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

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?

Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

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

  1. Dirk Poulsen says:

    The way I understand it is 4000 households refused to sign up to the program for the fact that they do not need the connection.

    While I would have signed up to Utopia early on when I actually needed the service is was not available.

    I have had 3 quotes from Utopia for a connection
    1. $600.00
    2. $1500.00 I have this one in writing
    3. $12,000.00

    Each time one saying the other does not know what’s going on.

    The reason service providers did not put in an infrastructure early on is because there was not a demand for it.

    Brigham City is pulling it’s usual shenanigans on the people of this city only looking at their small group of special interest and not the entire interest of the community.

    This has more to do with who we put in charge than it does the city as a whole of course.

    So here is my question?

    After the citizens of Brigham City pay for the infrastructure for Utopia who will benefit? How will they benefit, and what will Utopia get out of the deal?

    This project should have been finished 3 years ago. It is obviously a well arranged scam to fleece money from this city and they fell for it.

    It’s time that our leaders quit wasting money we do not have and it’s time we quit trusting our leaders to look out for our best interest.

    My business relies on an internet connection and it is located in Brigham City Utah.

    I do not have Utopia, I do not need it.

    Dirk Poulsen

    P.S. Better upgrade your WP to 2.8.6

  2. Anon says:

    Dirk,
    What kind of sour grapes inspired your post? It’s full of nonsense. Are you a UTA shill?

    If there was no demand for the service, then why have 1600 signed up to pay $25/month for the life of the bond to get that service? That seems like some significant demand to me.

    Can you really call 1600 households that are underserved, and will now get good service at a good price, a special interest? Even if you could, how does anybody not in that group lose anything through the SAA? Only the people signing up pay.

    You have city leaders who are making Brigham City more attractive for residents and businesses without raising taxes (since the only the residents who want the service are paying), and you think that is a bad thing? Send your city leaders to my city, if you don’t like them!

    As to who benefits once the infrastructure is paid off… obviously those who have service do. Their $25/month payment is gone, but they still get the monthly discount on their service, since UTOPIA doesn’t own the infrastructure.

    A scam to fleece money from the city? Seriously? The citizens who choose to sign up (nobody is forcing them to) collectively pay for the roll-out, and the resulting network infrastructure belongs to the city, not UTOPIA. So how exactly is anybody fleecing the city? If anything, the city is fleecing everyone else, since it ends up owning network infrastructure that it didn’t have to pay for.

    You personally have a business which relies upon an Internet connection, but you don’t need UTOPIA. Hmmm. So either your business is very low bandwidth (e.g. you only send and receive email, and do incidental web browsing) or you like paying extra money. UTOPIA’s business-level connections are significantly cheaper than an equivalent dedicated business connection from other providers. And if you truly beleive that you don’t need it, that’s fine! You won’t have to pay for it. But there are at least 1600 who do want or need it. So why do you have a problem with them paying for the roll-out to get the service?

  3. Jesse says:

    The way I understand it is 4000 households refused to sign up to the program for the fact that they do not need the connection.

    This doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t sign up down the road. Many homes are taking a “wait and see” approach which, after all of the delays in the past, makes sense to me.

    I have had 3 quotes from Utopia for a connection

    That’s not surprising. The quotes depend on how close you are to installed infrastructure which has changed over time. It may have also varied with their projections of how close the network would be to your location. Now if you got all of those quotes within a week, that would be something worth talking about.

    The reason service providers did not put in an infrastructure early on is because there was not a demand for it.

    I find that hard to believe. Didn’t Flying J relocate their HQ because of a lack of affordable broadband options? I seem to recall that this was the driving force behind Brigham City’s decision to join UTOPIA. Now, just a few years later, over 30% of the city has decided that it’s worth $3000 to get UTOPIA service. The demographics couldn’t have changed that much. Lack of demand indeed.

    After the citizens of Brigham City pay for the infrastructure for Utopia who will benefit? How will they benefit, and what will Utopia get out of the deal?

