Verizon Mum On How They Determine A City's Worthy Of FiOS Baltimore holds hearing to (unsuccessfully) find out why they were overlooked Back in February we noted how Baltimore was one of a number of cities upset that they were overlooked by the Verizon FiOS installation fairies. As we've discussed at length, the company is stopping deployment in any market where a franchise agreement hasn't already been signed. There's a number of reasons for this, including the fact that Verizon wants to market the service to deployed areas and ramp up adoption, the company is eager to see if they can grab stimulus bucks, and Verizon CEO (and FiOS's biggest champion) Ivan Seidenberg is on the way out -- and his replacements aren't as bullish on this whole "future" thing. Baltimore this week decided to hold a public hearing exploring why they weren't part of Verizon's $23 billion FiOS plans. The city denies that they were in any way the cause of Verizon's decision, either by being difficult franchise negotiation partners or by imposing heavy conditions on Verizon. Many in the city continue to think Baltimore was ignored because of its lower income and minority neighborhoods -- but Verizon again denied such "redlining" allegations at the hearing, according to attendee and Baltimore Sun blogger Gus Sentementes. Still, Verizon's not disclosing the secret formula used to determine FiOS worthiness: We still have not heard Verizon's rationale for avoiding Baltimore and heck, while we're at it: Boston and Buffalo and Syracuse and Albany, too. Specifically, by what standards did Verizon choose who would get FiOS and who would not? Did they throw darts at a map of the United States? It's not enough to say "we can't be everywhere" -- I think people generally understand that. But why is Baltimore the hole in the donut, to use Kraft's analogy? Choices were made probably following a set of criteria. Verizon must have made a business decision (one hopes) on a set of facts, and the city wants more clarification on how they reached that decision. Obviously Verizon didn't find installation there to be a profitable equation, but Baltimore still would like to see the math -- and Verizon likely felt telling Baltimoreans Verizon felt their city isn't very nice wasn't in the cards. To try and calm the locals, Verizon sent a letter to the Baltimore Sun insisting that they remain "committed to Baltimore." Just not when it comes to actually upgrading the network there: Although FiOS video may not be available, it's important to remember that Verizon is able to offer Baltimore consumers High Speed Internet (HSI) service (using DSL technology) at speeds up to 7 megabits per second in much of the city, and DIRECTV. . .With a network that is second to none, our infrastructure keeps residents and businesses communicating. And we'll continue to make that infrastructure better, faster and more robust. As for Baltimore figuring out Verizon's secret formula, the city is probably going to be waiting for a while. Cities like Boston, Alexandria, Binghamton, Albany and many others are asking the same questions but getting no answer. Of course Verizon looked at a huge variety of economic, logistical, competition (or more specifically a lack thereof) and other factors, but Verizon's never going to let the public see the real data behind their decisions. Perhaps Baltimore (or local businesses) can begin building a Baltimore fiber network, and see if that gets Verizon's attention?
|
  baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
 ·Comcast
 ·magicjack.com
| Agreed with the replacements Fiber is the next 5-10 years, but after that, optic-pulse satellite lasers....no need for wires.
