BONUS: Lessons from Utah's Primary: When a Data Center Becomes a Political Crisis

Between interviews, Marty shares a quick bonus take.

Utah’s primary results delivered a clear takeaway: political fallout isn’t always about the policy — it’s often about how the controversy is handled.

The Stratos data center backlash in Box Elder County illustrates how timing, process, and communication failures stack up quickly. 

🎙️ Watch and subscribe to stay up to date. New episode every Friday.

Off Script. On Record.

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

Hey, with the 4th of July holiday this week, we're taking a break from our regular format. We'll have another in-depth interview next week. But as we head into the weekend, I want to weigh in on the results of Utah's unofficial election day. Last week's primary election showed when a public controversy lands at the wrong moment, and leaders don't deftly manage the process or the communication, voters will notice and it will impact the results of the ballot box. We saw this in two places: the loss of Senate President Stuart Adams and the defeat of two incumbent county commissioners in Box Elder County. Both outcomes trace back to the same basic issue: the backlash around the Stratos Data Center project in Box Elder County and the broader debate over MITA and state-driven development decisions. Now, this was a failure in three ways, and I'd rank them in this order: timing, process, and communication. First, let's look at timing. Those who were championing the process took on what became a controversial project at the moment that they were most vulnerable, on the eve of an election. If the project had advanced later, say late summer or anytime after June 23rd, it might still have been controversial, but not election-defining. Instead, it became a live wire when voters were paying the closest attention. The second point is process. According to news reports, the process had some real stumbles. Fox 13 reported that commissioners held meetings about the project before the public was notified and that public comment was blocked at a key special meeting. Reports also noted that MITA's approval paperwork cited a county consent given on a certain date before the commission had ever actually met, something critics raised as an issue very loudly. And Commissioner Vincent was quoted as saying he felt the commission was brought in at the last hour and expected to hurry. That's a quote. Whether every detail bears out, the perception of a rushed, opaque process took hold very quickly. And once that narrative set in, it was very difficult to dislodge, and in fact proved impossible to dislodge on that timeline. The audience became the general public, and they were only hearing things that confirmed their worst suspicions about government. The third point I want to make is one of communication, and this is tied to process, but it deserves its own spot. When the controversy intensified, there wasn't a cohesive message. There wasn't a clear primary spokesperson to respond to concerns, and there wasn't enough visible listening. Once leaders looked spooked, it became even harder to regain control of the narrative, and the campaign calendar made every misstep louder. Now, one important nuance I want to mention. This is a referendum on the data center project. But just look at the Box Elder County Commission races in specific. They were really pretty close. That suggests something more like a narrow majority, not a landslide, are the ones who oppose this project. And it's also worth noting that some votes were likely cast before the project footprint was shrunk considerably or other concessions were made, or at least before that message had a chance to penetrate. So it's hard to tell if the corrective steps were enough to calm some of the public's concerns. Still, the political impact is real and impossible to ignore. The project has now lost some of its biggest supporters, and everyone planning major data center projects along the Wasatch front should be studying what went wrong here. Because this is what a political failure looks like in 2026. Bad timing, sloppy process, and incoherent crisis communication, all coming together at the worst possible moment when the spotlight was the brightest. With that, have a safe and fun Independence Day weekend, everyone, and happy 250th birthday, America. We'll be back next week with a conversation with the head of the Utah Bankers Association, Howard Headley.