TOOELE — Hours before the Utah Inland Port Authority's board of directors voted unanimously to approve the Tooele Valley and Twenty Wells inland port project areas, protestors gathered Tuesday outside the Tooele County Public Buildings to voice their concerns about the project.

Most focused on the notion that the ports would negatively impact air quality, increase traffic congestion and harm the surrounding Great Salt Lake wetlands near the respective sites.

"The people that propose these projects do not live in our county. They don't experience the negative effects that we receive (and) they make it seem like it's such a beneficial project on paper, but anyone can do that. Anyone can pick a topic and make it sound like it's this wonderful thing on a piece of paper," said Tooele County resident Miranda Smith. "There's negative impacts on the citizens and the inland port (authority) isn't here to experience them."

The Tooele Valley Project Area covers approximately 243 acres of land northwest of where Higley Road meets the railroad right-of-way on its east end. It proposes using the former Union Pacific Warner Branch line to bring rail service to the project area. The Twenty Wells Project Area totals 498 acres of land and is located entirely within the boundaries of Grantsville and includes rail access to the project area.

A press release from the Center for Biological Diversity estimates that together, the two project areas would harm approximately 12,000 acres of Great Salt Lake wetlands and deplete water resources in an area dependent on well water; it said the areas would face a significant decline in available water and massively increase truck traffic.

Amid increasing concerns over the creation of the new project areas and the threats they pose to wetlands and the Great Salt Lake, the Utah Inland Port Authority in November adopted a "comprehensive wetlands policy" that outlines regulations and strategies to protect and conserve wetlands within its project areas.

"With this new wetlands policy, we're actually going to have an opportunity, through the inland port authority, to create a mandatory source of revenue to help protect wetlands and the Great Salt Lake," said Ben Hart, executive director of the Utah Inland Port.

As far as how much revenue could be allocated to wetland and Great Salt Lake protection, Hart said it would be in the neighborhood of 1% of all tax differential from the various project areas.

"We are not going to participate in the destruction of the wetlands or harm the Great Salt Lake in any way, shape, or form," Hart said.

With the proposed policy, Hart said the port authority will be able to give back and contribute to wetlands and the Great Salt Lake using funding from projects around the state.

Despite this policy, environmental groups remain concerned about how the industrial development projects will impact the Great Salt Lake and surrounding wetlands, as well as public health.

Related:

Some groups think the inland port's newly proposed wetlands policy doesn't do enough

In the midst of community concern, the Utah Inland Port Authority on Thursday pitched a "comprehensive wetlands policy."

Dr. Courtney Henley serves on the board of directors for Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment and, speaking at the protest Tuesday, said she can't stand idly by and "watch my fellow citizens be harmed."

"We might as well call it the Utah Inland 'Harm' Authority, because these projects have the potential to cause so much harm to public health and wellness," Henley said. "For six years, the Utah Inland Port Authority has touted its goal to create truck, train and air shipping ports around the state of Utah. The only truck, train and air transport we have today relies on the burning of fossil fuels, and the emissions increase air pollution in the form of ozone and fine particulate matter."

Henley said breathing fossil fuel exhaust leads to it dissolving in blood, contaminating and inflaming organs in the body.

"Truth — that is what we're talking about today," Henley said. "The truth that inland port projects will hurt Tooele County residents more than it will help them."

During Tuesday's board of directors meeting, Hart said he believes the inland port can bring the "best and brightest" companies to Tooele County, boosting economic development and opportunities while also taking "traffic off the roads and pollution out of the air."

"While we're doing that — because we're statutorily required to — we're also going to be creating money to help save the wetlands of the Great Salt Lake. All of those things can and will work together," Hart said. "Anybody who tells you something different is lying to you. I hate to say it that bluntly, but that's the case."

Still, many county residents are less optimistic about project areas coming into the county.

"The Utah Inland Port Authority seems to want us to just trust them but, at least to me, haven't demonstrated that they can be trusted," said Teri Durfee, with the Stop Polluting Port Coalition.

Amidst chants of "stop the Tooele ports," the protestors called on county residents to contact their local city council members and urge them to reverse their support for the project areas.

"The Utah Inland Port Authority will be accepting the two Tooele County project areas but this is not the end. This can and should be stopped," Durfee said.

Related topics