I dont really blame verizon for theit rollout halt. They should concentrate on marketing in the areas that they are already in, since, they are only about 10% active on their homes passed. | |
|  | cptmilesPremium
join:2004-04-22
Swayzee, IN | Re: Agreed with the replacements Free space optics were all the rage in the early '00s, but they are not stable in foggy or snowy conditions. If you have other sources I would love to know what they are. | |
|
vic102482Premium
join:2002-04-30
Upper Marlboro, MD | The Wire The show ended its 5 season run and Verizon decided not to deploy fios to Bmore.....coincidence? 0.o
--
I tie a rope around my penis and jump from a tree, don't you wanna grow up to be just like me!!!! | |
| | | Source? This is the only site that continously mentions Ivan is on his way out. I tried doing a google search and see nothing. Source? | |
| |  PathfinderDazed ConfusedPremium
join:2000-03-26
Mount Vernon, NY | Re: Source? +1
I also would like to know the source of this. | |
| |  BelinrahsI have an ego the size of a small planetPremium
join:2007-09-07
Nashville, MI
1 edit | +1
I can't find news of Ivan's departure anywhere but here. What gives? | |
| | | | | Re: Source? Some time in the next 50 years he will retire, leave, or die. When he does Karl can use his double joined elbow to pat him self on the back for breaking the news first. | |
| | | | | I think it came from Mr burstein (over at dsl prime) along with a lot of other B.S. The CEO gave this interview ( verizon ceo gearing up for retirement, or not ) it's an Reuters article and their not waiting for stimulus bucks,Karl is just having some fun and they never said they would build out to 80% of the original footprint, that would be 43 billion dollars. the 80% number came from the interview with Ivan last year ( not a quote) but he said after Fairpoint and Frontier sale vz footprint will be 27 million homes passed, so 18million fios hp/ by 27million homes in vz footprint = 67%. The build out to ALL OF NYC will bring it up over 70% and OVER OVER OVER time it MAY GO to 80%. Verizon has always said 18 million homes over 6years, so what's new ? | |
| | |  tim_kButtons, Bows, Beamer, Shadow, KaseyPremium,VIP
join:2002-02-02
Stewartstown, PA
kudos:13
1 edit | never mind | |
|
jammmin
join:2000-12-14
Upper Marlboro, MD | Why did they leave out Alexandria Not sure why they passed over Alexandria, VA which is one of the richest suburbs in America. | |
| |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Why did they leave out Alexandria said by jammmin:Not sure why they passed over Alexandria, VA which is one of the richest suburbs in America. Maybe for the same reason they passed up my suburb - all utilities are underground. No telephone poles; no wires to the house. Everything has to be buried right up to the side of the house.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
| | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Why did they leave out Alexandria I think it's more to do with a breakdown in negotiations and bad timing. Here in Alexandria, Fairfax County, all of my utilities are buried and VZ spent the fall and first part of winter laying new/additional conduit and pulling fiber in my neighborhood. | |
| | | Zimfie
join:2001-09-06
Bensalem, PA | Not true, my area is all underground right up to the house and we have it. | |
| | | | rody_44Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA | Re: Why did they leave out Alexandria A lot of underground but plenty of poles in Bensalem. | |
|
| | weaver
join:2001-12-13
Alexandria, VA | said by Romney2012:said by jammmin:Not sure why they passed over Alexandria, VA which is one of the richest suburbs in America. Maybe for the same reason they passed up my suburb - all utilities are underground. No telephone poles; no wires to the house. Everything has to be buried right up to the side of the house. Well, things are above ground in my part of the city of Alexandria.
I think opendbox9 is right. They took so long to negotiate a new telephone contract, that Verizon stopped all negotiations for new contracts before the television contract was negotiated. The city seemed to be under the impression that deployment would start after the telephone contract was approved (the city website used to say that), but Verizon decided not to deploy in any areas without a negotiated contract. Maybe to get government money to expand. | |
|
| | Understandable It doesn't matter what the reason is.
City wants to know it so they can whine "Noo, we're not (too cheap | require too much | slow to provide permit for digging | any other reason)" and Verizon would be saying "yes you are".
FIOS will get to those cities when it gets to those cities, be it for the cost of rolling out, bigger percentage of low income residents or any other reason Verizon classified it as non-profitable at this time
--
Rants about life, politics, technology | |
| | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Understandable said by bugabuga:It doesn't matter what the reason is. City wants to know it so they can whine "Noo, we're not (too cheap | require too much | slow to provide permit for digging | any other reason)" and Verizon would be saying "yes you are". FIOS will get to those cities when it gets to those cities, be it for the cost of rolling out, bigger percentage of low income residents or any other reason Verizon classified it as non-profitable at this time Baltimore claims they aren't difficult. But I bet if you could find a Verizon insider who would talk off the record, that Verizon's long term experience with dealing with Baltimore's Mayor & Council would probably be very negative. And Baltimore's claims of economic and racial redlining can be proven false because Philadelphia(were Verizon is rolling out) has the same economic and racial profile as Baltimore.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
| | |  old_dawg"I Know Noting..."
join:2001-09-22
Westminster, MD | Re: Understandable said by Romney2012:said by bugabuga:It doesn't matter what the reason is. City wants to know it so they can whine "Noo, we're not (too cheap | require too much | slow to provide permit for digging | any other reason)" and Verizon would be saying "yes you are". FIOS will get to those cities when it gets to those cities, be it for the cost of rolling out, bigger percentage of low income residents or any other reason Verizon classified it as non-profitable at this time Baltimore claims they aren't difficult. But I bet if you could find a Verizon insider who would talk off the record, that Verizon's long term experience with dealing with Baltimore's Mayor & Council would probably be very negative. And Baltimore's claims of economic and racial redlining can be proven false because Philadelphia(were Verizon is rolling out) has the same economic and racial profile as Baltimore. If VZ throws in a case or two of "gift cards", I'm sure the fine upstanding politicians of Baltimore City will become most agreeable. 
--
"Our network engineers are aware of the problem..." | |
|
 pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Huh? Verizon has been building FIOS in some parts of Baltimore City.
»www22.verizon.com/about/communit···pr10.pdf
(Scroll to page 6 of the PDF above)
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
| |  SabreDi relung hatiku bernyanyi bidadari
join:2005-05-17 | Re: Huh? So far, just a tiny chunk in downtown. Probably they're not going any further than that. There are plenty of downtown businesses that might be profitable for them. Residential areas, probably not so much.
NB For those of you reading that PDF and aren't familiar with this area: Baltimore City is NOT part of Baltimore County. The County mostly surrounds the city, but it is a separate jurisdiction. Baltimore City is an independent area not part of any county. The multiple pages of "Baltimore" on the PDF refer to areas in the county, not the city. Only the small section mentioned above, labelled "Baltimore City - DTN" (probably standing for "Downtown") is actually the "city" part.
--
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world.
Save American Soccer - Stop the MLS! | |
| | | pnh102Reptiles Are Cuddly And PrettyPremium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD | Re: Huh? said by Sabre:NB For those of you reading that PDF and aren't familiar with this area: Baltimore City is NOT part of Baltimore County. The County mostly surrounds the city, but it is a separate jurisdiction. Baltimore City is an independent area not part of any county. And people from Baltimore County have no problem vociforously reminding people of that fact. 
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service. | |
| | | | SabreDi relung hatiku bernyanyi bidadari
join:2005-05-17 | Re: Huh? Guilty as charged.
Just throwing it out there because it really is confusing. (Sometimes it confuses me and I check that PDF every month!) | |
| | | | |
1 edit | Re: Huh? said by Sabre:Guilty as charged. Just throwing it out there because it really is confusing. (Sometimes it confuses me and I check that PDF every month!) That's granted when they update it, because they always take till the 2nd week in the month (or later) to get the new one up, and even then, the list is useless (See: Previous post) | |
|
| | | I stopped trusting that list years ago (specifically December 2008) being my street has shown up on that list 3 times (April included) and I still have yet to see so much as tagged utilities or a single Verizon truck.
Let's see... so far, my street has appeared on that list for:
The month of December 2008
The month of March 2010
The month of April 2010
It is now mere hours to May 2010
That list is a crock and utterly useless. | |
|
| | Verizon mum on the method to their madness Halfway down in this 2008 article from our local weekly are a couple of paragraphs with a Verizon spokesman explaining why they weren't interested in bringing FiOS to our city, the second largest in Massachusetts (after Boston):
»www.worcestermagazine.com/content/view/2413/
In a nutshell, too much underground wiring, too many multi-dwelling units (i.e. apartments & condos), complicated and expensive permitting requirements dictated by the municipality (public access channels, free drops, money and equipment grants to schools), etc.
In Massachusetts a company who wants to bring CATV facilities into a town has to negotiate individually with a "cable committee" in each town for a franchise. Verizon tried and failed to get that changed in MA so they could just get a statewide franchise and go to work. In some towns Verizon offered fiber and internet to the home with the expectation that they would be able to get approval to activate the TV later on (which I'm sure is their real money-maker), and that never happened in at least two nearby towns that I'm aware of.
--
Worcester MA
Verizon DSL 3M
Charter digital cable with HD
VOIPo phone
ICIA CTS-D
| |
| | Mark F
join:2007-08-01
Fort Wayne, IN | How Did They Determine That We're No Longer Worthy FIOS TV has been up and running here for less than three years, but we love it, it has Comcast beat in every way.
