1 / 8

John Bennion, research director for Conserve Utah Valley, gestures to a map of Utah County during a town hall meeting discussing the proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port on Thursday, June 8, 2023. The meeting was organized by Conserve Utah Valley and held in the Spanish Fork Library.

Harrison Epstein, Daily Herald

2 / 8

Eldon Neves, president of Lake-Shore Livestock Association, speaks during a town hall meeting discussing the proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port on Thursday, June 8, 2023. The meeting was organized by Conserve Utah Valley and held in the Spanish Fork Library.

Harrison Epstein, Daily Herald

3 / 8

Spanish Fork Mayor Mike Mendenhall, center, talks with City Council members and residents after a town hall meeting discussing the proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port on Thursday, June 8, 2023. The meeting was organized by Conserve Utah Valley and held in the Spanish Fork Library.

Harrison Epstein, Daily Herald

4 / 8

Land north of the Spanish Fork Airport is photographed on Friday, May 19, 2023. The land and airport are part of the proposed 2,200-acre Spanish Fork Inland Port footprint.

Harrison Epstein, Daily Herald

5 / 8

Byron Adams, biology department chair at Brigham Young University, gestures to environmental data projected on the screen during a town hall meeting discussing the proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port on Thursday, June 8, 2023. The meeting was organized by Conserve Utah Valley and held in the Spanish Fork Library.

Harrison Epstein, Daily Herald

6 / 8

Attendees listen during a town hall meeting discussing the proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port on Thursday, June 8, 2023. The meeting was organized by Conserve Utah Valley and held in the Spanish Fork Library.

Harrison Epstein, Daily Herald

7 / 8

Shawn Miller, Brigham Young University historian, speaks during a town hall meeting discussing the proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port on Thursday, June 8, 2023. The meeting was organized by Conserve Utah Valley and held in the Spanish Fork Library. Listening at front is Dave Anderson, Spanish Fork City's community and economic development director.

Harrison Epstein, Daily Herald

8 / 8

Area map of the proposed Spanish Fork Inland Port.

Courtesy Utah Inland Port Authority

❮ ❯

To Ben Hart, executive director of the Utah Inland Port Authority, a mini-port in Spanish Fork would be an economic boon to Utah County. To Eldon Neves, president of the Lake-Shore Livestock Association, the port would negatively impact how he, and other farmers in the area, live and make a living.

In verbalizing his opposition to the port during a town hall discussion Thursday night, Neves compared the plan to sexual assault — “my feeling is, what they’re saying is ‘you’re about to get raped, why don’t you smile and enjoy it'” — and the Holocaust.

Neves was the final presenter in the first half of the town hall, before the question-and-answer portion and spoke uninterrupted for his allotted five minutes. While moderator John Bennion, of Conserve Utah Valley, said the rhetoric between the two was “a little different,” Hart spoke against Neves’ comments and Bennion’s lack of admonishment.

“The reference for violence, in both sexual ways and in racist ways is disgusting,” Hart said.

Hart’s response received applause from a few of the 50-plus attendees at the meeting, which then moved forward without further incident.

Speaking to the Daily Herald after the meeting concluded, Neves defended his comments. “If they can’t take a little something like that, that’s not the way. The thing that I hate most (is) when it’s already established, already done. They’re just going through the motions here is all, basically. They’re just saying ‘OK, this is gonna happen now enjoy it.’ That’s the reason I referenced the — molestation would have been better comment,” Neves said. “It’s just a lot of bull—-.”

Aside from Neves’ highly-charged metaphors and Hart’s response, the evening was a direct conversation between experts with different perspectives on the proposed port and area residents, most of whom were from Spanish Fork.

The discussion was organized by Conserve Utah Valley and held in the Spanish Fork Library. Panelists were Dave Anderson, community and economic development director for Spanish Fork; Shawn Miller, Brigham Young University historian; Byron Adams, biology department chair at BYU; Brandon Gordon, Utah County Commission member and former Spanish Fork City Council member; Hart and Neves.

Each speaker was given five minutes to discuss their opinions on the proposed port from environmental, economical, political and personal perspectives before a question-and-answer portion including the 50-something people who attended the meeting and those who watched via online stream.

The plan

The Utah Inland Port Authority has changed focuses on targets throughout its existence, with a majority of the board’s attention being on the proposed port in Salt Lake City. In recent months, though, the UIPA has worked with cities across the state, including Spanish Fork, in potentially creating “mini-ports.”

Resolutions supporting ports were approved by various municipal and county bodies including the Spanish Fork City Council (on May 2), the Juab County Commission and more. The Spanish Fork port would be around 2,200 acres and include approximately 10 million square feet of industrial space, according to the Utah Inland Port Authority.

The town hall was organized in an effort to facilitate public discussion on the proposal, according to Conserve Utah Valley Executive Director Adam Johnson.

“The concern here is that with how fast this is moving, people that live in Spanish Fork aren’t even aware that it’s happening in their backyard,” Johnson previously told the Daily Herald.

Environment

Addressing the potential environmental impacts of the mini-port proposal, and opposing it in general, were Adams, Miller and Neves.

