More FUD: The Tribune Attacks Spanish Fork's Network

In what seems to be part of a continuing series, the Salt Lake Tribune has decided to go tilting at windmills once more by attempting to re-classify Spanish Fork's profitable network as a train wreck with tons of hidden subsidies and shoddy accounting. Apparently the Tribune is so focused on that predetermined conclusion that they're more than willing to discard any and all explanations to the contrary.

For starters, there's the public reason given for transfers from various city departments: they're buying a stake in the city-wide network for their own internal uses. For instance, Spanish Fork's electric department uses the network for the same reasons as iProvo, to conduct remote breaker monitoring throughout the city. The water and sewer departments no doubt have similar uses of their own. Given this, it only makes sense for them to own part of the network. The shame is that Spanish Fork is trying to have city agencies pay for their usage and ownership of the network, unlike Provo, and they still get hung out to dry in the papers. Damned if you do, damned if you don't, huh?

Unsurprisingly, the Utah "Taxpayers" Association was on the spot to provide some more "told you so" flavor quotes. Apparently getting quotes to provide a balanced story are way beyond the Tribune's capabilities. It's proof positive that you just can't trust what you read in the papers these days. 

Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to More FUD: The Tribune Attacks Spanish Fork's Network

  1. Andrea says:

    Are you saying that the benefit to the other city departments is $5 million? You seem to accept this without asking for or demonstrating any proof.

    You say the other departments “no doubt” have similar justifications. Why do you say “no doubt”? Are we expected to accept this on faith?

  2. Jesse says:

    I’m saying that the verdict is out until those reasonable questions are answered. The Tribune seems to have jumped to conclusions without asking the varied departments what they’re getting for their money. Or they just didn’t report the reasons. Given the absolute mess they did in their UTOPIA reporting last week, I think it’s perfectly valid to presume they did the exact same thing this time.

    At any rate, their reporting is downright sloppy. Even if they’re eventually proven right, it would be dumb luck rather than through the power of investigative journalism. That’s downright shameful.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *