Things Longmeadow Should Know About Article 7:
Longmeadow Fiber’s financial model is indeed NOT proven, and NOT the same as other models, even as they relate to Fiberspring.
To build Fiberspring, South Hadley’s Municipal Utility borrowed the money, not the town. Longmeadow doesn’t have a municipal utility and would bear the debt for Fiber, placing all of the risk on taxpayers.Source: businesswest.com/blog/south-hadley-utilitys-fiber-business-is-a-fast-developing-story/
Fiberspring, the proposed partner for Longmeadow’s fiber project, does not make its financial information public.
In fact, South Hadley’s municipal utility denied a public records request for Fiberspring’s revenue, a decision that was upheld by the Secretary of the Commonwealth.
Source: gazettenet.com/2024/04/18/secretary-of-state-sides-with-sheld-54760597/
The Finance Committee voted 6-1 to not recommend the project at Town Meeting.
This makes Article 7 the ONLY article with the label “not recommended” by the committee with the most fiscal responsibility in the town.
“The Finance Committee advises townspeople at town meetings by recommending or not recommending passage of any article related to financial matters. The committee has voted to recommend every such article in the warrant except Article 7.”
Source: Longmeadow Town Meeting Warrant (Page 20 & 23)
This project will put Longmeadow even more in debt, requiring a Proposition 2 1⁄2 override.
This project would put Longmeadow further into debt and require a Proposition 2½ override. Concerns about additional borrowing were raised, and the Select Board’s response focused on the fact that the town already carries debt, rather than addressing the risk of taking on more.
Source: Select Board Responses (Question 6)
The $8.6 million is just the first ask.
Additional borrowing is planned for the town-owned internet and is projected to cost more than $26.5 million. The Select Board states that future phases would be supported by the MLP, but also acknowledges that if key assumptions, including the projected 40% take rate, are not met, the financial risk will fall back on taxpayers.
Source: Financial Model
Source: Select Board Responses (Question 4)
The Select Board didn’t address the main concerns of the Finance Committee.
According to the 2026 Town Warrant, the Finance Committee’s main concern for the project was “the biggest financial risk to the town of Longmeadow is the accruing deferred capital and maintenance needs,”. They also asked seven simple questions focused on financial decision-making, risk allocation, and how the project would perform if revenue projections are not met.
Source: Longmeadow Town Meeting Warrant (Page 20)
On April 16th, the Select Board issued a written response outlining how the proposed MLP structure would operate. However, the response focuses on how the system is designed, rather than directly addressing the financial risks that the Finance Committee identified.
The Select Board points to the MLP structure, state statutes, audits, and open meetings as proof of transparency and accountability. Yet the proposed partner, Fiberspring, does not publicly report key financial or performance data. Past projects are cited as evidence of success, but without data on take rates, revenue, or outcomes, those comparisons are very difficult to verify.
Source: gazettenet.com/2024/04/18/secretary-of-state-sides-with-sheld-54760597/
There is only one publicly available source of Longmeadow-specific take rate data. The town has not conducted its own survey, even after acknowledging the importance of this data in 2024.
Mass Priorities conducted a simple take rate survey to get local data, asking “would you switch,” and nearly 80% of respondents said they would stay with their current provider:
“If you knew that the price for simple internet service from Fiberspring could cost $90 per month — more than other providers in the area without TV or phone service — would this make you more likely to: Switch to Fiberspring or Stay With Your Current Provider”
This is significantly below the 40% take rate assumed in the project’s financial model.
Source: drive.google.com/file/d/1aNaRACt0aLeiA5OACeim16A_IF9x5x8E/view?usp=sharing
You are being asked to vote on a long-term financial commitment. When questions are raised about cost, risk, and accountability, the answer cannot simply be to “trust the structure.” Residents can decide for themselves what they trust more: independently verifiable facts or materials created to support moving the project forward without fully addressing the concerns raised.
On May 12, Vote NO on Article 7 at Town Meeting.