    The city will own the SAA-built portions of the network and UTOPIA is working to find a way to give the rest of the network in Brigham to the city as well. It’s truly going to be community-owned. At least one local business (Brigham.net) is going to be saved from extinction by being able to join the network and avoid Qwest transport and future “Flying J” scenarios will be avoided. That’s a pretty big benefit in my book.

    UTOPIA gets to expand the network without having to seek additional loans and only the people or entities who want service are going to pay for it. Not a bad deal, eh? (And before you complain about the city buying service, would you still complain if the spent the same money with Qwest? Let’s be consistent.)

    This project should have been finished 3 years ago.

    No argument here. The previous management did a terrible job and thus are no longer employed by UTOPIA. The build pattern wasn’t tailored to meet demand, public awareness was low, and the projections of success were pie-in-the-sky. Add in the shenanigans pulled by RUS and you’ve pretty much got a perfect storm.

    It is obviously a well arranged scam to fleece money from this city and they fell for it.

    A scam? Really? Who exactly has made out like a bandit in this deal? Most of the UTOPIA contractors weren’t very happy with the work (go ask IBEW how they feel about UTOPIA) and there’s a bunch of employees who went without pay for 6 months to keep it afloat. Nobody’s getting rich off this deal, that’s for sure.

    You also fall for the same thing the cities do, thinking that UTOPIA is some kind of detached entity. In reality, the cities are UTOPIA. They created it, they own it, they run it. Or rather, they can run it, but most of them are perfectly happy to call it someone else’s problem and delegate.

    It’s time that our leaders quit wasting money we do not have and it’s time we quit trusting our leaders to look out for our best interest.

    I know that a lot of folks aren’t happy with how things are going. I honestly can’t argue against some of your points. The question of if they are going to be in the business, though, has been long since resolved. Debating if UTOPIA should or should not exist is a moot point because it already does and the bond isn’t going to magically disappear.

    The question now is how to reduce the financial risk to the member cities. If Brigham has to chip in $300K in order to create over $1M in system revenues, they’d be crazy not to.

    My business relies on an internet connection and it is located in Brigham City Utah.

    I do not have Utopia, I do not need it.

    If you’re going to refuse to sign up for UTOPIA because you’re angry at how things turned out, you’re cutting off your nose to spite your face. Pay $60/mo to Comcast and then get socked with the bond payment, or pay $60/mo to UTOPIA and possibly stave it off. The choice is yours.

  4. Dirk Poulsen says:

    @ Anon
    “What kind of sour grapes inspired your post? It’s full of nonsense. Are you a UTA shill?”

    I am a business owner who has experience first hand with the way Brigham Corp operates. They tell you one thing and do another. It is the same nonsense all the way to the top (Fed).

    Example: In about 2003 Brigham Corp presented an RDA on forest street and in 2004 they re-zoned it. I attended the planning commission meetings and was told first hand that I would be grandfathered in with my automotive business.

    The day after the re-zoning Jeff Leishman from Brigham Corp showed up to my business with a cease and desist order signed by him and Mayor Christensen (copies available on request). They told me in round words that I could no longer continue to run my business on Forest Street.

    After costing me several thousand in attorney fees they realized that intimidation only works when what you are doing is legal.

    They sent me an apology letter and rescinded their cease and desist and told me to continue doing business as usual and I have.

    “If there was no demand for the service, then why have 1600 signed up to pay $25/month for the life of the bond to get that service? That seems like some significant demand to me.”

    Because they were intimidated into signing a waiver that they really knew nothing about. You see Brigham City and Utopia have done a very poor job of explaining this program to anyone.

    “You have city leaders who are making Brigham City more attractive for residents and businesses without raising taxes (since the only the residents who want the service are paying), and you think that is a bad thing? Send your city leaders to my city, if you don’t like them!”

    Brigham City has done nothing to help my business in Brigham City. I have seen no new business come into Brigham City.

    Brigham City turned down Walmart Distribution, They turned down Walmart Super Store, they turned down Cabellas.

    Property Taxes and Utilities have gone up. I have 20 years of records but the last 3 years could show you the changes.

    “As to who benefits once the infrastructure is paid off… obviously those who have service do. Their $25/month payment is gone, but they still get the monthly discount on their service, since UTOPIA doesn’t own the infrastructure.”

    Your assuming that Utopia pulls out of Bankruptcy.

    “A scam to fleece money from the city? Seriously? The citizens who choose to sign up (nobody is forcing them to) collectively pay for the roll-out, and the resulting network infrastructure belongs to the city, not UTOPIA. So how exactly is anybody fleecing the city? If anything, the city is fleecing everyone else, since it ends up owning network infrastructure that it didn’t have to pay for.”

    My wife told me about a belligerent Utopia representative who was anything but nice when she was approached to sign the waiver and refused.

    Utopia has used scarcity tactics and visions of grander to try and entice the community to sign up.

    @ Jesse
    “I find that hard to believe. Didn’t Flying J relocate their HQ because of a lack of affordable broadband options? I seem to recall that this was the driving force behind Brigham City’s decision to join UTOPIA. Now, just a few years later, over 30% of the city has decided that it’s worth $3000 to get UTOPIA service. The demographics couldn’t have changed that much. Lack of demand indeed.”

    Nope, wrong again, I spoke with (the former)Jay myself at the airport in Brigham City. Brigham would not allow Flying J to build a 3 story or better office building in Brigham City.

    Their excuse was they didn’t have a ladder truck to service that kind of structure and that’s why Flying J left Brigham City. Jay even offered to buy the truck.

    Now let’s see….Now we have a ladder truck today…..How Come? How Much?

    All these Cities involved in Utopia have fallen outside their original purpose.

    I wish I had more time to answer your other questions at this time.

    Feel free to stop in and visit me in person anytime.

    Dirk Poulsen

    Performance Automotive
    1085 West Forest Street
    Brigham City, Utah 84302
    435-734-9906

  5. Y.Lee says:

    Hey Dirk,
    I respect your frustration to-date. It looks like BC underestimated the power of the telecommunications companies to resist competition.

    I just wanted to address one part of your argument. 1,600+ households have voted with their wallets to support UTOPIA.
    In last month’s Brigham City election, the turnout was just over 3,000.
    1,600 household should translate to at least 2,500 committed voters. That would be a mandate of over 80% for UTOPIA.
    Too bad this was not put to the voters last month. Then all of Brigham City would be committed and would have had to pay for this project.

    Remember, the taxpayers of Brigham City are sill committed to pay almost $3,000 per household (If UTA is to be believed) even if this project is cancelled and we will have nothing to show for it.

    I remember when the Ma Bell had a monopoly and owned all the equipment including your phone. You paid them a monthly rental for everything. They have been fighting competition ever since deregulation. We still pay monthly fees… I pay more than $25 per month in other fees to my telcom providers for home services.

    I have an idea on how to recover this if these clowns manage to shut down UTOPIA. Tax the telecommunications companies who have helped screw up UTOPIA.

    Does anyone know what is the connection (funding or officers) is between the telcos and UTA?

  6. Anon says:

    @Dirk Poulsen

    Thanks for clarifying your positions. It seems like much of your frustration comes from your past experience with Brigham City. I have no experience with them and I didn’t realize that much of your post was in regards to so many non-UTOPIA Brigham City problems. It sounds like you have legitimate issues with them and a lot of reasons to distrust their current doings. I’m sorry for calling you a shill (especially since you posted with your real name, and I’m “Anon”ymous).

    When I said that the city leaders were making an impact without raising taxes, I was speaking only of the SAA-funded UTOPIA installs. Of course they could still be raising taxes to fund other things. I was only applauding their work on UTOPIA. I’m surprised that the UTA is fighting this initiative, since it is funded by participants. It’s like they want UTOPIA to fail at all costs… never mind that if it succeeds, the burden on taxpayers will be erased. If anything, they should be encouraging people to sign up en masse, since that decreases eventual tax liabilities by providing revenue to pay the bonds.