Now, after Verizon spent over $70,000,000 on fiber here, we're being sold off to a company that has absolutely no experience in delivering the kind of quality TV service that we have become used to, that might put ridiculously low caps on our internet, and may eventually wind up in bankruptcy due to biting off more than they can chew.
If they want to serve only the Northeastern US, why put fiber here in the first place. Verizon giveth and Verizon taketh away. FIOS, we hardly knew ye.
Mark F | |
|
| | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Same attitude as Slick Willie Sutton said by Mr Matt: Install service in upscale neighborhoods where the money is and skip low income neighborhoods where the money isn't. It makes sense in a capitalistic market driven environment. Except there is ample evidence, as posted many times here at BBR, that they don't skip low income neighborhoods.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
| |  alchav
join:2002-05-17
Palm Desert, CA | said by Mr Matt: When Slick Willie Sutton was asked why he robbed banks he replied "That's where the money is." I guess Verizon has the same attitude when it comes to deploying FiOS. Install service in upscale neighborhoods where the money is and skip low income neighborhoods where the money isn't. It makes sense in a capitalistic market driven environment. If Verizon is receiving stimulus money to deploy FiOS, Verizon should be responsible for providing universal FiOS service in any market where they are deploying it. Verizon had a well laid out plan when they started with their FiOS, and no City or Community should cry about it now. If they wanted FiOS then they should have talked to Verizon years ago, but it's probably not too late now if they still want FTTH. As for Stimulus Money, I don't know what you guys have been smokin, but Verizon used their own money and it hasn't been paying out because people don't want to spend more than a couple of bucks!
Like I said, if these Cities and Communities really want FTTH, then form a Committee and a Plan and invite Companies including Verizon and I'm sure things will get done. Just don't sit around crying about it, and hoping for that Free Lunch! | |
|
 jaaPremium,MVM
join:2000-06-13
kudos:2
·Optimum Online
·Vonage
| Wireless closed the checkbook Wireless got tired of writing check to fund FiOS, so no more FiOS unless the wireline guys can figure out how to make a profit.
--
NOTHING justifies terrorism. We don't negotiate with terrorists. Those that support terrorists are terrorists. | |
| | Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Wireless closed the checkbook Correct, and until LTE takes off with a new, very expensive pricing model and can provide the same kind of extra cash SMS revenues have provided the last five years.
AND, Verizon likely believes that LTE can ultimately be a landline alternative in many of these markets. | |
| | |
See 6 replies to this post |
| | Wrong color? +++Many in the city continue to think Baltimore was ignored because of its lower income and minority neighborhoods...
"Minority neighborhoods" as a reason? What -- does Verizon not accept "black" money??? | |
| | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | Re: Wrong color? said by DufiefData:+++Many in the city continue to think Baltimore was ignored because of its lower income and minority neighborhoods..."Minority neighborhoods" as a reason? What -- does Verizon not accept "black" money??? They are accepting a lot of "black" money in Philadelphia. So there goes that particular theory.
--
Are you happy with your rep in Washington, DC? | |
|
 heat84Bit Torrent Apologist
join:2004-03-11
Fort Lauderdale, FL
1 edit | Isn't NY more complicated to upgrade than anywhere else? If they can do NY than they should be able to do anywhere. I can't imagine any place being more complicated than NY to FIOSize. I don't know about their permit procedures though.
--
Bit Torrent is my DVR. | |
| lthead
join:2006-08-17
Baldwinsville, NY | ivan retiring... Hi there I work for verizon in NY and I'm just wondering where you've heard or got the information that Ivan Seidenberg is "on his way out" as I've never heard anything here and tried searching online for anything regarding it and haven't had any luck.
Let me know if you have any links or info you can provide me regarding this please. | |
|  Simba7I Void Warranties
join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT | No FiOS for us.. Yep. I doubt we'll ever see FTTH services here. We'll be stuck with copper until the insulating jackets disintegrate.
I don't get it. Why not do the smaller cities? Less fiber to roll, less man hours to get it laid, decent backbone.. What's the issue?
Instead, they chose to pick the largest cities possible. Oh well.
