Judge rules against Salt Lake City in Utah Inland Port Authority lawsuit

A section of land looking southeast at 7200 West and I-80 that is part of the proposed Utah Inland Port in Salt Lake City is pictured on Monday, July 16, 2018. On Wednesday, Jan. 8, 2020, 3rd District Judge James Blanch rejected the city’s lawsuit challenging the state-created Utah Inland Port Authority, ruling the body does not violate the Utah Constitution’s “Ripper Clause” regarding local powers. | James Wooldridge, Deseret News

SALT LAKE CITY — In a blow to Salt Lake City, a judge has ruled in favor of the state of Utah in the court case over the constitutionality of the Utah Inland Port Authority.

In a ruling issued Wednesday, 3rd District Court Judge James Blanch rejected the city’s lawsuit challenging the state-created Utah Inland Port Authority, ruling the body does not violate the Utah Constitution’s “Ripper Clause” regarding local powers.

The ruling is a major strike against the case former Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski laid out prior to her exit from office, arguing the state violated the Utah Constitution when it created an 11-member board to control about 16,000 acres in western Salt Lake County for the development of a global trade hub with a vast network of air, truck and train connections.

But it’s not the end of the line for Salt Lake City.

Newly-sworn in Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall told reporters outside of her office late Wednesday she was “disappointed” by the judge’s decision, but the city plans to appeal and take the case up to the Utah Supreme Court.

“It’s our responsibility to our residents in Salt Lake City and really to cities throughout the state of Utah who will be impacted by this decision to get clarity from a higher authority,” Mendenhall said.

The Utah Inland Port Authority, since it was created by state leaders in 2018, has angered environmentalists and other activists concerned about an inland port’s potential impacts on pollution and traffic along the Wasatch Front, where air quality has tracked among the dirtiest in the country.

But in court, the debate hasn’t been whether Utah should have an inland port. Rather, the question posed to the judge was a question of power — and who should get control of the jurisdiction’s future property tax dollars and have final say on land use decisions.

The question of whether Utah’s constitution prevents state lawmakers from seizing control of the trade hub and delegating authority to a board has a simple response, according to Blanch.

“The answer is no,” he wrote in the 51-page ruling.

“Whether wise or unwise,” he continued, the 2018 law creating the board “is sufficiently infused with a state purpose.”

He found it does not violate the parts of the constitution the city had identified, including its “Ripper Clause” barring the state from giving municipal authority to special commissions.

Blanch’s decision comes less than two months after state and city officials laid out their arguments in front of the judge. Biskupski walked away from that day in court confident the city’s case would prevail.

“I feel we have a much stronger case and much better legal arguments,” Biskupski said at the time.

Now, just weeks away from the Utah Legislative session, Mendenhall says she has “clarity” on the court case, which will affect her and the Salt Lake City Council’s strategy with state leaders as they perhaps continue negotiations with state leaders on the legislation.

The outcome of the case will have “unprecedented” shock waves on not just Salt Lake City, but all 248 cities and towns across Utah regarding local land use and taxation authority, Mendenhall said.

“Everything about the inland port is setting a major precedent, and the state’s actions to create the inland port authority and usurp what we believe are constitutionally protected (powers) is unprecedented,” Mendenhall said.

This story will be updated.

Contributing: Annie Knox

from Deseret News https://ift.tt/36zRtLe