Tag Archives: Utah Taxpayers Association

Layton Mayor Curtis Takes Aim at the UTA

By | | , ,
2 Comments

Apparently I’m not the only one sick of the Utah “Taxpayers” Association and their constant vuvuzela-like drone. Layton Mayor Steve Curtis is getting sick of their spiel too.

Mayor Steve Curtis said UTOPIA, and the cities involved in it, have been transparent. “There isn’t anything we are doing behind closed doors,” he said.

The association has been opposed to UTOPIA from the beginning, Curtis said. “And if there is a way and means to stir the public, they go about it,” he said.

Curtis said he also disagrees with the association’s assumption that the public pledges being made available to the project are on the rise.

This is the kind of elected official needed in UTOPIA cities, just like Mayor Winder of West Valley City. It’s about time that the cities started sticking up for themselves and their decisions against the telecom guns-for-hire representing themselves as some kind of public advocate. You’re on notice, UTA: we’re all pretty sick of your lies.

Special Note: The UTA is still a bunch of cowards. They never responded to my challenge to a debate and refuse to respond on their Twitter account. Royce Van Tassell will also abandon any discussion thread on FaceBook about UTOPIA once I jump on. What a bunch of wusses.

An Open Challenge for the Utah Taxpayers Association

By | |
7 Comments

For years, the Utah Taxpayers Association has been concern trolling over UTOPIA, conveniently avoiding any kind of real confrontation or public forum where they can be called on it. They censor or remove comments from their website that don’t support their position, they whip the press into a frenzy with fantastic and inaccurate claims, and they regularly go almost entirely unchallenged when they openly lie on behalf of their clients Qwest and Comcast. They’re the poster child for lobbyists run amok.

To that end, I’m issuing an open challenge to the Utah Taxpayers Association. You find your best guy, name a time and place, and we’ll have the knock-down, drag-out debate over UTOPIA that you’ve been avoiding for years. I know you’re reading and I know you’ll see this. I also know you’re probably too chicken to accept the challenge or risk getting your nose bloodied in a public forum. I’m extending it anyway to give you the opportunity to prove me wrong.

So bring it. I’m ready.

The Non-Story of UTOPIA and Lawsuits

By | | , ,
1 Comment

Today’s Deseret News ran an article about UTOPIA’s preparation for some pending litigation, but it’s not really much in the way of news. We all know that UTOPIA and RUS aren’t on each other’s Christmas card lists and that UTOPIA incurred some significant expenses as a result of the incompetence of that federal agency. Negotiations with RUS broke down months ago and UTOPIA was still left holding the bag. At this point, they really don’t have much of a choice but to go after RUS in court since a settlement could not be reached and the damages are in the tens of millions.

UTOPIA obviously can’t confirm nor deny anything at this point, but it’s not hard to read between the lines. The question, though, is why this is being cast in some kind of sneaky and sinister light. Only an idiot would openly discuss pending litigation in a public meeting, much less with members of the press. It’s also not uncommon to have internal agency meetings that don’t require public notice. I would bet that every city, county, state agency, and interlocal agency has done the same.

That said, I can understand why someone would be heavily suspicious. UTOPIA has always struggled with putting information out for public scrutiny. It isn’t helped when the incumbent guns-for-hire Utah “Taxpayers” Association regularly takes what information is public and distorts or outright fabricates negative information about the project.

Basically, there’s nothing to see here that you haven’t already heard through the grapevine. When there’s real news, they’ll probably put out a press release.

What exactly does UTOPIA's press release mean?

By | | ,
7 Comments

After the first read-through of UTOPIA’s press release, I wasn’t entirely sure what they were trying to say. In fact, most of the press release seems to allude to some sort of ethereal plan to bring the network out to 20,000 more subscribers as quickly as possible. Given the financial situation that UTOPIA is currently in, I was left scratching my head. That is, until I read the last paragraph of the press release.

As we all know, UTOPIA doesn’t have any capital to use for expansion. Barring repayment from RUS or getting awarded stimulus money, I doubt there will be spare change rattling around for several years. All of the eggs are currently in the SAA basket since it’s the only way to finance building things out. Part of the problem with the SAA is the execution time required. You have to pick a specific area to be a part of the SAA. If it’s too small, it won’t be financially self-sustaining or require an unreasonably high participation rate. If it’s too large, you could easily spend a couple of years canvassing to find enough participants. Then, after months of finding the people who want service, you have to spend a few more months getting the city council to approve the bond for the SAA, then wait for the money to come in, then, after many moons, finally start digging trenches and laying fiber. It’s a time-consuming process that could be derailed at any time by the saber-rattling of the Utah Taxpayers Association, Qwest, or any number of anti-UTOPIA factions.

