top of page

Inland Port

H.B. 347 Inland Port Modifications – F. Gibson (Member of the In Land Port Board) – Passed Committee with 7-1-2; D-Harrison only opposition

2018 Bill (HB 234) Utah Inland Port Authority

• Click on “Hearings/Debates” and select the “Day 44” to listen to Rep Gibson speak to the bill.

o Remember: This bill did NOT go through House Committee, under suspension of the rules.

o This hearing is the 2nd to last day at 9:34pm. – They cut debate early, sounds to me that the floor vote was not to “Previous Question” or end debate, and is not debatable.

2019 Bill (HB433) Inland Port Amendments

• Click on “Hearings/Debates” and select the “Day 39” to listen to Rep Gibson once again.

o This bill was heard in Committee with a vote of 6-2-3 (Harrison & Moss opposing, Dems)

o Passed the House 61-11-3 – All Democrats opposing

Do a quick Google Search, and you’ll find MANY articles about the Port.

Bramble with a NEW BILL today, S.B. 191 Income Tax Revisions. Not the “new tax break” that we are all expecting since we are once again in a surplus!

We heard 24 Bills in the House today – 11 contested, and 6 of those were contested with more than 10 votes. Those include, HB 262 – Limit prosecution to 11yr old, HB118 – Include e-cigarette under regulation of tobacco, HB298 – Victim guidelines, HB236 – State to eval safe school routes, HB246 – incentivize doctors to stay in Utah (90% already do), HB278 – Signs and barriers along Jordan River, HB283 – New Commission created to evaluate future needs of recreation.

- 27 NEW numbered bills

- 13 NEW requested bills

Total Bill Count

- House 423

- Senate 191

- House Concurrent Resolutions (HCR) 23

- House Joint Resolution (HJR) 21

- House Resolutions (HR) 3

- Senate Concurrent Resolutions (SCR) 7

- Senate Joint Resolutions (SJR) 12

- Senate Resolutions (SR) 1

Committee Meeting – Roughly 30+ people wanted to testify for 2min.

• Stop the polluting port – Still have not seen a business plan (NO clean green ports)

o Thrown at Utah second to last day after 9pm by Greg Hughes.

• No opportunity for Inland Port from public input. No environmental statement to date.

o Idea of “building the ship as we go”, well how well does that work?

• Trucking may be able to be lessened, based on shipping in/out versus the current 22K+ trucks pass through instead of using rail.

• Go forward without standard studies. Rebuilding on sand. Doubling the pollution. Fragile wetlands. Who actually profits? Very few, not the constituents.

• 11,600 trucks, and 23,000 car trips DAILY is what the port will drive. Need for Env. Impact study.

• AFLCIO – Utah labor union, supports HB347, and satellite hubs (support to economic boost). Will create sustainable high paying jobs.

• Despite all the concern in previous bills, legislature continues to allow inland port to go forward with no business plan/advice.

• Utah manufacturer – In land port has been part of Utah since 1970’s, and to drive the economy and manufacturer to improve. Will attract additional industry.

• Lives in avenues, bill proposes tweaks, however where is the document and why no “shall” in the document instead of “may”. If the “hub and spoke” does happen, then the SLC project should be able to be reduced, and boundaries pulled back from most sensitive areas. Prison being built in the marsh/swamp.

• Sanpete County Commissioner – Avenue to the inland port, and support 100%. Why vilify commerce and economics.

• Executive Dir of Utah trucking – Appreciates work and reaching to discuss. Supports bill. Likes the incoming plan for trucking and moving freight. Likes to have been considered.

• Not only the trucking coming through, but the equipment building the port, and the moving of supplies inside of the port.

• Executive director of league of cities and towns – Have been engaged since the start. Supports the bills and the improvements that it makes to the bill. They originally opposed bill, but now with representations they support.

• SL Air Protectors – Financial or political interest that are speaking “for” and that the citizens feel they are not protected or heard. Need to have “may” or “shall” and giving rights to the developers without any business plan. What are the impacts of the building, and no study has happened.

• President of SL and Westland railroad – supports and the increased opportunity.

• Green Party candidate for mayor – Steamrolled by this port, and the health an wellbeing of the valley. Quality above profits.

• Port has listened and is trying to understand what the locals want, and in development of business plan.

7 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page