A Burlington city councilor raised ethical concerns Wednesday over City Council President Jane Knodell’s (P-Central District) direct communications with a former Burlington Telecom bidder.
Councilor Joan Shannon (D-South District) criticized Knodell for phone calls to ZRF Partners over the past weeks, which, she said, “wreak havoc on the process.”
“Councilors should not be negotiating with anybody,” she said. The council had hired the head of Dorman and Fawcett, Terry Dorman, as negotiator for a reason, Shannon said.
The criticism came as the two finalist bidders, Tucows and the co-op Keep BT Local, met Wednesday to try to hammer out a compromise proposal to buy Burlington Telecom. Monday, the council deadlocked in a 6-6 vote, and asked the two bidders to partner up. The two entities have until the end of the day Friday to put forward a joint proposal.
If they can’t come to an agreement — or if the council doesn’t support their agreement — two previously eliminated bidders, Schurz Communications and ZRF Partners, would be readmitted to the process.
Shannon also said Knodell’s conversations with other bidders were part of a political charade by councilors who voted for Keep BT Local but now are backing off that support.
“President Knodell isn’t exactly rooting for @KeepBTLocal & @TingBurlington to successfully negotiate,” Shannon tweeted on Wednesday. “I hope KBTL supporters like Schurz because it looks like that’s where we’re headed.”
Councilor Dave Hartnett (D-North District) agreed; he guessed that Schurz would win if given a second chance before the council.
Knodell acknowledged that she had several phone conversations with ZRF Partners over the last few weeks, but said she did not negotiate anything. “To characterize my conversations with anyone as negotiations is absolutely wrong and baseless,” she said. “The council has been very divided. I felt it was prudent to keep our options open.”
Hartnett said he supported Knodell’s communications, saying that it was the only way to ensure that the process the council voted on Monday was followed. “I think the council’s lost trust in the format of Terry Dorman and the administration” as negotiators, he said.
Councilor Kurt Wright (R-Ward 4) also reached out to Schurz, he said, and on Wednesday, he defended those calls. “Obviously we should not be negotiating, but it’s important to be prepared, because we know there’s a timeline,” Wright said. “If we sprung it on them, then we’d be getting criticism of, how are we going to do this on the tight timeline?”
“I think we should stay on the high road here,” Wright added, urging councilors to focus on the negotiations at hand.
While communications with bidders without council approval do not explicitly violate council rules, they obscure a process meant to take place in the public eye, Shannon said. Knodell had not told the council about her communications, Shannon added.
In an interview last Friday, Mayor Miro Weinberger also said that he had discouraged councilors from reaching out to bidders. “That’s not something I support,” he said.
On Wednesday, councilors all around were quick to fling barbs. Knodell said she was “disappointed in Councilor Shannon’s remarks.”
Hartnett, too, was quick to lambast Weinberger’s lack of transparency throughout the process.
“If people want to know why we’re at where we’re at, it’s because of the mayor and what’s he been doing,” Hartnett said. “Quite honestly, it’s been a wreck.”
None of the councilors who spoke to Seven Days said they had heard updates on the negotiations between Tucows and KBTL. That’s the way it should stay, Knodell said. “I’m hoping that councilors and the mayor will let the parties negotiate freely without interference,” she said.
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
We need a new city council. What a mess.
Even if you disagree with Jane (and I certainly have!) it is clear she has integrity and good intentions. I may not agree with her all the time but she has taken positions that have angered the left, the right, and the center in Burlington to do what she believes is right, and has done so without resorting to political attacks.
Appears some of the votes for KBTL were really anti-Ting votes designed to open it back up to other bidders. The process has been terrible. Start with the criminal actions of Leopold and Kiss, the attempt select buyer in secret, then mayor has back door communications with ZRF that cause them to drop out, then Paul recuses/”unrecuses”, and now this. I support KBTL, and I am not happy about more action from councilors that undermine trust.
The fundamental question that no one is addressing directly is whether our public utility should be publicly or privately owned. It would help if the council addressed this head-on.
“Maybe those KBTL supporters really didnt want KBTL to win.”
I think that statement may apply to many more Burlingtonians than just members of the Council. Speaking for myself, I’ve supported KBTL, I still have the lawn sign up, and I’ve even delivered KBTL pamphlets (to Joan’s Lakeside neighborhood, heh).