Using the environmental impacts included in the state’s draft plan for the project, Adams highlighted two factors — ozone pollution (in parts per billion), of which the area was found to be in the 94th percentile nationally, and wastewater discharge, of which the area is in the 99th percentile. He also addressed two impacts to the area itself. The first being the soil, which he explained is “highly productive” and some of the best for agricultural production, and secondly the people the development would most impact.

“Communities that are closest to the area that is affected are also some lower-income families, so it disproportionately affects lower-income people,” Adams said.

Miller, also a member of the Provo Agricultural Commission, addressed efforts in the area to protect farmland in the county.

According to current predictions, more farmland will be eliminated in the state, limiting the amount of food produced and requiring food to be brought in from other parts of the country.

“What we have in Utah is a fairly precious resource, of which there’s very little left, including the area we’re talking about,” he said. “Because there’s so little farmland, it doesn’t make sense to develop it and turn into other things. Our highest use for most of this land is agriculture.”

One way to protect the land, Miller said, is by setting up conservation easements, which are areas “consistent with the protection of open land,” according to state law. Miller stated that there are only about 300 easements in Utah.

Neves mentioned plans to put 40 acres of his land into a conservation easement, along with statements in support of those who choose to continue farming in the area and expressing doubt toward the port authority’s current and future plans.

“You’re saying 2,200 acres, that’s not going to end there. Let’s not pretend that … that’s going to be there and then it’s going to proceed on to the west,” Neves said.

When it comes to the wetland areas in Spanish Fork, Hart said the group does not support anyone who would seek to destroy the wetlands.

Economics

The construction of the Spanish Fork port, Hart told the audience, would lead to enhanced transportation infrastructure. Anderson, the city’s economic development director, said conversations about a potential port began in February.

“I think the economic center of Utah County has been north of Spanish Fork for some time. I strongly believe the future of Utah County and the economic vocal inertia and centrality for the county really could be in Spanish Fork,” Hart said. “With regard to the port facility, we are looking at not building a brand new big inland port, but we’re looking at how we use the existing rail and any existing facilities to create that access point.”

He also mentioned “targeting the right kind of businesses,” specifically mentioning aerospace and defense companies with a warning that not moving forward with the port could lead to “a situation that is exacerbated by growth” around roads and city infrastructure.

Growth is a frequent point of contention and conversation for Utah County residents and officials. With an estimated population over 700,000 right now, it is expected that the county will surpass 1 million residents in the coming decades. Much of the previous growth has been felt in northern Utah County, with Lehi growing by an estimated 78% from 2010-2022, Saratoga Springs by 177% and Eagle Mountain by almost 153%.

Community leaders expect that much of the coming growth will be in the southern half of the county.

“Santaquin Main Street has a 45-minute backup on your average afternoon, because it’s the only road out to Goshen and Genola and Elberta, that whole area. There’s one road and it’s Santaquin Main Street,” commissioner Amelia Powers Gardner told the Daily Herald in December 2022. “And really, it’s Lehi Main Street 20 years ago.”

Thus, the present focus remains how to prepare for the future boom on several levels, including economically. Anderson told the crowd that Spanish Fork has never been a “bedroom community,” but one that has been a commercial center for the area.

Of the 2,200 acres wrapped into the plan, about 1,100 have already been developed and the rest of the land, Anderson said, has been earmarked for industrial development for decades.

“The effort that we’re undertaking here is trying to make sure that development in the area happens … in an organized, deliberate manner. That the appropriate infrastructure is in place to make sure that it works,” Anderson said. “That’s where the port authority comes into play. They have the ability, having been given tools by the state Legislature, to do some things a little bit better than they could do on our own.”

Another aspect of the land that makes it a candidate for a port is the existing rail lines and access to U.S. Highway 6 toward Price and much of eastern Utah.

Politics

The only elected official taking part in the discussion, Gordon offered his perspective from the Utah County Commission, as a former member of the Spanish Fork City Council and as a multigenerational farmer in the city’s lakeshore area.

“Spanish Fork has such a vision of forward thinking. They did pressurized irrigation and metered it again before anyone else in the state of Utah,” Gordon said. “I don’t get to have a say in this decision, but I do have a lot of confidence in their ability to plan, think forward and collaborate and make smart decisions as it pertains to growth.”

Gordon’s father purchased 45 acres of lakeshore area in Spanish Fork in 1970, he said, and the family has farmed on the land for decades. He also advocated for the rights of farmers to continue farming their land as long as they would like.

After the meeting, Gordon told the Daily Herald that “from everything I’ve seen today,” he would support creating the inland port and would have voted for the council resolution had he still sat on the body.

Attending the town hall from the crowd were also several members of the Spanish Fork City Council, Spanish Fork Mayor Mike Mendenhall, Payson Mayor Bill Wright and Utah County Commissioner Tom Sakievich, among others.

Two public meetings will be held in the coming weeks with the Spanish Fork City Council to make a final decision on whether or not to allow the port plan to proceed. Before signing off the call, Hart affirmed that any movement and development for the port would still go through the full public zoning process.

Newsletter