KUER0%

How urban: Half of Utah now lives in just these 20 cities 30%

By Sean Higgins0%

5/5/2026, 11:51:21 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Quote-first Misdirection, Appeal to Authority, and Anecdotal, with Overconfidence Bias as the most egregious example at 27% saturation with 178 hits. Analysis detected 1,588 faulty-reasoning hits from 659 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 39.8% and a BS Rank of 30% (14,965 of 21,198 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 70.60% of the article peer group.

For the first time in Utah's history, over half of its population lives in cities of at least 50,000 people. 
But that doesn’t mean the state is growing equally. 
Data in first-of-its-kind subcounty population estimates compiled by the University of Utah’s Kem C. 
Gardner Policy Institute found that 172 of Utah’s 284 communities grew between 2024 and 2025. 
The institute has previously issued reports on state and county-level population estimates. 
The new numbers are more granular. 
“This is the first time our state has produced city-level, county-level and state-level numbers that all come together,” said institute Director Natalie Gochnour. 
“We need population numbers so that we can plan appropriately, so that we can make decisions that are informed, and so that we can allocate funds in a way that approximates the needs of all of these communities.” 
A more detailed look at pockets of growth will be essential if Utah continues to be one of the fastest-growing states in the nation. 
Notably, over 50% of the state’s population now lives in just 20 cities. 
Suburban Saratoga Springs and Eagle Mountain grew the most from 2024 to 2025, adding 4,682 and 4,169 people, respectively. 
The urban hubs of Salt Lake City and St. 
George followed closely behind, also adding thousands of new residents. 
Construction has recently boomed in Saratoga Springs and Eagle Mountain. 
In Saratoga Springs alone, the city estimates that it will have over 120,000 residents when all of its lots are built out. 
But it isn’t just single-family and townhome construction driving population growth. 
In Salt Lake City, construction has gone up rather than out. 
“There’s been a lot of multifamily, pretty dense development in Salt Lake City that has been showing up in a really pronounced way in these estimates in the past several years,” said Mallory Bateman, the Gardner Institute’s director of demographic research. 
“And that makes a really big impact.” 
In fact, from 2023 to 2024, a full one in five new housing units along the Wasatch Front were added in Salt Lake City. 
Those large apartment complexes have sprung up along major road corridors and transportation hubs throughout the city. 
Demographer Megan Rabe said there are a few caveats to the capital city’s growth, notably the Utah State Correctional Facility’s move from Draper to Salt Lake City in 2022, which added thousands of residents. 
But that doesn’t tell the whole story. 
“If you’re kind of looking over time, the story of Salt Lake City is that really high number of permitting for these large multifamily apartment complexes,” Rabe said. 
But widespread growth isn’t happening everywhere. 
In fact, cities like Provo and Orem ended up losing population in that same time frame. 
Orem had the biggest drop-off of 942 people. 
While there might not be a singular reason for the decline in those cities, Gochnour has some theories. 
“We think of Utah as this rapidly growing state, which is absolutely true, but when you get behind the curtains and look at various communities, you’ll see all sorts of variation,” she said. 
“We do have some traditional communities. 
In a lot of ways, the kids have grown up and left home, and the parents are still there. 
But we have smaller family sizes, and so the persons per household goes down.” 
Bateman agreed that the reasons for decline are not always as simple as people moving out. 
“It might be more people dying than babies being born,” she said. 
“So in some of the smaller growth areas, smaller communities, it could just be a combination of not having new movers coming in and kind of that older population aging out.” 
For Gochnour, the numbers show just how variable growth in Utah really is. 
“We’re still a high-growth state, but our growth has moderated,” she said. 
Editor’s note: KUER is a licensee of the University of Utah but operates as an editorially independent news organization. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 13.5%Sean Higgins: 2.5%KUER: 2.8%Confirmation Bias13.5%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.9%KUER: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 10.5%Sean Higgins: 2.8%KUER: 3.4%Availability Heuristic10.5%This article: 6.5%Sean Higgins: 1.7%KUER: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic6.5%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.4%KUER: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 27.0%Sean Higgins: 2.1%KUER: 1.9%Overconfidence Bias27.0%This article: 6.8%Sean Higgins: 5.2%KUER: 7.4%Framing Effect6.8%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.9%KUER: 1.3%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 2.4%Sean Higgins: 1.1%KUER: 1.2%Status Quo Bias2.4%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 12.7%Sean Higgins: 4.1%KUER: 4.4%Optimism Bias12.7%This article: 1.8%Sean Higgins: 1.9%KUER: 2.4%Pessimism Bias1.8%This article: 9.4%Sean Higgins: 5.3%KUER: 6.3%Negativity Bias9.4%This article: 2.9%Sean Higgins: 4.2%KUER: 2.2%Self-Serving Bias2.9%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.7%KUER: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 2.7%KUER: 1.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.8%KUER: 0.6%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 1.8%Sean Higgins: 2.1%KUER: 2.3%Halo Effect1.8%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.0%KUER: 0.1%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 10.2%Sean Higgins: 1.2%KUER: 1.2%Recency Bias10.2%This article: 6.5%Sean Higgins: 0.5%KUER: 0.3%Primacy Effect6.5%This article: 1.7%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias1.7%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.5%KUER: 0.6%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.6%KUER: 0.4%Straw Man0.0%This article: 21.7%Sean Higgins: 4.1%KUER: 4.7%Appeal to Authority21.7%This article: 1.4%Sean Higgins: 2.2%KUER: 1.7%False Dilemma1.4%This article: 3.6%Sean Higgins: 0.7%KUER: 1.1%Slippery Slope3.6%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.3%Sean Higgins: 4.7%KUER: 4.1%Hasty Generalization5.3%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.6%KUER: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 5.0%Sean Higgins: 5.5%KUER: 5.6%Appeal to Emotion5.0%This article: 7.7%Sean Higgins: 0.8%KUER: 0.7%Begging the Question7.7%This article: 12.6%Sean Higgins: 2.5%KUER: 2.4%Post Hoc (False Cause)12.6%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 1.1%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.4%Burden of Proof1.1%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 3.8%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Composition/Division3.8%This article: 16.4%Sean Higgins: 2.4%KUER: 3.1%Anecdotal16.4%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 7.1%Sean Higgins: 1.8%KUER: 1.5%Ambiguity (Equivocation)7.1%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.0%KUER: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.2%KUER: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.1%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.1%KUER: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 3.0%Sean Higgins: 0.9%KUER: 0.8%Unattributed Quote3.0%This article: 24.7%Sean Higgins: 0.8%KUER: 0.7%Quote-first Misdirection24.7%This article: 7.9%Sean Higgins: 1.4%KUER: 2.2%Biased Writer Voice7.9%This article: 5.8%Sean Higgins: 2.4%KUER: 1.6%Indoctrination5.8%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 1.3%KUER: 0.8%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.3%KUER: 0.3%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 0.6%KUER: 1.0%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

