CAPITOL HILL—A bill reducing the size of—and city representation on—the board of the Utah Inland Port Authority is headed to the governor after winning unanimous support from the House on Thursday.

The bill, HB443, shrinks the port board to five members—a majority of which will be appointed by legislative leadership—removing all voting seats previously held by representatives of Salt Lake City, Magna, West Valley City and Salt Lake County.

“It was a political board and not a business board,” said Sen. Jerry Stevenson, R-Layton, the bill’s Senate sponsor. “It’s time to have a business board.”

While development of the inland port—an expansive area largely within Salt Lake City’s industrial northwest quadrant—is already underway, its broader activation as a hub for freight, shipping and manufacturing has been stymied by varying levels of pushback from county and municipal officials, environmental advocates and resident demonstrators.

But on Capitol Hill, HB443 was pitched by both city and state leaders as a long-sought kumbaya that could cool tensions on the perennially controversial topic. Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall told City Weekly on Wednesday that while the removal of board representation is “a loss,” the bill includes significant wins for the city in the form of a larger share of the tax revenue generated by the port and a 25-year contract with the Inland Port Authority directing environmental impact mitigation and west side community reinvestment.

The legislation also leaves untouched a lawsuit pending before the Utah Supreme Court and launched by Salt Lake City, challenging the tax and land use authority granted by state law to the unelected Port Authority Board.

“We need a contract no matter what happens with the litigation,” Mendenhall said. “What this legislation creates is a pathway for us to gain the assurances we need.”

Sen. Derek Kitchen, D-Salt Lake City, cast the lone opposing vote in the Senate on Wednesday. Before the vote, he unsuccessfully attempted to move an amendment that would give Salt Lake City’s mayor the authority to appoint the port’s fifth board member, a position that under HB443 would be jointly appointed by the House speaker and Senate president.

Kitchen noted that he was a city council member at the time of the original inland port legislation and had participated in negotiations for the county and municipal board seats that were now being removed.

“I have a hard time understanding what is to prevent a future Legislature from stripping away these benefits,” he said.

In a prepared statement released after the vote, Kitchen said the port will impact Salt Lake City’s economy, natural environment and public health, without the involvement of a city representative.

“The Authority Board approves major policy and financial decisions related to the Inland Port,” Kitchen said. “Impacted communities should be included on these important decisions at every step of the way.”

Deeda Seed, a member of the advocacy group Stop the Polluting Port, was also critical of the legislation, describing it as “taxation without representation.”

“It’s important that the people whose tax dollars are being used to create this—whatever it is—have a seat at the table, a vote, making decisions about how that money is going to be spent,” Seed said.

But supporters argued it was time to transition into a new phase of the inland port’s development, with lawmakers crediting elements of the bill that offer incentives to businesses that pay above-average wages and direct funding to communities directly adjacent to the port.

“I think the tension between Salt Lake County and the rural [counties], we really need to put that to bed and we need to start working together,” said Sen. Kathleen Riebe, D-Cottonwood Heights.