Dec 07
Utah Taxpayers Association — UTOPIA’s Financials
2007 at 12:28 am | posted by Rep. Craig Frank 5 comments
The Utah Taxpayers Association just mailed out their monthly newsletter (December 2007) with an interesting article containing current financial information regarding UTOPIA. It’s worth a look! Link HERE to the association’s webpage, click on the “Current Newsletter” button, and then scroll down (.pdf) to Page 6.
5 Responses to “Utah Taxpayers Association — UTOPIA’s Financials”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
December 7th, 2007 at 8:52 am
UTOPIA, iProvo, and SFCN are not working because the wrong people are in charge.
December 7th, 2007 at 4:54 pm
SFCN isn’t working? You mean the network that turned a $275K profit this year?
December 7th, 2007 at 11:44 pm
SFCN gets hundreds of thousands of dollars from other Spanish Fork city departments for providing phantom “services”. That’s where Provo is getting its idea.
Of course, the value of these “services” is at best dubious. Remember that the cost to provide a “service” does not necessarily equate to the value of the benefit.
When iProvo does this, I hope Stewart and Turley are quick enough to ask why city departments have never prioritized these so-called “benefits” when making budget requests in previous years. IOW, you can’t really call something a benefit if the city was never seriously spending money to get that benefit in the first place.
Real Salt Lake played the same game, claiming that the county was getting benefits for certain services when the county had never even considered appropriating money for those services in the first place.
December 10th, 2007 at 1:12 pm
Monica: Are the financials online somewhere so that claim can be verified?
December 11th, 2007 at 8:37 am
Nevermind, I found Spanish Fork’s numbers.
The Broadband department has made financial transfers back to the general fund every year since at least 2005 in order to perfectly balance income and expenditures. I also don’t see any line items to indicate payment to the broadband department from other departments. This doesn’t seem to support your claim.