--
Bresnan 15M/1M
MyWS[P4HT@3.2GHz,2GB RAM,2x1TB HDDs,Win7]
WifeWS[P4HT@3GHz,2GB RAM,60GB HDD,Win7]
Router[2xP3@1GHz,512MB RAM,18GB HDD,SMC 8432BTA,2xDigital DE504,Compaq NC3131,Intel Pro/1000MT,IBM Gigabit Ethernet-SX,Allied Telesyn AT-2560FX,Gentoo Linux] | |
| | pnolte
join:1999-10-21
Chino, CA | Re: No FiOS for us.. Chino CA is a little cow town and we were one of the first to get it. I have had FiOS for almost 5 years now | |
|
| | Ban Verizon!!! Hey they're basically saying you're not good enough FiOS! Then you need to tell them they ain't enough to have you as a customer of their DSL/Landline service! People should cancel all Verizon services from their homes and go to cable in spite! | |
| | Sammer
join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA | Re: Ban Verizon!!! said by NJBoricua75:Hey they're basically saying you're not good enough FiOS! Then you need to tell them they ain't enough to have you as a customer of their DSL/Landline service! People should cancel all Verizon services from their homes and go to cable in spite! That's exactly what Verizon landline and DSL customers in areas that Verizon refuses to upgrade to FiOS should do but not out of spite. If your neighborhood isn't good enough for Verizon to upgrade then tell Verizon you'd rather spend your money for services (including wireless) from a better company. | |
| | | | | Re: Ban Verizon!!! For alot that may not be possible. Verizon might be the only decent gig in town. | |
|
| | | I have not used Verizon's pathetic landline offering's since 2006. I am in Baltimore City about 2-3 blocks from the Baltimore County line. I told them to cease and desist sending offers to me for their pathetic DSL (what they call "blazing fast high speed internet") bundled with their phone service and Directv for their version of a non-FIOS triple play. I told them that I already have Directv, ViaTalk and Comcast HSI (50mbps/10mbps) giving me the non-FIOS version of a triple play of my choosing. Here is their resonse: Dear ********,
Thank you for contacting the Verizon eCenter. My name is Scott, and I
have received your email dated 3/22/10. You advised that Verizon High
Speed Internet speeds are pathetic and the last hope for having you as a
customer is FiOS service. You also mentioned that we're wasting paper
sending you advertisements for Verizon High Speed Internet bundled with
DirecTV service.
We appreciate your feedback. I'm sorry to hear that Verizon High Speed
Internet does not meet your needs.
Thank you for taking the time to provide us with your comments.
Sincerely,
Scott
Verizon eCenter
****** VERIZON PERKS ******
Take advantage of our REWARDS PROGRAM with hot savings and discounts
exclusively for My Verizon customers. | |
|
Flycat
join:2003-05-12
Lawrence, MA | Not just high income cities I was surprised to find out fios would be available to me in Lawrence MA, which isn't exactly a well-to-do city by anyones definition. | |
|  n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
·Optimum Online
| Even if you get FiOS... Even if they got FiOS what would they expect to happen? Lower prices? Here in Cablevision territory, FiOS has caused Cablevision to hold the line on Internet and phone rate increases but video prices still go up on both FiOS and Cablevision regularly. FiOS has also forced the cable companies to innovate a bit by getting them to deploy free WiFi, available to their customers, and to enter into an agreement between Time-Warner, Comcast and Cablevision to share access to their WiFi network.
--
I support the right to keep and arm bears. | |
| | | Ivan IIRC Ivan had mentioned last year that this would be his final year. It was rather offhanded and I am not sure It was meant to be an official announcement. If anyone else has an official announcement - post it up.
On another note as a former VZ employee I know for a FACT that the plan all along with regards to deployment of FiOS was to hit the areas with the highest estimated ARPU. The exact formula that was used to determine this had to do with average income, housing prices and some other factors that are unknown to me. Race had nothing to do with it though... just money. | |
| Ulmo
join:2005-09-22
San Jose, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
| Most of the reason Verizon skips FiOS someplace is the gov't Most of the reason Verizon skips installing FiOS someplace is because the government got in the way along with whatever cable company was around to help bribing the government to do so. That's the main reason. Other reasons added up, but nowhere near as much as that one main reason. If your government was so luck as to have Verizon come in and say "we want to do TV here", the government should have jumped up and paid Verizon to do so, not get in the way and demand a billion things and money and junk.