    I still think that what BC is currently doing with the SAA will be a big win for the residents and businesses in the city. While you may disagree about whether or not UTOPIA is something the cities should have been doing in the first place, the fact is that they are doing it. They are on the hook for the bond. Rather than pay on a bond and have nothing to show for it, why not encourage people to get some good service out of the deal.

    You are right that there’s a risk that UTOPIA could go belly-up, but at that point, the City still owns the network, and the residents could pay a different provider to service that network. In the mean time, adding lots of UTOPIA subscribers for very little install money (from the city’s and from UTOPIA’s point-of-view) makes UTOPIA much more likely to succeed.

  7. Dirk Poulsen says:

    @Y.Lee @Anon (thanks for the apology)

    I am not against “Utopia”

    I am against Brigham’s lack of disclosure and low blow tactics of intimidation used on the Businesses and citizens for every project they undertake.

    They lied before and they are probably doing it again. The only difference is that now that the economy has slowed, and business does not consume all my time, I have had some time to pay attention to what is going on.

    I am not fighting Utopia, I am fighting the way Brigham City handles everything they do.

    If Brigham ever decides to be honest in their dealings then I might reconsider the goals they are trying to reach.

    I would like one person to mention one undertaking that Brigham City has done that benefits the people of Brigham City and makes a profit at the same time.

    One that is not funded by the tax payers.

    Fire Station,
    Golf Course,
    Swimming Pool,
    Other Projects I don’t even know about,

    If Brigham City decided to helps it’s local businesses and promote them, help them get the funding for growth and inventory they would have the sales tax revenue to get these projects done and would not have to bond.

    Pipe Dreams or not!

    Cheers,

    Dirk Poulsen

  8. Y.Lee says:

    Hey Dirk,
    Thank you for your note.
    I have not been involved in local politics. I’m just a resident who works with technology. I have to commute to Logan every day.
    I have suggested to friends and neighbors that BC becomes more Tourist friendly. We have a great vintage down town, but no sidewalk cafes or eateries. We roll up the sidewalk at 6:00 pm most days even i the summer. Sunday? forget about it… Not even our pool is open on Sunday…

    If we get UTOPIA, the next step will be to setup a “free” Wifi zone down town. Free when you get a code form a downtown merchant.

    Promote tourism? what a concept? what a pipe dream?

    Y.

  9. Y.Lee says:

    Hello All,
    Please note that UTA is working on a petition to stop UTOPIA.
    http://www.utahtaxpayers.org/?cat=3

    I have attempted to post to both:
    “Taxpayers Association Notifies Brigham City Residents of UTOPIA Lien”
    and
    UTOPIA Petition — NOW AVAILABLE

    Theirs is not an open forum and they are holding my posting for “moderation.”

    Here is what I have posted:
    ==================================
    Do not sign this petition. It attempts to limit how I manage my private property.

    Why? I paid cash and I want service.

    No one twisted my arm and made me sign. I am an adult and the last time I checked I am allowed to sign contracts that affect my property. Or are you saying that I do not know how to read.
    Its not your property. Its mine! and the bank’s.
    Its my choice to borrow against my property if I wish. I took out a line of credit and paid the $2,760 in full.
    I encourage others to do the same.

    I’m old enough to remember Ma Bell’s monopoly and fees. Qwest still changes fees that I can not control.

    Why are you sticking your noses in my bisiness.
    I live in Brigham City. You do not.

    What are you getting for doing this? Who is paying you to stooge for them?

    If you are honest you will post this…

    ==============================

    Let’s see if they release this posting.
    Please go to the UTA site and post your objection to their interference with our business.

    Thank you,

    Y.

  10. Jesse says:

    Don’t hold your breath. The UTA has a long history of refusing to publish comments that contradict their position. They are not interested in dissent.

  11. Paul Larsen says:

    The City’s response to the Utah Taxpayers Association postcard in on the City website at http://www.brighamcity.utah.gov.

  12. Pingback: Brigham City Responds to UTA FUD » Free UTOPIA!

  13. Anon says:

    Not to bring religion in to this, but I’ll call this out…..

    Being LDS myself, I’m disappointed how certain members of my faith spread flat out lies / misinformation like this all for monetary gain with their corporate allies.

    Sorry my LDS UTA friends, but you are not “honest in your dealings with your fellow man”. You are associated with the UTA, and tout the falsehoods like you do, you are not living LDS standards yet you lie to your bishop, just like the tax payers, and tell him you are.

    UTA, you clearly do NOT have the best interest of the tax payers in mind, but only have your bottom line / corporate ally pocket books in mind.

  14. Anon says:

    Aw man! Somebody stole my name! 🙂

  15. Capt. Video says:

    The UTA does NOT have the taxpayer as their prime concern. The UTA is a business group and their goal is to protect their member businesses…like Comcast and Qwest.

    HOWEVER….that does not make everything they say wrong.

    Clearly SOME of what they say is well reasoned and logical. Some truths that may or may not have been made clear by those with a strong interest in getting people to sign up for the SAA.

    The fact that you COULD lose your home for failure to pay (even if you never get service) is factual. In fact it appears that if you are just 15 days late on a payment over the 20 year period you COULD be called upon to pay the remaining balance in FULL or have your house sold.

    While I don’t expect that to happen It is possible.

    People who sign up are making a leap of faith (perhaps well justified?) that UTOPIA still be in business over the long run.

    While that is very possible and perhaps even likely, it is not assured.

    On this forum I have asked where UTOPIA will get the millions of dollars it is likely to need over the next 20 years to keep the network upgraded. I have never seen anyone answer that question.

    It appears unlikely subscriber revenues will ever be able to pay for the existing bond debt. That would suggest they will not have the revenues to replace/upgrade the network equipment. Will the cities sign on to increase their payments? I would like to hear the cities say so.

    I support the SAA concept (I would never sign up myself as I’m not willing to gamble on UTOPIA being around in the long run). I hope they are, but I’m not sure enough to lien my home saying they will.

    Do the SAA members get some form of written guarantee as to their rates for service? UTOPIA is getting a written guarantee they will get the payments, what guarantee do the people who sign up get. If service providers change or the network ownership changes (UTOPIA could sell as Provo City did) are the SAA members discount rates protected? I’ve asked about that before and never seen an answer.

    What guarantee is there that UTOPIA (with no money to upgrade) will be adding the latest & greatest, features and services that come out next year, in 5 years, 10 years or beyond. Today they are the cool new network, but if they don’t have money to invest in new equipment and technology over the next 20 years will they become the old clunker network? The SAA members will still be paying even if UTOPIA falls behind in technology or reliability.

    The City paying for network construction makes the waters a little muddy in trying to figure out if this puts non subscribing city residents at risk or if the city is getting the best deal on services. Will the rate they get still be the best in 5, 10 or 15 years….who can say?

    But not including the city part, the citizens should be able to create the SAA if they want.

    Bottom line in my view….it really won’t matter. UTOPIA needs tens of thousands of subscribers….not a thousand or two.

    But it’s a start. Is it likely to be duplicated in other areas? I doubt it…but I doubted they would get 1600 people to pay $3000 for the service. Go Figure?

  16. Y.Lee says:

    Hey Capt. Video,
    I did not like the concept of the SAA. So, I found my own funding and paid cash. Today is the last day to do so…

    Y.

  17. Harold Bills says:

    The article in the SL Tribune casts some strong doubt on Utopia’s future. The concept of applying liens to people’s home will never be acceptable. Hang on, it’s about to get real rough!

  18. Jesse says:

    All due respect to Steve Oberbeck, but the Trib article was a UTA hatchet job. They didn’t offer much in the way of explanation from Brigham or UTOPIA, they quoted Mayor-Elect Fife out of context, and the UTA’s talking points were taken at face value. There was also apparently no attempt to find residents who didn’t think much of the supposed controversy. It was just bad journalism.

