Does Utah have a Boston Tea Party problem with water?

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Thidder MAPLETON, UT
    July 11, 2018 11:18 a.m.

    Best option for cities is simply provide water for it's citizens only. Those living in the county, in order to escape higher property taxes, can look elsewhere including purchasing water from a private source with tanker truck delivery. That has been my source of water for the last 18 years. Person choice follows personal freedom.

  • quackquack Park City, UT
    July 11, 2018 8:28 a.m.

    What blows my mind is Cities Like Bluffdale, Lehi, Eagle Mountain sell Utah water to corporations like Facebook, NSA, & Intel Flash at pennies on the dollar then increase the rates for Utah citizens.

  • SAS Sandy, UT
    July 11, 2018 2:56 a.m.

    Are people seriously complaining that it's been 100 years since the Utah constitution's rules regarding water were amended, and that changing times call for changing approaches to governance?

    Meanwhile, we're set to nominate a new Supreme Court justice who believes that the "original intent" of a bunch of white men two hundred years ago is perfectly adequate for the problems of today's society.

  • Susan Quinton Draper, UT
    July 10, 2018 10:15 p.m.

    Very interesting article. In the Middle East, the biggest fights are over water and religion, and water is life/death in the desert. Guess Utah will get to that point as well, and we will have to rethink that perpetual green lawn...we live in the mountains here and special assessments, taxes, and high water costs are common. Of course, fire danger is a big concern as well. Wish the HOA would allow natural vegetation with clearings for fire buffers, and not require grass and deer-magnet plants.

  • Fullypresent Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2018 9:52 p.m.

    They need to quit building on land that doesn't have infrastructure and water to support the development. Water is a finite and precious resource that needs to be carefully used and monitored. There are actually towns in some states that do not have clean water or anymore water to support their water needs.

  • LindaGJ Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2018 8:22 p.m.

    Good article, and fair representation of what went on. The 2 big issues seemed to me to be that 1) they seem to think it had never happened that water was turned off, but three years ago was a drought year, and both Town of Alta and Brighton Water District were put on 30 or 60 day notice of imminent shutoff by SLCWU; and 2) that the constitution's presumed solution to the non representation problem was to annex, which worked in 1880 but now there are major cities being served by SLC Water (for example) and they can hardly "annex" to SLC. The other, really seriously wrong thing is that water, pricing, and availability to an enormous number of people in the county is controlled and priced by a smaller number of city residents, who are the electors of the city council which sets the rules. I think the intent of the founders was the opposite. It seems inequitable to me and is the explanation of the feelings of Boston Tea Party, as headlined. The good news is that a committee of thr legislature is working on a constitutional amendment, and they sounded like they had a good grasp of the problem. This isn't just a problem in SLCO, it is something that needs fixing for the State.

  • Fitness Freak Salt Lake City, UT
    July 10, 2018 6:17 p.m.

    This issue will be more and more important as city "leaders" pay virtually no attention whatsoever to availability of water.

    Heretofore, people have paid very little attention to who they elect to their local water boards. That time has passed.

    It WILL be increasingly important to understand the how/why of local water boards.

    Ultimately, the issue will be water for "new growth", or keeping rates (relatively)low for existing homeowners and farmers.