Brice Wallace
The makeover of the Utah Inland Port Authority continues.
The past year has seen legislative changes to the authority’s board, new leadership take the helm, new staff brought on board, internal policies added or tweaked, and port projects announced for rural parts of the state.
The latest change is a new{mprestriction ids="1,3"} brand. While the UIPA name remains, the organization has a new logo and tagline; a pending new website; new social media platforms; and a renewed focus on its mission, vision and values.
“We maximize long-term economic benefits in Utah by developing and optimizing economic project areas and logistics-based infrastructure” is the mission spelled out by Ben Hart, UIPA’s executive director during a news media unveiling of the new brand.
The logo and brand are “inspired by topographical and natural patterns,” he said. “A weaving of road, train tracks, hills, rivers, lakes, mountains, farmland and deserts come together to suggest movement and exploration, in shades of greens and blues to emulate colors of maps, of fresh life and opportunity, all held tighter in the ‘U’ for our great state. This logo stands as a symbol that supports and defines our mission.”
The rebranding process “has provided an excellent opportunity to refocus the port around our core mission and values,” he said.
What that means for Utahns in practical terms is attempting to boost the use of rail for movement of goods into, out of and through the state, rather than relying so much on truck traffic. Hart said an overdependence on that transportation mode has cost the state millions in construction dollars, hurt air quality and resulted in abandoned rural communities.
Increased use of rail can result in more manufacturing in the state, better jobs for people throughout Utah and other benefits, port officials said. While the focus at one time was developing a port in Salt Lake City’s Northwest Quadrant, it has shifted to having not just a Salt Lake facility but also ports throughout the state as a comprehensive logistics network for more efficient shipping via rail rather than trucks.
“Let me be clear: Our focus is not about building a port,” Hart said. “It’s about building a better statewide logistics system, and inland ports play a key role in that strategy.”
The authority has approved one port facility near Cedar City, and a proposal in Spanish Fork has been announced.
“By creating greater access to rail for the movement of goods and better employment opportunities statewide, we are creating a stronger Utah for future generations,” Hart said.
Miles Hansen, chair of the UIPA board, said the past year has been busy for the organization. “We have a clearer vision, we’ve increased transparency, and now we’re benefiting from the increased accountability and trust that comes with that,” he said.
The new brand “is absolutely critical to the direction we’re going as a port authority,” Hansen said. “It will help us better communicate the port authority’s dedication to sustainability, innovation, respect, accountability and collaboration to all Utahns.”
The authority will redouble efforts to strengthen the shipping and logistics community in the state, he said. As Utah moves to become the “Crossroads of the World,” “we have to stay on the cutting edge of all transportation options or we’re going to be left behind,” Hansen said.
Mike Schultz, a UIPA board member and member of the state House of Representatives, said that Utah already has about 40 percent of U.S. GDP flowing through it.
“It is important that we do everything possible to try and get these heavy trucks off of the roads as much as possible and put the products on rail,” he said. “That’s what we truly are committed to doing all across the state.”
Getting freight traffic off roads and onto rail “has always been a top priority,” he said. “I don’t see that it’s changed, really, but I view it as more getting back to what the original focus was.”
But Jerry Stevenson, a UIPA board member and state senator, said the authority has “retrenched” from its origins five years ago.
“We’ve retrenched because the direction we were heading, we felt like we were going to end up with a massive warehouse district which we didn’t want” in the Northwest Quadrant, he said. “That’s what will happen out there if we don’t continue forward.”
Warehouses generally result in lots of space being used but not a lot of jobs created, he said.
“If the inland port area turned into a massive warehouse district, we would create a tremendous amount of traffic on our roads and we would create not only the traffic, but we would not create the jobs and the job quality that we want,” Stevenson said.
“As you look at what’s happening now out in the inland port area,” Schultz said, “it’s creating more and more and more truck traffic with all the warehousing that’s going on out there. That’s not our goal, that’s not our vision. If we don’t work to meet the [new] goal, that’s what’s going to continue to happen.”
The recent changes could lead to a smoother port authority operation. The authority has had critics since the beginning, featuring Salt Lake City residents concerned about pollution, traffic congestion and environmental issues; regulatory and land-use authority fights with Salt Lake City government; and concerns about the actions taken by authority leadership.
Schultz said the previous administration and board “struggled politically,” fighting among themselves and with local stakeholders as they “got sidetracked with a whole bunch of other things.” While the stakeholders now don’t always agree, they have found ways to move forward, he said.
While board meetings a few years ago were raucous as port critics screamed, yelled and took over meetings, the criticism has subsided if not disappeared. The public input portions of meetings have featured many of the same claims about the troubles an inland port will create in Salt Lake City, but the tone has been cordial.
At the May 11 UIPA board meeting, Hart said he wants to build more public trust, to have people better understand what the authority is trying to accomplish. “There’s been a lot of confusion,” he said, but he wants to ensure “that we’re giving very clear direction about what our intent is.”
After spelling out the authority’s plans at that meeting, Hart asked that people “saying anything other than what I’ve presented, please don’t repeat things that you know are not true.”
“That is not going to help us to clarify and get our message out,” Hart said. “It’s been unfortunate to me that some of those who have been most critical about the port, saying that our message is a little bit confused, are the same ones that are trying to confuse the public.”{/mprestriction}