  19. Capt. Video says:

    The following is not known facts, but my opinion!

    I believe that the UTOPIA sales people likely did not CLEARLY mention the full impact of signing in relation to placing a lien on your home.

    Perhaps for the following reasons?

    1: They might have been commissioned sales people and wanted to close the sale.

    2: They might have known this was UTOPIA’s last best hope to stay alive and wanted that.

    3: They likely do believe there is NO danger of UTOPIA going under. (Some would say they have drunk the Kool-Aid?)

    4: Just the clear mention of the fact that they were placing a lien on their home by signing would open a can of worms and increase the sale time by 30-60 minutes or more??

    In any event I think both UTOPIA AND the CITY had a strong moral obligation to make that VERY clear to EVERYONE that signed.

    In bold letter, outside the document to make it very clear. A short, simple statement….1-2 lines.

    If that were the case, we would not see so many reports from people saying they never knew and they would not have a single report of people now wishing they could get out.

    Can anyone say that UTOPIA and Brigham City made the fact that each and every signer was placing a lien on their home? Can UTOPIA or someone from the City stand squarely in the light and make that claim?

    If so…let us hear them say it! Do you think they made that statement to the Trib and they just didn’t print it?

    If they did not insure it was VERY CLEAR to signers…WHY NOT? What would we say if Comcast or Qwest acted in that way? I think Comcast typically has a money back guarantee on install fees and the 1st months service?

    Which company is on the moral high ground?
    Shame on Brigham City for NOT insuring full and complete disclosure (if these claims are correct). They should be PROTECTING their residents as consumers.

  20. Jesse says:

    Capt: As an experienced pooper-scooper for sales staff, I know first hand how many of them can, er, “de-emphasize” less desirable parts of a deal. They also know better than to get bogged down in technical details and focus on the big picture: $25/mo for 20 years.

    I would direct you to read Utah Code 11-42-501. If I’m reading that correctly, no municipality can execute an SAA without a lien against the improved properties. I’m also going to bet that it’s not the first time that Brigham City residents have been part of an SAA. Most of them probably know how it works or know well enough that there hasn’t been an SAA foreclosure in Brigham. Ever.

    The point is that a lien is not a scary thing, just a scary word. The UTA used that to try and spook people. How much do you want to bet that the fancy new police building in Salt Lake City, the one endorsed by the UTA, is secured by *gasp* a lien?

    Just a point on risk. Moody’s rated the bonds for the SAA as A3. They consider it a low-risk proposition.

  21. Y.Lee says:

    Hey Capt. Video,
    All I can speak to is my own experience. I was told that the lien was an alternative during the sign up process. I was told that the reason for the additional funding was the failure of federal funding. I had originally signed the contact on my own. The UTOPIA sales person came to my house while I was out and explained the contract to my wife. (I was not there.) He explained the lien. She signed.

    How many people signed without reading?
    Are we responsible for their acts?

    Y.

  22. Y.Lee says:

    Hey All,
    Tonight’s BC council meeting was a zoo.
    The council gave the con and pro UTOPIA groups 10 minutes each to speak.

    The bond will be issues at approximately 5.5%
    Three councilors and the mayer spoke in for UTOPIA. One councilor was absent but sent a letter in favor.
    One councilor was against and tried to delay.

    The final vote was 3 to 1 and the bonding passed.

  23. Ronald D. Hunt says:

    This is a great step forward, Maybe we can get this method of Utopia expansion in more city’s.

  24. Capt. Video says:

    Jesse:

    Having managed and done direct door to door sales in the past…I fully understand exactly what you are saying.

    However I would suggest that it IS likely the first time many or most people have taken part in an SAA. I’ve owned 5-6 homes in as many cities and never been part of an SAA….but all those cities have likely done them.

    …and YES! YES! YES! Mr. Lee….as the CITY and as a GOOD company, we ARE responsible to insure that we make this clear.