But I’ve still been uneasy with the riskiness of the proposition (i.e., “junk bond” capital, a seemingly imminent Citibank suit, the possibility of Bluewater Holdings and/or the Public Utility Commission giving the deal the thumbs-down). Honestly, I’d be fine to know that Burlington Telecom was owned by a seemingly responsible and responsive company like Ting.
My point is, I suspect there are many more Burlingtonians like me out here who love the idea of a co-op in theory but are not yet comfortable with the degree of risk that KBTL represents. Certainly that would explain some of the seemingly ambivalent behavior from some of the pro-KBTL Councilors.
Pointing to the fact that they had the votes to get KBTL in, but passed is revealing. You’re right. They all didn’t really want KBTL in the first place. So why have they been posturing as such? That’s the question to ask. The reason will be different in each Councilor’s case but in the end none of those answers will be satisfying, and most will reveal more of a political need to block the mandated success of this Mayor than anything else.
Also consider this for a sec. Check the Prog FB page. That will reveal that they have supported KBTL and opposed all other bidders before their bids were even revealed.
I disagree with the comments that criticize this BT process. Its been a long road from virtual bankruptcy to two $30M offers – the steps we took to get to today have been a huge success in my mind. Lets finish this process swiftly and smoothly by selecting the best offer in front of us so that we can move on to other City matters. We’ve strung Ting along long enough, they are one of the finalists, their offer is excellent, its time to give them the win. Opening this back up is a huge waste of time. Everyone got a chance to vote for their two finalists, if they don’t like the outcome, that’s unfortunate, but they had the opportunity to vote and did so. Please put your personal issues with one another aside for the moment and do whats best for the City right now. Thank you.
You know what?… maybe the KBTL votes on the council wanted a full vote of the council because that was the right thing to do… so that any decision on BT would not be sullied by a perception that the vote was somehow unfair… the process has certainly been a shit show and I put that on the mayor and the Dems… it’s pretty funny to hear Dems attack Knodell for contacting ZRF… I wonder if Shannon was as angry and disappointed about the the mayor’s contact with ZRF over the pulling of their bid?… doubt it… we all know that Joan Shannon is firmly in Miro’s pocket so don’t tell me that Shannon came up with this new bit of mudslinging on her own… she is for all practical purposes a wing of his PR machine… just like some of the regular commenters I regularly see on these threads… The mayor’s handling of the ZRF bid in the first place? Paul’s recusal, quitting her job, what will be her eventual rehiring at her previous or another accounting firm once the dust settles?… the optics of that little Dem “junket” to Toronto for votes that were already lined up?… it’s made a mockery of the process… transparency?… bs… this mayor and his team are 24/7 political schemers… the ends justify the means…
Another point that has been brought out is Councilor Paul’s rescusal and subsequent quitting of her job so she could vote without conflict (a questionable tactic for another topic of discussion). If she had not voted for Ting, KBTL would have been the choice! Perhaps the Mayor knew this outcome could happen and was behind her strategy in order to move along his preference…which wouldn’t surprise me about our Mayor
This article raises some interesting questions. Why was there a 6-6 deadlock vote this week? At least 3 of the 6 KBTL supporters voted to POSTPONE the decision at the Oct 30 city council meeting when they could have successfully voted in KBTL 6-5 since Karen Paul had recused herself. Maybe those KBTL supporters really didnt want KBTL to win. Why did Jane Knodell continue communications with ZRF when she chose KBTL as her top candidate? I dont get it.
@BTVKG… as I wrote in a previous comment, maybe the KBTL votes on the council did not choose political expediency and wanted a “clean” vote either way so as not to sully the decision by cries of an incomplete council vote?… that’s a concept the mayor and his Dems might not understand… also… Knodell is being accused of speaking to ZRF after this current round of voting… imo probably to see if this guy could be brought on as a capital resource for the KBTL bid?… but that is just speculation… and I would assume the same conflict of interest with his bid exists… but then he could always quit his job!!!
A general comment: The comments from some of the other supporters of the mayor’s preference – the actual regular $$ donors or the ones who do professional internet outreach for his development projects- and especially those who may have future development projects in the pipeline?… your comments I take with a large amount of salt…
critikboy…..The article states “Knodell acknowledged that she had several phone conversations with ZRF Partners over the last few weeks”. No mention that the discussions occurred after the vote. She was a strong critic of Miro having discussions with ZRF even though he had informed them in advance of those discussions. According to this article her discussions were made without the council’s knowledge.
I won’t speculate about the motives here of delaying the vote or the desire for any particular outcome (though it just seems like a difficult choice for the Council, understandably), but @BTVKG don’t you have a close relationship to Joan Shannon? Your first post was initially under a name (which equates to the initials KG), but with the same picture/avatar. If that’s the case, not a great practice to engage in, in order to advocate for her position – as if a member of the general public.
“The comments from some of the other supporters of the mayor’s preference… your comments I take with a large amount of salt…”
kk, courageous anonymous critik.
This is simply Joan Shannon peddling a conspiracy theory to deflect from the fact that she has consistently voted against the interests of Burlington and against the will of her constituents by supporting a Canadian company over local community ownership of BT. The delay was due to the fact that Karen Paul had a conflict of interest and some Councilors wanted time to figure out what it was about, and if it had unduly influenced the process leading up to that vote. And, Karen has still not come clean to the public about the nature of that conflict of interest. If there had been a vote, and KBTL had won, Ting supporters would have cried foul over over the recusal. Taking time to bring back some level of transparency in a process that has been shrouded in secrecy, controversy, and undue influence from the Mayor’s office is not a bad thing. To the point that somehow KBTL supporters on the council wanted to delay so they could get a tie – KBTL supporters on the Council had no way of knowing that Karen Paul would quit her job so she could vote. In all likelihood, KBTL was expected to win this past Monday had Karen not taken the extraordinary step of leaving her job so she could vote. We should be thankful that Jane has worked to successfully open up the process around the sale so we could have some level of public input before a decision was made. If the Mayor had gotten his way, the public would have had virtually no time to examine the bidders and form an opinion about the sale before the Council voted.
“This is simply Joan Shannon peddling a conspiracy theory…”
No, Josh, that was simply Joan responding to the fact that the City Council president was conducting secret phone calls to a would-be eliminated bidder for BT.
“…to deflect from the fact that she has consistently voted against the interests of Burlington and against the will of her constituents by supporting a Canadian company over local community ownership of BT…”
So…you DO know the will of all of Joan’s South District constituents? A lot of people would be interested in paying you for your expertise.
“We should be thankful that Jane has worked to successfully open up the process around the sale so we could have some level of public input before a decision was made.”
That’s unfortunatly contradicted by the information shared by Joan (see article above), who says that Jane has been in direct communications with ex-bidder ZRF Partners. My understanding is that this was not done with any knowledge of the City Council, i.e., it was done secretly. Whatever else Jane has done to open up the process around the sale, this behind-the-scenes scheming is its antithesis.
And I’m a Jane Knodell fan. I’ve delivered campaign literature for her around the ONE in freezing December weather. And I’d do it again, I think, but this working-in-secrecy stuff is a head-scratcher.
So, let me get this straight…
The mayor – who secretly contacted one of the bidders and persuaded them to quit – suddenly has found religion?
Apparently, since hizzoner is now scolding councilors individually for contacting bidders.
Time for a new mayor – someone who can lead this city.
Nate- It was the Mayor who went behind the Councils back to encourage ZRF to remove themselves from the process. The Council agreed last Monday to open the process back up to ALL 4 bidders if KBTL and Ting could not come to an agreement by Friday. Jane was simply preparing for the very probable outcome that Ting and KBTL would not come to an agreement, and alerted the public and council immediately after ZRF said they would be willing to return. She has acted in complete transparency through this process, and we should be tankful that Jane was able to undue the harm caused by the Mayor going behind the Councils back in the first place to encourage ZRF to remove themselves. I would also remind you that if the Mayor had his way, the process would have remained behind close doors right up until the final vote, and we would have never known about the damage he did – and continues to do – to this process.
And, i’m sorry, but I don’t trust the opinion of someone who is clearly trying to deflect the push back from a clearly unpopular decision by blaming the people who have worked to open up this process. Even Dave Hartnett, an endorsed Democrat, said that the fault lies squarely in the Mayor’s office.
“The Council agreed last Monday to open the process back up to ALL 4 bidders if KBTL and Ting could not come to an agreement by Friday. Jane was simply preparing for the very probable outcome that Ting and KBTL would not come to an agreement, and alerted the public and council immediately after ZRF said they would be willing to return.”
Check that timeline, Josh. Per the article:
“…Councilor Joan Shannon (D-South District) criticized Knodell for phone calls to ZRF Partners over the past weeks…”
Did you catch that? Past weeks. Not since Monday. Weeks.
“And, i’m sorry, but I don’t trust the opinion of someone who is clearly trying to deflect the push back from a clearly unpopular decision by blaming the people who have worked to open up this process.”
