Five Burlington City Councilors this week will visit the Toronto headquarters of Ting, one of the finalists in the bid to buy Burlington Telecom.
The trip will cost approximately $6,500 and will be paid for by Burlington Telecom, according to Katie Vane, Mayor Miro Weinberger’s communications and projects coordinator. The councilors will fly out on Thursday evening and tour Ting offices and meet with management before returning to Burlington close to midnight on Friday.
On Monday, the city council will choose between Ting or the co-op Keep BT Local as the winning bidder for Burlington Telecom.
Some councilors not taking the trip believe that the visit is an effort by Ting to tilt the balance in their favor. Other councilors say the trip will serve as a valuable piece of research in making a decision.
Ting, a publicly traded company, has put forward a bid of $27.5 million for Burlington Telecom, while KBTL has offered $12 million.
The trip will provide the chance “to get a clear sense of what the company’s like, what the culture is like … get a sense of their operations,” said Adam Roof (I-Ward 8).
In spite of initial misgivings, Roof decided to go on the trip. “I didn’t want to be prioritizing potentially negative political optics over what I see as an important due diligence activity,” he said.
Besides Roof, four Democrats — Richard Deane (East District), Joan Shannon (South District), Karen Paul (Ward 6) and Chip Mason (Ward 5) — will make the trip to Toronto. Brian Lowe, Weinberger’s chief of staff, will accompany the councilors.
“We’re now deciding between [Ting] and the local folks we know,” said Shannon. “I know that folks have concern about selling to an outside company.”
The trip could help answer those questions, she said.
The entire city council was invited on the trip, according to Roof. The five going on the visit also voted on October 16 to keep Ting as a finalist.
“The accusations will fly that this is a wine-and-dine” trip coordinated by Ting, acknowledged Roof. “That’s not the situation.”
He said he would make public his itinerary and scheduled activities, as well as his list of questions for Ting and the company’s answers.
The trip expenses will be covered by Burlington Telecom revenues — not taxpayer dollars, Roof noted. But if the public has concerns, he added, he’d pay for the trip out of councilor discretionary funds or, if need be, out of his own pocket.
Max Tracy (P-Ward 2) billed the trip as unnecessary. “Other councilors are meeting Ting reps in Burlington,” Tracy wrote in a message to Seven Days. “Why do councilors need to go to them if they are already coming to us?
“I think that this crucial period leading up to the vote would be better spent meeting with Burlington residents to share information and gather feedback,” he added.
Former councilor and current state Rep. Selene Colburn (P-Burlington) took to Facebook on Tuesday to raise questions about whether the trip was appropriate “given the strong administrative support” for Ting. In early October, Weinberger urged councilors not to support KBTL because he said its low bid would open the city to legal challenges.
Dave Hartnett (D-North District), who voted in favor of KBTL on October 16, is the only Democrat not traveling to Toronto. “I’ve done my research, I know my options, and I’m happy with where I’m at,” he said.
Hartnett noted that he had no concerns about the ethics of the trip, though others may see it as a “pay-to-play trip,” he said.
“I don’t see it as that. I have respect for all my colleagues,” Hartnett said. “All five are going with the intent to learn more about a potential owner of Burlington Telecom.”
Related Stories
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Reminiscent of Mayor Weinberger’s “fact-finding” mission – sponsored by GBIC on a private plane – to an air base in Florida to judge firsthand how loud F35s are. Viewed objectively, of course, with no outside influence. Shocking outcome: he supports F35s.
If concerns are over legal matters with KBTL’s bid, unsure what a junket to Toronto will resolve.
Tee up 5 votes to Ting.
Tiki. I would welcome the opportunity to engage in a discussion about the legal and regulatory risks associated with KBTLs bid. The final revised bids were due today at 5. The council has not received them. They are being reviewed by the Citys advisors who will advise us whether their assessment of the risks have changed. This is not a junket. Ting is not paying for the flight, hotel or any expenses associated with the trip. We are scheduled to do a site visit and q&a with ting Friday am. Our visit follows the visit the Mayor and certain BTAB members made to both Ting and Schurz before our last vote. I understand that the visit was very informative and I am looking forward to getting a first hand look at issues relating to culture and customer service. The invitation was extended to all councilors and while I wish all could have attended, I respect that some have chosen not to take this oppportunity to visit. I also understand that a reporter from 7days will be attending as well to verify it is not a junket.
Hmmm, one name that is conspicuously missing is that of Ward 4 Councilor Kurt Wright, the only Republican on the Burlington City Council. It’s hard for me to believe that Kurt would end up to the left of the Dems, whom nearly all, disappointingly, seem to want to sell to the commercial interest.
Former Ward 7 Councilor Tom Ayres, a dear friend of mine whom I owe much to, but I feel that his replacement will maybe vote better (i dunno, i never really asked Tom what his current thinking was regarding BT). Thank you, Councilor Dieng for holding the line on this.
This is hopeful, but the scary thing is that Kurt will side predictably with the Dems (even though he has sided in the past with the Progs when they were ganging up to defeat the Dems on something like who was gonna preside over the Council), it will come out 6 to 6 and the Mayor will vote against KBTL.
