Port power bill in Utah sent to the Senate floor despite the opposition – Standard -Examiner

1/9

Deeda Seed listens to the Committee on Economic Development and Labor Power in the Senate of Utah on the hearing of a bill to amend the management statute of the port administration of Utah on Wednesday, February 12, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

2/9

A demonstrator protested against the port administration of Utah in the Capitol state building on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

3/9

The Reverend Scott Veperman of the Presbyterian Church of the Trinity attended the hearing of the Committee on Economic Development and Workplace in Utah, amending the bill that amended the leadership statute of the port administration of Utah on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

4/9

Joan Gregory attended the hearing of the Committee on Economic Development and Labor Power in the Senate of Utah under a bill that amended the Guide Law of the Port Administration of Utah on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

5/9

The Executive Director of the Port Power in Utah Ben Hart left the hearing of the Committee on Economic Development and Workforce in the Senate of the UPA under the Governing Law of the UIPA on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

6/9

Deeda Seed, a campaign for the Center for Biodiversity, spoke against the internal port of Utah in a demonstration in the state capitol building on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

7/9

Toele County Resident Terry Drafi spoke against the internal port of Utah in a demonstration in the Capitol building on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

8/9

The demonstrators protest against the port administration of Utah in the State Capitol building on Monday, February 10, 2025.

Collin Leonard, Ksl.com

9/9

A great joint salt lake

❮ ❯ ❯

Editor’s note: This article was published through The Great Salt Lake Collaboorative, an initiative for Solutions journalism, which partners of news, education and media organizations to help inform people about the plight of the big salt lake – and what can be done, for change before it gets too late. Read all our stories in Greatsaltlakenews.org.

Salt Lake City – a small frame of the critics of the port administration of Utah on Wednesday have argued against a proposed bill that will expand the ability of the enterprise to make purchases on the ground and influence the development of plots adjacent to the current borders, among others boundaries, among other limits changes.

The SB239 was presented to the Committee on Economic Development and Labor Services in the Senate by the main sponsor of the bill and the longtime member of the UIPA board, Senator Jerry Stevenson, R-Layton.

What about the account?

At the end of the fiscal year 2024, the inner port reported over 97,000 acres within 12 different project areas in Utah. These boundaries contain areas that benefit from financing the tax increase, which works by freezing tax values ​​at a zone at their current levels for some time and occupying the expected increase in property tax income.

The proposed amendments to the management statute of the enterprise will extend the powers of the UIPA to allow the purchases of plots within the limits of the project or adjacent to them. The port administration will also be able to conduct its typical business, facilitating the development and creation of infrastructure areas in areas adjacent to demarcated project areas.

“We have an early agreement with Salt Lake City,” said Executive Director Ben Hart. “This new legislation will allow us to make purchases on a potential sensitive land in connection with Salt Lake City.”

Hart told Ksl.com that the amendment applies only to the area of ​​the group’s northwestern quadrant project. “I do not know that this will have immediate or long -term impacts in any of the other areas of the project, to be honest. This is something that is quite unique only for Salt Lake City. “

Income from different sources can be spent on “environmental resistance projects”, in addition to infrastructure and improvements “on or related to land in the project area”.

This move follows the purchase of UIPA of the former northern temple depot of the Utah Trust land administration on Monday. The repair of polluted groundwater will take six to seven years, Hart told Ksl.com, making the way for “really good business. Not distribution centers, but manufacturers and those who really add value to the economy. “

Another amendment would allow the UIPA to fund other state entities to “fulfill the obligations and responsibilities of the body”. This change was encouraged by the past 2.5 million dollars of grant UIPA gave the Ministry of Natural Resources in November 2024, according to HART. The money funded the purchase of land near the southeast coast of the large salt lake to create a buffer area of ​​industrial development.

“We have found that there are a few things in our statute that have just complicated this,” Hart said. “It just helps to clear this so that we have easier time with moist areas and sensitive protection of the area.”

The SB239 will also allow the governor to appoint three of five members of the voting council instead of the current two. Hart says the change “brings us according to other similar entities.”

Longtime critics protest against UIPA

Public members spoke against the changes during the hearing of the Commission, citing common fears that promoting industrial development would affect air quality in areas already struggling with pollution. The uncertain levels of the Big Salt Lake were in mind a number of commentators.

“You may have heard that the Big Salt Lake is already shrinking,” says Dr. Brian Moench, the head of Utah doctors for a healthy environment, a group that is currently suing UIPA by claims for a non -Constitutional Council. “Where will the water come from for all this development, especially the data centers? Where will we go to air that is not dangerous to breathing? “He said.

Senator John Johnson, R-Ongden, said: “It seems that many of these are the original complaints about (UIPA). And it seems that another attempt to kill something that is already going on. “

“It seems to me in this bill, you are actually improving a lot of these things,” Johnson said. “Not that the account worsens this, so I don’t really understand.”

Katie Papas, a consistent opponent of UIPA, told members of the committee that the bill “is unclear and does not define guidelines to prevent unforeseen consequences.”

Prior to the hearing of the committee, the local coalition stopped polluting ports published a report claiming that UIPA was planned to give more than $ 1.3 billion in “subsidies funded by taxpayers, for developers” during the life of the current projects.

Hart told Ksl.com that the report’s allegations were “100% false. Our Statute says that we cannot provide subsidies to developers. We do not provide subsidies to developers. “

Deeda Seed, a campaign for the group, spoke at a small press conference in Capitol, saying that the impact of development would have the influence of the “breach or destruction of up to 77,000 acres of wet areas of the great salt lake”.

SEED told KSL.com the group calculated this figure by measuring “wetlands within project areas and in the neighborhood”.

The report alleges that the development will add “over half a million new vehicles to roads across the Wasatch front.” The group calculated the figure using 1.7 trips per 1000 square feet of warehouse, but according to the Institute for Transportation Engineers, the standard rate is about 0.19, almost 10 times less.

“Our main message here,” said Seed, “is that we are calling for stopping the financing of the inner port and we are calling for a complete audit of the implementation of the port administration. “

“I told the group this: what they say is the limit, if not a clear slander,” Hart said. “They are 100% false. They know that they are wrong and choose to spread misinformation anyway. “

The bill unanimously passed through the Senate Commission with a positive recommendation.