This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
Over and over during his short tenure as Utah House speaker, Greg Hughes has bobbed and weaved his way through one phony public process after another. Now he's extending that skill set to flat-out deception.
First it was the prison, which despite the window-dressing of a public process, just had to be moved from his Draper hometown. Then, and continuing, is the farce that Hughes and cronies have engaged in with regard to Medicaid expansion. Over the last two years, Hughes, et al., have abandoned over 125,000 of Utah's most vulnerable uninsured to fend for themselves, despite expansion being approved by the majority of Utahns and Gov. Gary Herbert. Now Hughes insists that it's coincidence that the resignation of one UTA board member and the expected departure of two others occurred after discovery that he, UTA board members, lobbyists and others secretly traveled to Switzerland after UTA resolved that such international travel was subject to prior public disclosure/approval.
How does Hughes justify this end-run around the UTA's own rules? By having lobbyists, PAC's and his office arrange the trip. But the resignations are utterly coincidental. Just ask Greg.
This is far from over because Hughes' fascination with Switzerland's trains runs deep and has seemingly infiltrated the Mountain Accord process which, to some, looks no more transparent or responsive to public input than the prison relocation or Medicaid efforts. Despite repeated recommendations against a train up Little Cottonwood Canyon, despite the vehement opposition of the vast majority of residents in the area and despite the budget-busting cost of such a proposal, the idea of a train up the canyon seems to keep chugging along in the Mountain Accord process. The official answer that "everything gets studied, nothing is decided," worries more than a few that this is more of the "nothing to see here" deflection until the day area residents wake up to find the tracks are being laid and the bill is in the mail.
The Mountain Accord team encourages public input at public meetings, on their website, even at many community meetings. But most of the public response is against rail in the canyons. As this doesn't fit with what seems the real goals, increasing tourism and economic development (to the significant detriment of local skiers' experience and residents' lifestyles), guess which goal our elected leaders will support?
To me, keeping the rail option on the table is like preparing a dessert table for some teens, with several healthy dessert choice (fruit, maybe dark chocolate?), and then adding some nice Twinkies and pretty sugar-bombs. What are the kids gonna' eat? The sugar-bombs, of course.
What are our government leaders/Mountain Accord executives likely to choose, given the various transportation choices? That which is glamorous, which ignores public input and which will cause even greater transportation debt.
The trip to Switzerland included meetings with Stadler Rail execs and Swiss lawmakers to discuss funding — how their public-private partnership could work here to meet our supposed demand for mountain transit systems. Stadler Rail is being wooed to build its North American headquarters here in Utah. This will be discussed at a December meeting of the Governor's Office of Economic Development. How remarkably convenient.
While the idea of a train presents a nice image, given the fact that it's reported that the state is projected to be $7.3 billion short of meeting its transportation cost needs by 2040, maybe it's time to agree that a train is a great Swiss solution but we need a Utah solution.
It's time that Speaker Hughes and the leaders of the Mountain Accord process learn something about transparency and responsiveness to the public.
Mary Young is a resident of Granite.