Now this is the statement that sticks out:

Under this next phase of growth, the eleven pledging cities would create a new bond and release funds incrementally as demand is demonstrated.

In other words, UTOPIA cities will go ahead and approve the bonds now to get the financial side rolling, then go find and form the SAAs. This not only accelerates the deployment schedule by months, it also allows for much smaller participant areas, maybe even as few as several dozen. That’s great news for residents of member cities who want service but can’t get a couple hundred neighbors to sign up as well. Once you have enough people to jump in, construction could start the next week. It’s the SAA improved and evolved.

If you live in a pledging city, now is the time to go to UTOPIA’s website to register your interest for service. Get your neighbors to do it. And your friends, family, and even that guy down the road with the busted washing machine on his porch. (You never know; he might tune into the DIY Network and get inspired to do something about it.)

Letter to the Editor: Utah Taypayers Association Lacks Credibility on UTOPIA

By | |
1 Comment

The following letter to the editor was submitted to the Salt Lake Tribune, Deseret News, Daily Herald, Ogden Standard-Examiner, and Davis County Clipper. It was published in the Clipper and an abbreviated version is currently slated to appear in the Tribune.

UPDATE: Here’s the letter published in the Tribune.

Whenever there is criticism leveled towards UTOPIA, you will usually find the Utah Taxpayers Association screaming the loudest. The irony is that they are one of the least-qualified to criticize UTOPIA or make any commentary on telecommunications policy.

Continue reading →

UTA Threatening to Sue UTOPIA and Brigham City

By | | ,
10 Comments

Hot off of their misinformation campaign to residents, the Utah Taxpayers Association is now rattling their legal sabers at UTOPIA and Brigham City over the Special Assessment Area (SAA). The UTA is claiming that participants were deprived of due process because the terms were not explained properly and that there wasn’t a public hearing. These claims, however, are a matter of pure fiction. Many of the comments I’ve read indicate that the terms were explained and paper copies of the agreement provided via mail by the city. The initial meeting held in November to form the SAA was a public hearing and was well-attended.

What’s interesting, however, is that it was Qwest that initially filed FOIA requests with Brigham City to see the terms of the SAA, yet the UTA is the one making legal threats. My suspicion is that, after getting their butts kicked in court, Qwest wants to use the UTA as their proxy in these fights. The UTA refuses to disclose how much money individual members contribute or what influence any members exercise, ironic considering that they are protesting that there hasn’t been enough sunshine in the process.

The most galling part isn’t the lying and misrepresentation. At this point, it appears to be par for the course. No, what irks me the most is the UTA characterization of Brigham City residents as simple-minded fools just waiting to be duped by the first slick salesman that appears on their doorstep. I’ve met many residents and city employees from Brigham and I can tell you with complete certainty that they’re no dummies. They go to city council meetings, read the papers, and get informed on issues in a way that I wish their urban counterparts would consider trying out. (Seriously, I’ve found rural voters to be some of the sharpest tacks out there, especially when it comes to local politics.) How the UTA thinks it can simultaneously insult the intelligence of and purport to represent taxpayers is beyond me.

Brigham City Responds to UTA FUD

By | | ,
2 Comments

Brigham City has posted a thorough rebuttal (warning: PDF) of UTA’s false and misleading mailer sent to residents earlier this week. (h/t: Paul Larsen) It thoroughly shreds the UTA’s positions which are about the same as claiming that dihydrogen monoxide is a dangerous substance. Many of them are the same rebuttal points I offered, some are new or provide additional specifics I did not have. It proved that UTA is, once again, making stuff up to derail UTOPIA while saying they’re looking out for taxpayers. If they really cared about taxpayers, they would stop trying to derail the project and make residents in the member cities pay higher taxes.

Utah Taxpayers Association Uses Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt Ahead of Brigham City Vote

By | | , , ,
35 Comments

The City Council in Brigham City will be holding a final vote on the UTOPIA SAA on Thursday December 10 at 7PM. This vote will determine if the SAA will move forward or not. Ahead of this, the Utah Taxpayers Association has decided to start up a campaign of disinformation to try and get residents against it. The following mailer was sent out to all residents of Brigham City (no doubt at a considerable cost to the UTA).

UTA Postcard Side A

UTA Postcard Side A

UTA Postcard Side B

UTA Postcard Side B

In their usual style, it purposefully misrepresents the SAA and plays loose with the facts. Here’s a few highlights.

  • Before UTOPIA came to town, private companies would not invest in Brigham City. Both Comcast and Qwest refused to provide broadband service to residents despite repeated requests from the city to do so. After Brigham City joined UTOPIA, both companies started to roll out services. Chasing away private capital indeed.
  • Sure, your house could be sold at a foreclosure sale if you fail to pay your part of the opt-in SAA. The same thing happens when you fail to pay your property taxes, your mortgage, or any other expense associated with owning a house or taking a loan out against it. Yet, for some reason, the UTA doesn’t seem to think those items are unfair. Nice spin, guys, but not paying your bills will, surprise, result in consequences. No duh.
  • The UTA has purposefully inflated and misrepresented the city’s share of the expenses associated with the SAA. Brigham City has chosen to pay to hook up all city buildings with UTOPIA service. That accounts for well over half of the money the UTA is talking about and provides a legitimate service to the city. It is also entirely unknown what costs, if any, the city will have to carry for the bond to go through. This is because it depends entirely upon the number of people who sign up. Unless the UTA has some kind of magic crystal ball that I don’t (which I seriously doubt), they’re just making crap up. Again.
  • The UTA is actually calling it a negative point that you’re paying $25 and don’t get service included at that price. I hate to break this to them, but there isn’t a provider on earth that would provide even a single part of a triple play for just $25/mo., at least not without line subsidies (like Qwest and the USF). This is just a nonsensical argument. It’s like complaining that the taxes you pay for roads don’t include a car.
  • The UTA also points out that the money from the sale of your home will be used to pay off the costs of the SAA. Again, duh? What, does someone expect that the bond magically disappears because you sold your house? It’s another nonsense argument.

The flier is nothing more than a pathetic attempt to derail a project with significant community involvement and backing. The UTA isn’t looking out for taxpayers; they’re covering for their members. Let Brigham City’s residents spend their money how they want to, m-kay?

FUD Alert: Utah Taxpayers Association Continues to Bend and Cherry-Pick the Truth

By | | ,
21 Comments

It shouldn’t be any surprise that the Utah “Taxpayers” Association can’t quite bring themselves to stick to facts, instead resorting to the time-tested tools of fear, uncertainty, and doubt to prop up their weak cases. In the July newsletter, the UTA decides once again to lay into UTOPIA and directly address some of my points on defining UTOPIA’s success. Unsurprisingly, they very much missed the mark yet again.

Continue reading →

Egg on Your Face: Rep. Frank and the UTA Play Loose With the Truth

By | | , ,
39 Comments

The UTA recently released a report that UTOPIA will be calling on tax pledges this year. They cite an April statement from Murray Mayor Dan Snarr as their sole evidence. “At this point in time, no tax dollars have been used on this project. That may change, and we may need to help pay for some of the operations until there are enough customers to cover expenses.” Rep. Craig Frank was all too willing to quickly attach himself to this report as solid truth. The problem for the UTA (and by extension Rep. Frank), however, is that this is their only evidence, this statement has been repeated over and over since the refinancing (elected officials need to hedge their bets), and there’s no way it would be possible for UTOPIA to call on pledge dollars anytime this year.

The facts are simple. UTOPIA does not have a bond payment due from operating revenue until June 2010. There is absolutely no possible way that they can legally call on the sales tax pledges this year as the UTA asserts. Elected officials have been saying the same thing as Mayor Snarr for the last year to cover their own butts in a worst case scenario. The UTA is just trying to spread fear, uncertainty, and doubt without citing any new or relevant facts. It’s scaremongering, pure and simple.

If UTOPIA is really doing so poorly, how is it that they managed to sign on Integra Telecom, a company that measures its revenues in the hundreds of millions? Don’t you think a company of that caliber (which is likely going to bring in hundreds of thousands or millions in new revenue) would do their due diligence? And how is it that there’s no criticism for city-owner power or the horrendously botched sale of iProvo? Anyone? Anyone? Bueller? Seems like you folks like to reserve your criticism for easy targets.