Where exactly did I blame the people who have worked to open up this process (i.e., Jane)? I started out expressing a sort of sympathy for the apparent ambivalence on the part of some KBTL-suppporting Councilors (because I feel it personally), then I demonstrated some patent misinformation in your own, prior post. (I’ll cop to being snarky with critikboy.)
But solid reasoning doesn’t hinge on whether or not you trust someone. It stands on its own.
I’m a south end constituent who strongly supports Joan Shannon and is very grateful to her for standing up for fiscal responsibility. Ting is by far the best choice, they’re a great cable company and I’d love to subscribe right now. It’s not easy to stand up for what’s right, it would’ve been easier to knuckle under to Jane Knodell’s ridiculous hypothetical theorizing.
There are many of us who support Ting because we want to protect BT as a valuable asset for Burlington. A vote for KBTL is a vote to kill BT and deny many taxpayers access to their service. The six councilors who voted for KBTL need to be replaced by better and more thoughtful people with simple common sense. Especially Knodell and Bushor. Otherwise we taxpayers will pay the price for their foolish disregard for responsible governance.
Nate- I was referring to Joan, not you…
Hopefully Ting and KBTL can come up with a joint plan. I think KBTL could play an important role guiding BT’s future and providing guardianship over the original spirit of BT. Who knows, but since its pretty clear that they’re support on the Council is waning, or empty to begin with by some, if they want to have any relevance and role, they really need to work with Ting. And I think any collaboration will make the eventual entity stronger. Go KBTL + TING.
I support all bids that are financially sound and offer management expertise, does not provoke lawsuits, and moves BT forward. Obviously KBTL does not qualify. Why they are even in the running is a statement on some of the city council’s lack of math skills.
I’m sure glad I don’t live in Burlington. People in Brookfield tend to get along pretty good without the drama of this soap opera.
Do people understand that Burlington no longer owns BT? And voting for Ting would give Burlington back partial ownership? Burlington will get nothing if Bluewater decides to reject the city’s choice, and they will reject KBTL.
The owners and creditors of BT will not approve a ridiculous vote that awards BT to the low bidder likeliest to bankrupt the telecom within five years. Thanks are due to Mayor Weinberger and the councilors who support Ting. Their bid allows Burlington to regain partial ownership, and BT will grow exponentially because Ting has the money to expand the network, making the city’s minority stake that much more valuable.
Knodell’s argument is that the percentages aren’t good enough, the terms aren’t good enough. Well, thanks to the shortsightedness of some councilors the city is about to have zero ownership in BT with zero choice of buyer. I can’t believe we came so close to a fairy tale resolution only to have it snatched away by a handful of foolhardy councilors lacking business management expertise.
I live in the South End, do not vote for Joan Shannon or Chip Mason, but contacted them both a few weeks before the the final vote. Chip Mason responded immediately, and we agreed to disagree. Joan Shannon did not reply until after her junket to Toronto, and was slightly less than politic in her reply to me. I don’t trust her or agree with her as far as I could throw her. That she is a shill for Miro I don’t doubt, as are several on the council. I disapprove of much of what Miro has done, and am skeptical about anyone who kowtows to his leadership.
I am sorry that this process has reached such acrimonious levels. I hope KBTL and Ting can reach an agreement, as they were my first and second choices (in that order) of the final three (which would have been a final four if a certain person hadn’t made what I consider to be highly unethical communications to #4). If we go to a new vote with four participants, I don’t believe any party will get a majority of the votes, and I suspect we will have a tie for the second place bidder. That possibility was not considered in setting the rules and I fancy it will cause more acrimony and spitting before it is resolved.
@Penelope you are 100% correct. Thanks for putting it so clearly. And the reason its important to support whatever collaborative agreement that Ting + KBTL comes up with is to avoid a prolonged process that pushes us beyond the Dec 31 cut-off. It may not be perfect – but I suppose we need to just wait and see what such a structure looks like.
I have been following your BT debate from Nebraska. My provider is a well-manged successful co-op with quite fast, optic even rural connections…apparently a rarity in the U.S. Burlington should be able to have a publicly owned telecom. I fault your community, which includes the government, media, and you citizens with a continual counterproductive emphasis on Personality Politics. There seems to be no one publicly addressing the specific economic logistics of the situation. If you look back at the reportage history including your replies to articles done by 7 Days, there is continual No Hard Data feed being presented to your detriment. You can’t educate in an echo chamber and you can’t educate or progress effectively without the facts.