I’m pleased (and a little surprised) that Councilor Hartnett has taken the KBTL position. Please hold the line on that, Dave. And Kurt, please show us all that you can surprise us with a vote that might not be the GOP “free market” way.
If we sell BT to the commercial interests, we basically toss that $17 million away. We’ll never see it again. If we keep BT local, if we make a condition to the private investors of BT that the city can exercise an option to buy out BT at some time in the future, like we have for the Winooski Dam, that $17 million loss will get paid for many times over in reduced costs for telecom access and will keep Comcast a bit more honest by having a decent utility to compete against.
I thought BT money was taxpayer money, which is why it had to be sold to private interests to recoup our losses, so how is this not at the end of the day a taxpayer funded trip? BT paying for this trip and this trip only doesnt help the already shaky optics.
Youd think since BT entered the world with such secrecy and potential conflicts our elected officials would do everything in their power to be particularly sensitive to even the faintest hint of a conflict.
The decision on who operates BT will have a significant impact on Burlington’s future. It is critical that we find a solid operator who can effectively manage and buildout a telecom business. That is no small lift. Why criticize city councilors for gathering as much information as possible to inform their decision making?
These councilors already support Ting. What do they expect to learn on this trip? At the last vote, Richard Deane’s opposition to Keep BT Local was aggressively unequivocal. Given his statement with regard to going with KBTL, “I WILL NOT DO IT,” I can see no point in spending our money to send him to Toronto. The other 4 were somewhat less emphatic, but they should focus on how to make KBTL work, not on being entertained by TIng. Councilor Roof said he’ll pay for the trip with his own money. My response to him and the other councilors is, please do that.
The responsible step here is for all Councilors to see Ting’s operations first hand. I’m stunned to learn that they hadn’t already. Meetings in Burlington with a select few cannot provide an accurate feeling for the culture of a company. How could any Councilor not choose to visit informally with employees in their space. To see their work environments, and to get a real sense of the vibe of the company. Its absurd to question the attending Councilors doing their due diligence (and no, that isn’t on taxpayer’s dime). What should be in question are those Councilors who choose not to. These Councilors have a duty to properly vet each candidate and they are choosing not to. Why?
Dave,
Most of the councilors expressed that their reasoning to support KBTL or Ting was based almost entirely on their interpretation of fiduciary responsibility. What do these councilors expect to see in person that would change their interpretation of those documents?
Why wasnt there a visit much earlier in the process when the bidders were first narrowed – why wait until the literal last minute? And why were councilors not invited to visit Schurz on BTs dime? Lastly, maybe instead of councilors choosing not to go, most of them work more typical, inflexible 9-5 jobs where they are not allowed to miss work with little notice?
If you’re worried about time and money, as you claim to be, why do a mass visit to Ting BEFORE they are one of the two finalists and BEFORE those two finalists submitted their final bids (Oct. 25)? It makes perfect sense for the councilors to do exactly what they are doing NOW, i.e., final due diligence on the two final bidders after their final bids are in.
Some of you KBTL people will see conspiracies around every single corner.
“The trip expenses will be covered by Burlington Telecom revenues not taxpayer dollars, Roof noted. But if the public has concerns, he added, he’d pay for the trip out of councilor discretionary funds or, if need be, out of his own pocket.”
What planet is Roof on? Put another way, how stupid does he think we are?
1.) Where does he think BT “revenues” come from – the moon? Does he think BT revenue is any different from “taxpayer dollars? It all comes from the same place, sir – our pockets.
2.) Sir, you say if need be, you can pay for the trip with the “councilor discretionary fund.” Do you take us for idiots? Do you know who finances that slush fund? We, the taxpayers, do.
3.) Are you for real?
I see this as more of a pleasure trip than anything. Of course Ting is going to get it so why travel there. I would be very surprised and happy if KBTL gets it but the Mayor of Money wants Ting so I imagine he will get what he wants, wouldn’t want him to throw a temper tantrum because the spoiled brat doesn’t get his way would we? I for one thinks that Miro only thinks of himself as always and not of what other people think..
It’s worth noting that I respect Chip Mason very much. Unsure if most people out there know it, but he is easily the fittest (athlete-wise) City Councilor to serve. Truly inspirational!
On the BT issue, we simply disagree. The Ting field trip can be justified, but the optics show tone deafness.
It’s not that either bid is without merit. The concerns about KBTL are valid. Just from where I sit, the decision seems to boil down to risk tolerance. Since my job requires reliable internet connectivity, I still have scars from the days when there was no choice in broadband except conglomerate internet. The lost productivity time was appalling. That went away with BT.
BT is a homegrown entity sought by over 2/3rds of Burlingtonians back when it came to a vote. I am willing to bet on KBTL serving my needs best. Nothing against Ting, but I don’t know them. It would be great for my city government to stand up and fight for homegrown initiatives when push comes to shove.
Chip is a very smart person so a part of me holds hope that his inquiries at Ting reveal legal & regulatory challenges no different than those KBTL would face.
BT $$ comes from subscriber revenue. Tax payer $$ comes from property tax and revenue paid directly to the City of Burlington. They are completely separate. Some comments make me suspect that folks don’t know that the City of Burlington no longer owns Burlington Telecom. The entity and its assets were sold when the deal was struck with Citibank to settle their lawsuit brought because the city owned them $33 million. Why are we ok with KBTL having private meetings with councilors and opposed to councilors going to see TING & TUCOW’s operation? We now have a lot of info about the fiscal side of the offers, but ability to operate BT and provide great service is just as important to the councilor’s decision. The visit lets them find out as much as possible about Ting & Tucow’s operations.
I think a better headline would include the fact that the five councilors are all Democrats, from the Miro Wienberger- moneyhungry wing of the Democratic party. They all voted for Ting last week, so tell me what they actually are expecting to see. Something to change their mind? I doubt it. They are looking to justify going against the desires of the populace. I understand that there have not been many comments on this issue, but those who did comment overwhelmingly supported KBTL. That is the unified voice these councilors should be listening to as our elected officials.
I am not hopeful. While I agree with Tiki that Chip Mason is a thoughtful and engaged councilor, and I do not expect him to use this as a junket, I must say that I wrote the same letter to Chip and to Joan Shannon after the vote, expressing my reasons for supporting KBTL. Chip wrote a very understanding reply. I heard nothing from Joan Shannon. Was I just pissing in the wind?
@BBAdirector, is it really fair for you, the director of a business lobbying group that has a ton of influence in this administration, to complain about private meetings?
Maybe you do not realize that people are finally growing tired of an administration that puts the needs of wealthy business interests over the needs of regular working class residents?
It is just as appropriate for BBA director to complain about KBTL private meetings as it is for you to whine constantly about anything and everything that Weinberger does. He is working his ass off to make this city a more economically healthy one. Working class residents interests are definitely bettered by more housing, more jobs, etc. Thats in stark contrast to the stagnation of the prior administrations in which 12, yes 12, units of housing were built in Burlington in the 20 years prior to Weinberger taking office, and in which BT was almost destroyed by city ownership mismanagement.
Thank you @knowyourassumptions. This Mayor and his team have worked with such diligence to turn this mess around. As you can hear in this thread and even by Councilors such as Max Tracy, common decency and civility is being lost. I expect the very same people point fingers at Congress and Trump for the very same tone and behavior that they themselves are demonstrating right here in Burlington. I have so much respect for the diligence and work this Council and the Mayor and his team puts in. These are thankless jobs and they work very hard at them. Regardless of whether you agree or not, they do deserve respect.
I don’t quite get where all the fervor over keeping BT local comes from. Perhaps ideology plays a role here? My Comcast bill is $132.16, including all taxes and fees. For the same bundle of services from BT, which I just inquired about last week, the total came to $169.39. That’s $446.76 per year more than Comcast.
Dave S., I guess you got a deal with Comcast. When I last moved, I lost BT and had to go with Comcast. They gave me a “deal” too, and for the first few months, they were only $10 more than BT. But they’ve nickeled and dimed me to death over the last two years and I am now paying more than $25 more a month than a better deal deal at BT. So I don’t know what tier you’re in, but I bet the BT package you looked at had way faster and better internet than anything Comcast promises or delivers.
“Vibes of the company”?!?!?… so if they have a ping pong table in the break room and dogs are allowed to be brought to work, then it’s okay if future earnings and profits from the company will stop going out of state forever??…
Before criticizing Ting HQ visit, please ask yourself these questions:
1. Would I criticize Councilors who support KBTL for visiting KBTL HQ (if KBTL had an HQ to visit)?
2. If Ting wins and no councilors had visited Ting HQ, would I object that Ting HQ was never visited prior to the award?
3. If I were responsible for awarding a contract to sell remaining city interests in BTC (*** see below), and concerns were raised about whether the entity was compatible with Burlington, would I visit their HQ to examine working conditions, workforce, to observe operations and culture, and talk directly with employees and customers?
4. If I already indicated support for an entity and was coming under attack for that support, would I want to visit their HQ to confirm why I was supporting it? To either change or explain my final decision?
*** Do KBTL supporters understand BTC no longer owns its equipment? To resolve BTCs earlier financial near-collapse, a locally-owned company, Blue Water, bought BTC’s equipment, with proceeds partially paying Citibank debt. Blue Water leases BTC system and equipment back to BTC. BTC must pay Blue Water back with bid proceeds. These earlier agreements dictate how bid differences between Ting and KBTL will be received by Blue Water and Citibank, to whom money is still owed. Read it here: https://www.burlingtontelecom.com/wp-conte…
$27.5m vs $12m. Read the settlement and do the math: if you were Blue Water or Citi, how would you react to city taking in $15 million less?
Please don’t attack my character or motivations. I am a proud BTC customer, a 35 year resident of Burlington, and I love local. Unfortunately, poor decisions made years ago left us handcuffed on BTC. We have only one more chance to salvage something; let’s not blow it again.