the long run pay back the City’s Burlington Telecom (BT) losses would be the first words of Central District Councilor Jane Knodell on the subject. Perhaps her comments were not carefully reported by 7 Days, but it is hard to tell what she believes is best for our business and residents in the long run when it comes to the sale of BT. Tony Redington
Burlington Telecom is a critical asset to the future of Burlington. It is equal to our owning BED. This means we need to be responsible for the decision-making associated with owning a utility, hold important the control of an infrastructure service that is a key element of the city’s future market place viablity, and acknowledge that actual physical investment is something we the City (ie people of) ALREADY own… Why pay for it twice? We’ve written off the investment and now its our to profit from… Let us reap the benefits of controlling our destiny (even in small ways!)… We need long-term income generating elements to the City… We cannot rely on solely on property taxes!