    I’m sure most people have signed documents (buying a car, home, etc.) without reading all the fine print. You are right in saying we should NOT do that, but we all know it happens…all the time.

    I feel with the CITY backing the project it was MORE likely people would sign without reading all the details (or fully understanding the legal language if they did read it?) and THEREFORE two very important items should have been made clear in bold type on a separately signed sheet of paper…
    1: That you were placing a lien on your home for the $6,000 and if you failed to pay you could lose your home. (While unlikely, this is a legal fact.)
    2: You would be responsible to pay the $6,000 even if UTOPIA failed to deliver the services you want or went out of business and delivered NO service at all. (Again, a simple FACT.)

    I fully understand neither UTOPIA nor Brigham City was legally required to make these facts clear (I’m sure the document says this in legal terms but not as plainly as I have stated above)…but I believe that is what they should have done to insure everyone FULLY understood exactly what they were doing. They should have made every effort to make sure everything about the SAA was completely transparent. Going above and beyond any simple legal requirement (getting them to sign the document?) to insuring they understood it.

    The CITY officials failed to SERVE their residents by not insuring the FACTS were presented in a simple, easy to understand manner. They should be very ashamed of themselves.

    …and YES, LIEN is a very scary word…for good reason.

  25. Capt. Video says:

    The description of the council meeting as a “ZOO” suggests there were a number of residents that might have changed their mind and wanted out?

    Is that correct?

    Oh…I’m sure the reason the bond is rated good is because the CITY is likely fully responsible and/or the bond is backed by real property, the homes themselves.

    I don’t think you are suggesting that UTOPIA itself could get a loan from anyone or a good rating on it’s bonds….are you?

  26. Jesse says:

    One thing is for sure: the lien issue is not going to be unclear in any future SAAs. UTOPIA has an incentive to be much clearer about it and residents in other cities have likely taken note of it. There’s no wiggle room now. I would point out, however, that malfeasance seems a lot less likely than making some honest mistakes. Hanlon’s Razor applies here.

    I think the description of “zoo” would apply to any meeting that fills council chambers, the hallway, and the stairs leading to it. Any time you have a venue that packed, things just feel kind of crazy regardless of the attitude of the crowd. The simple fact is that only about 4% of the participants signed the UTA’s petition. That doesn’t sound like a groundswell of opposition to me.

    I point out the bond rating to suggest that UTOPIA commitments have not over-extended cities in the manner that the UTA suggests. Right now, I don’t think UTOPIA could directly borrow a quarter for a phone call. That’s why all of the eggs are in the SAA basket. The only way to get money to build is to ask those who want service to pony up. The possibility of a free lunch has been long gone. There will probably be some stimulus money and it will help push service in member cities, but it’s not a panacea by any means.

  27. Dirk Poulsen says:

    I believe that Utopia will never get on top of the expense of building and maintaining the network.

    Simply because the problems they are facing started in the beginning.

    “Poor planning and research” especially “education of” on the part of the Cities and Utopia.

    This would already be a successful completed project if it had been implemented correctly and everyone would have access to high speed “everything”.

    Band Aids and bailouts are symptoms of very, very poor leadership. In the end the ball always rolls to the tax payer.

    Cheers!

    “If it jams, force it, if it breaks, it needed replacing anyway”.

  28. Mary Woodward says:

    After reading all these posts and finding a broad range of comments I think Utopia will not get off the ground. My concern is charging Brigham City residents and liening their homes to pay for it will never fly. This is upsurd. I am curious to one thing now. Out of the 1600 residents that signed up for the service, how many of those customers want out of this deal now? Does anyone know how a resident can cancel this service that they supposedly signed up for. I understand residents in Brigham were not told the whole truth as they were signing up. I smell a rat in the woodpile!