Now that Verizon has ceased investment in new fiber areas, those governments get what they sewed. Governments are tied to areas. Any area that wonders why they aren't getting FiOS only have themselves and their own government to look at for that answer.
What's this pulse laser satellite stuff someone mentioned? | |
|  SteveConIBEW 2222 Boston, MAPremium
join:2004-09-02
Boston, MA | Thank your MA state & town elected officials.. When FiOS first came to your local town in MA, they had to obtain a license from the town to deploy the service. The towns used this to negotiate infrastructure improvements in exchange for a license. You've seen them, the newly paved driveway for your middle school, traffic signals & crosswalks, demanding half a dozen local access channels instead of the standard 3 or 4; you get the idea. Because some towns were more militant than others, cost for the "license" began to skyrocket.
Verizon sought to have legislation enacted that provided for a state-wide license like some other states had, rather than be held hostage being forced to go through each town one by one. This process took anywhere from 8 to 18 months per town.
Had it not been for the state trying to generate revenues instead of doing what it's citizens had been doing all along ie: "making due with less", Verizon would have deployed more fully in MA. State officials found the public land (sidewalks & streets) that utility poles are on, and the pipes and ducts that lie beneath could be a *new* source of tax revenue. New, because it had never been taxed before. Ever. Verizon told the MA officials point blank, that if they were to tax these "properties" they would cease to deploy FiOS in the state and deploy in more "friendly" states instead, regardless of a law granting a state wide license to deploy FiOS, or not. MA officials decided to call Verizon's "bluff" and began taxing poles and pipes underground. They also found out that Verizon hadn't made idle threats. Verizon is "all done" seeking new franchise licenses in MA - and to matters worse, laid off hundreds of installers as a result. Presently, there are plenty more technicians ready to take early retirement offers rather than run the risk of layoff due to significant downsizing in the near future in Verizon's recent announcement of some 12,000 "surplus" union employees (and who knows how many non-union & management employees) from the mid-Atlantic region northward to NY & NE.
| |
| | | The answer continues to be publicly owned infrastructure Baltimore and other areas, especially cities, shunned by Verizon should seriously consider building the fiber out themselves. Just wafting the proposal in the air, will probably cause Verizon to send in the trucks with or without a franchise agreement. Or they will just send their lobbyists with bags of bribes to Annapolis. | |
| | | | Re: The answer continues to be publicly owned infrastructure said by Thatgeekinit:Baltimore and other areas, especially cities, shunned by Verizon should seriously consider building the fiber out themselves. Just wafting the proposal in the air, will probably cause Verizon to send in the trucks with or without a franchise agreement. Or they will just send their lobbyists with bags of bribes to Annapolis. Sure, they can get their own fiber. Maybe they can hire Utech. Ooops, that has the now disgraced ex mayor Dixon's sister working for them and they haven't done anything but were being paid by the city of Baltimore.
»www.citypaper.com/news/story.asp?id=13104
quote:
Over the past 11 months, allegations of ethics violations have hounded Dixon, as the state prosecutor's office conducted an investigation into the city's relationship with a company called Utech. Dixon's sister, Janice Dixon, worked for the company, and in February 2006, Sheila Dixon advocated on the company's behalf at a City Council committee hearing--despite the fact that the city's ethics law expressly forbids public officials from taking part in any city business that involves a family member. It turned out that Dixon had other ties to Utech, a minority contractor with the city, through a former campaign chairman. Utech's contracts with the city came under scrutiny after The Sun revealed Dixon's conflict, and state prosecutors stepped in, subpoenaing records from various city agencies and officials. It appeared that Utech had possibly lied about contracts it held, falsified documents, and farmed out the bulk of its contract work to subcontractors against city contracting rules. Dixon's failure to recuse herself from votes and meetings involving the city's contracts with Utech put her squarely in the center of the controversy.
Baltimore didn't get FIOS because that city is so corrupt, it might as well be called Chicago East. | |
|
| |
|
|
·
Same attitude as Slick Willie Sutton
