Do two 'no' votes to fund UTOPIA signal trouble for agency?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Sabrecat South Jordan, UT
    Feb. 26, 2013 5:22 p.m.


    I wouldn't call 40 megabit/s DSL "Silly". And yes, according to my download speeds I am indeed getting every last bit of the 40mb/s speed.

  • terra nova Park City, UT
    Feb. 25, 2013 7:42 a.m.

    The unfortunate truth is that when government gets involved, costs go through the roof. When they try to sell their over-priced wares, clients run the other direction. The hand writing is on the wall. Utopia will be carved up and sold and the municipalities that bought into it will still be paying for the east wind. They will never recoup the money spent.

  • mountain man Salt Lake City, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 6:24 p.m.

    Call me crazy but I think Internet is as vital as electricity and water.
    For a city to be involved makes perfect sense to me.
    For a bunch of cities to share the risk makes even more sense.
    Do we leave our water to private companies... No.
    It is unfortunate that there has been such a steep learning curve on how to do this
    With probably more costly mistakes to come in the future. But at the end of the day
    Utopia makes sense. I do not work for utopia nor own any utopia stock. Nor do I know anyone who works for utopia.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 6:22 p.m.

    I find it odd that the number things the extreme left wants the government to provide for them including bailouts for car companies, banks, and investment companies, willing to give billions for green energy companies,

    that they would draw the line here.


    The government doesn't provide us basic rights (or any right).

    They already belong to the people,

    we give power ans rights to the government.

    If UTOPIA was sold as a service or the poor, the left would up in arms about two no votes.

    I do believe if UTOPIA is a private business it should be able to stand for itself or fail.

    But they do have right to try and get communities to buy into it.

    If the people of the community want it then they can figure out a way to pay their community's fair share or not be part of it as a community.

  • Prodicus Provo, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 5:07 p.m.

    You who think cable and phone companies provide very good Internet service- what world do you live in? are you judging by the standards of 1995? Complaining about Comcast et al has become almost a national pastime since these companies are so awful.

    Those who say government shouldn't be involved in data services should immediately ask their municipalities to shut off their water, electricity, garbage pickup, etc, and should refuse the services of municipal fire departments when their house catches fire. Otherwise your "get the government out of public services" stance is empty hypocrisy.

    I'm all for letting the market deal with many things that government has been involved in; very basic economics helps us see that if a market approximates a certain set of conditions it will lead to efficient outcomes. But one of those conditions is perfect competition. All the public services I mentioned above, incl. internet access, are natural monopolies; open markets in these services quickly become noncompetitive. The result is market failures which can be disastrous to society.

    It is good conservatism to insist on decentralized government and competitive markets. It is anarchism or insanity to insist on eliminating public services.

  • Oldy Glocks Orem, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 5:07 p.m.

    After years of promises and moving 4 times within Orem, we are finally at a place where it is available if you are willing to pay fees beyond our ability. We are quite happy with Utah Broadband which is wireless at about 1/2 the cost.

  • Allen Salt Lake valley, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 12:54 p.m.

    I don't know anything about UTOPIA; I just think city governments shouldn't be involved in providing high speed Internet services to their cities. High speed Internet connections are not a basic right. Cities that support UTOPIA are taking one step towards socialism. Kudos to the two cities for deciding to spend public dollars elsewhere!

  • Lindsay Payson, UT
    Feb. 24, 2013 12:18 p.m.

    If you have Utopia you would love it. We have faster Internet than a lot of companies. We don't get bogged down like our neighbors with cable and to even compare DSL to Utopia is silly. We considered moving, but we are staying put in our house because we don't want to take the chance we won't have Utopia access. Fortunately we got this when it was new to Payson and we didn't have to pay up front for install, but installation costs are factored into our bill.

  • Johnnyoh! ,
    Feb. 24, 2013 10:12 a.m.

    UTOPIA was and has been a loser from the get go, their business model was as flawed as their selection of a company that had never installed this kind of system, from digging holes through sewer laterals, water lines, using utility poles that they didn't have legal access to, not securing right of ways first, the list could go, but the point is made, with those few examples.

    Then there was an issue of funding this turkey, bonding went from revenue bonds to municipal bonding, putting the taxpayers at risk, the UTOPIA take rate was over emphisised at 20% plus, it was like peddling snake oil, just a few more million that will do it, then comes the hand asking for more, just like iProvo, designed to fail.

    This project should be investigated as to where all that money has gone, may suprise everyone who pockets it lined.
    Stick a fork in this turkey to see if it is done, if not, as councilman Jim Brass stated when they rebonded for more money, we need to do this, so if it bankrupts,it will be worth more if we liquidate it.
    Isn't it time for the fire sell?

  • Wyomex Burlington, WY
    Feb. 24, 2013 7:00 a.m.


    There Ain't No Such Thing As a Free Lunch. You pay for it - just over time.

    As a society, we've been lured into an expense mentality rather than a capital mentality. Often, we
    think the upfront item is "free" while it is just the service that "costs."

    Items that are "free" upfront then are so much per month cost much more over the long run. Financiers and marketers have figured out that by changing the way we think about capital items - treating them as expenses, more will buy in.

    Whether it is a bond issue (big money now to pay for a long term benefit) or a car now (that only "costs" $249 per month - rather than $24,000) or internet service installed for "free" (but pay more per month over time), it all shows that few are willing to save to pay. Most want things now and will spread costs over the future.

  • cjb Bountiful, UT
    Feb. 23, 2013 7:09 p.m.

    The phone company and the cable company offer too good of internet service for UTOPIA to be attractive. Why would people pay thousands of dollars to get internet service installed when you can get very good service installed for free?