Weber County Inland Port
The proposed Weber County Inland Port Project Areas represent an untenable trend in which environmental and public health issues are overridden by the lure of economic development.
The Weber County project, should it reach its intended dimensions, would expand over 9,000 acres of land and wetlands adjacent to the Great Salt Lake (see map below).
A project of this magnitude and in this location—between the Harold S. Crane Waterfowl Management Area and the Ogden Bay Waterfowl Management Area—will cause tremendous harm.
Here's what developers are planning for the biggest area:
The ecological peril we face with declining Great Salt Lake water levels and ecosystem collapse, loss of wetlands, air quality problems, population growth, and pollution demonstrate that this project is not in the public's interest and shouldn’t receive public subsidies through designation as an inland port project area.
The Port Authority recently entered into a "Participation Agreement" with Weber Bend Project Area Developers that is NOT in the Public’s Interest
Background: A contractual Participation Agreement between UIPA and West Weber Bend developers PCC Land LLC , represented by Dan Stephens of the BlackPineGroup, and Christian Gardner of the Gardner Group, was approved by the UIPA Board on June 13, 2024. The agreement is a classic “sweetheart deal” for developers, while creating harm for the public in terms of increased traffic, pollution, harm to water resources and lack of compensation for public services that need to be provided for big new industrial development in West Weber County, such as fire, police and road maintenance.
This development agreement harms the public interest. Questions need to be answered:
Why did Weber County agree to give 75% of the tax differential to UIPA and developers and only keep 25% for the local taxing entities who are required to provide services for the area? Why not a 50% - 50% split or, 25% for the developer and 75% for the County with no need for UIPA at all? At least in Salt Lake City there were some requirements to, theoretically benefit the community and offset impacts.
Since everyone knows that UIPA does not actually create value, the local county development officials could have captured this tax differential without UIPA. For example the cumulative UIPA administrative expense exceeds the total for wetland mitigation.
One of the worst things about this contract is that UIPA is encouraging the developers to purchase and retain highly valuable Great Salt Lake water rights for themselves using tax differential money given to them by UIPA. Given the situation of the Great Salt Lake, this should not be allowed, that water belongs to the taxpayers, not the developers. Other questions include:
-
Why is the project area allowed to expand in the future without resident review and input? What consideration did Weber County residents get for waiving their review rights? (Section 1.3)
-
Was there a competitive bidding process for the contract? How were Gardner and his local partner selected? A competitive bid would have generated more value for tax paying residents. What consideration did Weber County residents receive for giving up the right to a competitive contract? (Section 1.6)
-
Why are the developers given basically unlimited rights to restructure and transfer this project? What consideration did Weber County residents get for this extremely generous clause? What, if any, control over the developer remains with Weber County? (Section 2.2)
-
Why is the developer not held to any performance standards or timelines? Weber County has agreed to have no control over the pace of development with this contract. Note that no Master Plan is required of the developers. None of the standard recommendations for non-linear, landform friendly development are even mentioned. (Section 3.1)
-
Why is there insufficient protection for wetlands? In spite of public comments made by UIPA Executive Director Ben Hart that “We’re going to take unprecedented measures to try and protect the wetlands up here”. The required setback from the Weber River is only 100 feet, and only 30 feet from any wetlands delineated by the US Army Corps of Engineers, but allows ditches to be moved underground thus eliminating surface wetlands. A fair contract would be based on an actual land use plan and specified higher setbacks, used a state wetlands inventory, referenced the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources endangered species database, defined mitigation requirements and proposed a non-linear development pattern based on specific soil and flood zone mapping.
-
Why are developer reporting requirements strictly financial, including nothing with respect to wetlands, wildlife or Great Salt Lake conservation? (Section 3.1(c))
-
Why does Weber County give UIPA sole authority on extending the project life from 25 years to 40 years? (Section 4.1)
What can you do?
Join the team of people working to stop the inland port harm in Weber County:
What are some of the harms of the proposed Weber County Inland Port Project areas:
More harm to Great Salt Lake
With the proposed Weber County port so close to wetlands, wildlife refuges and the Great Salt Lake itself, we must consider the current state of this iconic but shrinking body of water.
-
By any measure, the lake is sick. Due to enormous draw-downs of its water supply from the Bear River…reduced snow- and rainfall…and normal evaporation patterns, the recession of the lake has yielded an unexpected and most undesirable gift—arsenic and mercury dust previously stuck in the lakebed that is now blowing our way.
-
In Tooele County, where one port site is already partially built and a second site is expected, residents in rural areas where wells are prevalent report a noticeable drop in their water table as well as decreasing water quality…factors associated with a declining lake and climate irregularities. We can expect impacts to water quality and quantity at the proposed Weber County Inland Port Project Areas
-
On the lake itself and among its peripheral waterfowl management areas and bird refuges, overall lake ecology is suffering. The Great Salt Lake is a critical feeding and breeding destination, as it lies beneath the Great Pacific Flyway, one of several North American migration routes essential to birds and to waterfowl in particular.
-
According to Dr. Elizabeth Gray, CEO of the National Audubon Society…”In my lifetime, North America has lost more than 3 billion birds. This is a catastrophe playing out on a planetary scale. We are reaching a tipping point for birds, magnified by the dual crises of biodiversity loss and climate change.”
-
One cannot, however, separate birds from the other ecological and economic components of the lake. Brine shrimp are front-of-mind here. The shrimp are not only an important industry…they’re a world-wide source of fish food for vast populations where seafood is an essential dietary component.
-
To put a fine point on it, the brine shrimp industry supplies over 40% of global fish farming industries. According to the state of Utah the lake generates $46.2 - 94.8 million for Utah’s economy.
-
Check out Dr. Kevin Perry, Department Chair and University of Utah Atmospheric Scientist. Dr. Perry spent two years traversing most of the lake’s perimeter and exposed lakebed on foot and bicycle and the rest by boat. Watch his YouTube video: Dr Kevin Perry: Dust Plumes from Great Salt Lake.
Destruction of Wetlands
According to geological survey maps, west Weber County is rich in wetlands. Research reveals that wetlands can actually reduce pollution by acting as “kidneys” of the earth…storing carbon, reducing sediment and filtering water.
-
As Heather Dove, as President of Great Salt Lake Audubon, stated in a recent Salt Lake Tribune column: “I continue to be ever more shocked at the staggering loss of wetlands and uplands that we face if UIPA and their various county partners are allowed to proceed with this proliferation of inland ports around and on the shores of Great Salt Lake…”
-
Wetlands are among the most productive ecosystems in the world, comparable to rain forests and coral reefs. An immense variety of species of microbes, plants, insects, amphibians, reptiles, birds, fish and mammals can be part of a wetland ecosystem.
-
Wetlands can be thought of as "biological supermarkets." They provide great volumes of food that attract many animal species. These animals use wetlands for part of or all of their life-cycle. The functions of a wetland and the values of these functions to humans depend on a complex set of relationships between the wetland and the other ecosystems in the watershed.
-
In the watershed, water, sediments and dissolved materials drain from higher elevations to a common low-lying outlet or basin…such as a larger stream, lake, underlying aquifer or estuary.
-
UPHE President Dr. Brian Moench, put it unequivocally in a December Salt Lake Tribune editorial: We cannot save the Great Salt Lake ecosystem if we amputate its wetlands.
The proposed Weber port will clearly impinge on existing wetlands, thus reducing their inestimable value not only to Great Salt Lake ecology but to all of us living in northern Utah and beyond.
Dangerous Pollution
Pollution associated with both the construction and operation of an inland port comes from many sources.
-
The grading and paving of roads, the infilling of wetlands, the trenching for water supply and sewer pipelines, the installation of power lines, the delivery of equipment and supplies for building warehouses—virtually all these processes rely on diesel-powered machinery and vehicles.
-
Once infrastructure has been built and installed, additional truck and rail traffic will be generated just within the port site in order to deliver incoming cargo or transport cargo out.
-
Allowing for present and future population growth…in light of current congestion along the entire I-15 corridor…and taking into account UIPA’s plans for numerous ports from Box Elder County to Utah County and points farther south, the increase in additional vehicle-based air pollution is almost inestimable.
-
Even today, Utah—and the Wasatch Front in particular—are often out of air quality attainment standards due to our unique regional geography as well as predictable weather patterns.
-
In California, inland port warehouse districts have become known as diesel death zones.
Harm to Public Health
As an immediate corollary to pollution concerns, the very population one assumes would benefit from an inland port will actually suffer from its creation and operation.
-
Experts estimate that air pollution in Utah causes 2480 – 8000 premature deaths annually and decreases the median life expectancy by 1.1 to 3.6 years.
-
Asthma rates among Utahns of all ages continue to rise. Indeed, the total annual health cost from air pollution has been estimated to range from $1.8 billion to $820 billion according to a recent BYU study. https://pws.byu.edu/costs-of-air-pollution-byu-1-1-pdf .
-
Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment (UPHE) has published extensive documentation regarding the deleterious health effects associated with pollution in general, and with inland ports in particular.
-
The proof is in the pudding. Wind-blown dust from the Great Salt Lake, with its microscopic tidbits of toxic chemicals, will have a direct impact on everyone who breathes. And not in a good way. Young, old, male, female, pregnant…everyone.
Stop the Polluting Ports
Find Us On: