Unfortunately, in lieu of taxes isn't the issue on which to ride back into prominence. As Terry pointed out to the press after the press conference, LUS never planned to give LCG any In Lieu of Taxes until it was cash flow positive--a concept that the council endorsed when they approved the feasibility study that outlines this position.
I guess the Fiber411 three could nobly fight for an ordinance that makes a legal obligation of what LUS and the council have always said they intend to do. But that lacks a certain pizazz. And it is unlikley to garner continuing coverage.
I hope the Advertiser fleshes out the story a bit before tomorrow. As it stands now it's pretty incomplete. The lead paragraph has a few troubles; it reads:
"Citizens group Fiber 411 announced today that its members will not support the project unless an ordinance is adopted excusing LUS from paying “in lieu of tax” on the telecommunications division"As I noted above, both Neal Breakfield and Bill Leblanc were forthright in response to my question during the Q&A about not supporting LUS even if they meet their demand. So what we really know is that 2/3rds of Fiber411 won't "support the project" if their suggestion is adopted. There is no visible membership beyond these three. Which members? Are they thinking of the denizens of the Fiber411 chatbox? My guess is that changing the in lieu of tax proposal to legally require what LUS has already said it would do won't make any difference to that group.