top of page
Newly Proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port
$180 million in public subsidies to developers, significant harm to northern Utah
spanish fork.png
    (Proposed Spanish Fork Project Area is outlined in purple)                               

What is the Proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port?

Here is the description from the draft Utah Inland Port Authority Spanish Fork Inland Port Project Area Plan:

“The Spanish Fork Inland Port Project Area Candidate (see above) is envisioned to be a 2200-acre industrial park with approximately 10 million square feet of industrial facilities. The properties are a group of non-contiguous parcels on the west side of Spanish Fork City. The area currently has developer-acquired property, water rights, and adequate power capacity. The Springville Spanish Fork Airport, Utah County Jail, and Utah County Mosquito Abatement are all located within the project area.

The project area will have a need for water and wastewater infrastructure and transmission lines for power delivery. The project area anticipates recruiting manufacturers and exploring use of a Foreign Trade Zone. The early estimate for infrastructure investment is approximately $50 million for the first phase and another $50 million for Phase II.  

The primary contact with the city is Dave Anderson - economic development director of Spanish Fork. The legislative body is Mayor Mike Mendenhall and the City Council. Private sector interests involve: Colmena, Wadsworth, Boyer, and the Gardner Group. The only identified noteworthy taxing entity is the Nebo School District.” 

Who benefits?

This is a project that benefits well-connected Salt Lake City based warehouse developers Colmena, Wadsworth, Boyer and the Gardner Group.


Who is harmed:
A 2,200 acre,10 million square foot industrial development, located 2 miles from Utah Lake and Provo Bay, and adjacent to land that has always been open space, will irreparably damage quality of life for nearby residents in Spanish Fork and Palmyra. Warehouse developments cause air, water, light and noise pollution. They deplete water resources. Heavy truck traffic will degrade roads, add air pollution and create traffic hazards.


Developers are seeking up to $180 million in tax breaks. The ultimate travesty is that taxpayers will foot the bill for this boondoggle.

Air Quality

Of particular concern to everyone in northern Utah, is the fact that the area is not in compliance with federal air quality standards. We breathe unhealthy levels of ozone and PM2.5. The proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port would make this problem worse.    

Impacts to Utah Lake

The proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port is about 2 miles from Utah Lake, a significant source of water for Great Salt Lake. Utah Lake is an impaired water body that is undergoing science based restoration and conservation. Building a 2,200 acre industrial park, with the pollution and destruction of wetlands it will generate, negates the millions of dollars in public money that has been put toward restoring and conserving Utah Lake.


What’s up with the Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA)?
UIPA, which was created by the Utah Legislature in 2018, has failed with its effort to create a Salt Lake City Inland Port (although there is a growing warehouse district in SLC on the shores of Great Salt Lake). In order to justify their existence they are rushing creation of “Inland Port Project Areas” throughout Utah. There isn’t any rigorous business case being made for these highly speculative developments, but there are several pots of taxpayer money that developers want. Recently a rural inland port was approved for Cedar City (even though Cedar City is running out of water). On April 11, 2023 the Tooele County Council passed a solution supporting creation of an inland port on wetlands close to Great Salt Lake. On May 2, 2023, the Spanish Fork City Council passed a resolution supporting creation of a Spanish Fork Inland Port. 


What you can do:

Sign our petition

Join us on May 11, at 9:30 am in the Utah State Capitol Rotunda for a press conference and rally in opposition to this boondoggle at the taxpayers expense.

bottom of page