659 words analyzed.

Speakers

7speakers60%attributed speech263writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageUniversity of Utah’s Kem C. • 14 words • 0.0% coverageGardner Policy Institute • 15 words • 0.0% coverageGardner Policy Institute • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageNatalie Gochnour • 23 words • 100.0% coverageNatalie Gochnour • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageSaratoga Springs • 22 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 11 words • 0.0% coverageMallory Bateman • 41 words • 100.0% coverageMallory Bateman • 7 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 24 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rabe • 34 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageMegan Rabe • 28 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 6 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 0.0% coverageNatalie Gochnour • 33 words • 100.0% coverageNatalie Gochnour • 6 words • 0.0% coverageNatalie Gochnour • 19 words • 0.0% coverageNatalie Gochnour • 14 words • 0.0% coverageMallory Bateman • 16 words • 0.0% coverageMallory Bateman • 12 words • 0.0% coverageMallory Bateman • 31 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageNatalie Gochnour • 12 words • 0.0% coverageKUER • 19 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Natalie Gochnour

100%flagged-word coverage
145 attributed words37% of attributed speech93% writer coverage
0%32.5%65.0%Quote-first Misdirection+64.8 ptsWriter: 0.0%Natalie Gochnour: 64.8%64.8%Indoctrination+26.2 ptsWriter: 0.0%Natalie Gochnour: 26.2%26.2%Biased Writer Voice+18.2 ptsWriter: 4.6%Natalie Gochnour: 22.8%22.8%Unattributed Quote-7.6 ptsWriter: 7.6%Natalie Gochnour: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.