S.B. 264 Inland Port Authority Amendments

March 7, 2024

The Utah Inland Port Authority (UIPA) was established to ensure our state has the infrastructure necessary to support economic growth while preserving our valuable natural resources. S.B. 264 Inland Port Authority Amendments addresses several aspects of the UIPA’s functioning to promote transparency, efficiency and adaptability in light of evolving project areas and statewide expansion. 

One of the focuses of the bill is to prevent the misuse of tax differentials for developer costs and clarify that public infrastructure does not encompass expenses related to developer building costs. This safeguard helps maintain fiscal responsibility and prevent any potential diversion of public funds.

The legislation also introduces options for the composition of the UIPA board, broadening the eligibility criteria to include individuals interested in land within a project area. While allowing for increased participation, it adheres to recusal in instances of conflicts of interest. In anticipation of expanding project areas across the state, S.B. 264 emphasizes securing diverse and knowledgeable board members to execute these developments effectively.

To streamline administrative processes and adapt to regional capabilities, S.B. 264 eliminates the requirement to post notices of project areas in newspapers, acknowledging the challenges posed by limited newspaper options in certain regions. Instead, notifications can be made through official city and county websites, the Utah Public Notice Website and in-person announcements in the affected area.

Additionally, S.B. 264 allows UIPA the creation of remediation project areas without the landowner’s agreement. This flexibility enables UIPA to address environmental concerns independently and efficiently while streamlining the remediation process.

Moreover, the legislation removes UIPA as an intermediary for certain sales tax transactions in project areas. Taxes will now be directly forwarded from the tax commission to municipalities to enhance the responsible flow of funds.

Finally, the substitute for S.B. 264 prohibits the development of retail or distribution centers on designated landfill sites during remediation projects.