  29. barney says:

    i hear that 25% of the residents actually paid up front which says a significant number of them think utopia is worth it. i was at the city council meeting and amazed at the number of people that got up and said they were not ‘hoodwinked’ and were fully aware of the lien. this is nothing more than the uta trying to scar people

  30. Y.Lee says:

    Hey Mary,
    I believe that a more pertainant number is the number of people who prepaid for this service. I did not get the exact number, but my understanding based on the collection of over one million dollars that about 350-400 households pre-paid. That’s cose to 25% of the households.
    Also note that in the last city election, there were only about 3,200 residents who showed up to vote and assuming that 100 of the 1600 households are dissatisfied = 1,500 households. If we consider 1.5 people per household, then 2,250 voters would be in favor of UTOPIA. These people have voted with their money. That’s 70%!
    That would be enough voters to impose their will on the entire city not only on those who have changed their minds…

    Yes there is a Rat, several actually… They are the telecommunications companies and their stooges…

    Y.

  31. Mary Woodward says:

    Thank you for responding and I agree with you. I have to figure this out. I believe my mother-in-law was duped and she is too old to figure this out. I have to dig deep to be sure of what I am doing here. Thank you for explaining this to me. I cannot believe people actually have paid for this service upfront. That would be like paying Comcast or Qwest upfront for future services. Yikes!! How stupid can people be? Not in a million years will they ever get their money’s worth as I see it. And… what if Utopia falls on it’s face. Where did their money go? There is a rat here. I cannot believe anyone would stand for this type of fool hardy service. I live in Taylorsville and I know we had a real problem come up a couple of years ago and our city councileman who lives two doors down from me went against the citizens on an issue and guess what. He is out of there as of this election. What is wrong with you people in Brigham. You have had ample time to get rid of the Mayor and the city council. You need to pay attention to what is going on or they will ramrod every bond down your throat and everything else that comes along that will benefit them personally. I saw it here in Tville. We were debt free until Mayor Wall was elected and now we are in debt. Bad business. Their incredible raises, the insurance they put on themselves and also made themselves full-time employees. Get out of here! Utopia is going to suck. There has to be a way to stop this. I am sure putting a lien on someone’s home for future services cannot be legal. I am going to check on this first thing in the morning. Don’t give up!! There has got to be an answer here you are just overlooking it.

  32. Y.Lee says:

    Mary,
    I prepaid because I believe in my community, not because I’m an idiot.
    Part of our city already has UTOPIA and those who have it, love it.
    Qwest and Comcast have been #### us for years with non-optional fees.

    I would also love to tell my website hosting provider to go way and host out of my own house. I also pay them each month and none of this money is not coming back.

    I am sorry if the UTOPIA sales folks did a rough job in selling, but from my own experience, no one lied to me. I was told exactly what the costs would be.
    I was given the alternative to get a personal loan or pay cash or borrow against my property (a lien funded by the city).

    UTOPIA told me that this is good for the community. I agree.

    Trust me, if the management of UTOPIA are giving themselves perks, they will have me all over their tails…

    Y.

  33. Pingback: UTA Threatening to Sue UTOPIA and Brigham City » Free UTOPIA!

  34. Capt. Video says:

    I think that Brigham City had poor service from Comcast and Qwest and this led a good number of people to want to pay fees that most of us would consider crazy to get the UTOPIA service.

    I believe the vast majority were aware of the lien and went into this with their eyes open. However there were clearly a small number that were not aware of exactly what they were doing and even if it was their fault for being old and trusting and not reading and understanding everything…they should have been allowed to get out when they asked.

    Citizens should be allowed to do this if they like.

    Personally, with UTOPIA looking at a 1/2 billion dollars in debt and still not able to even operate cash flow positive. I believe signing a long term commitment with them is foolish and I believe all that signed up will get burned in some way.

    I still question how UTOPIA will pay for future upgrades and if they will keep pace with future services given their economic situation.

    UTOPOIA has the cash to build these areas from the bond, but NOT to pay for future equipment replacement and the costs of adding future services if they have a cost (as most new equipment & services do).

  35. Pingback: Utah Taxpayers Association Holding an Anti-UTOPIA Rally » Free UTOPIA!

Leave a Reply to barney Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *