The Utah Transit Authority is to be commended for voting in favor of a light-rail system this week. Traffic-clogged freeways and arteries along the Wasatch Front need the mass-transit rail line now more than ever.
By voting 12-2 in favor of a proposed financing contract with the federal government - one that would construct a rail line from Sandy to downtown Salt Lake City - the UTA board showed it favors a sensible solution to congestion that threatens to foul the air and stall the state's thriving economy.It also demonstrated courage in the face of a persistent and misguided opposition, and it means light rail, at long last, has a good chance of being built.
Obstacles remain, not the least of which is getting the federal government to provide most of the money. The proposal approved Wednesday would require UTA to pay 20 percent of the project, or about $59 million. That would come through surplus land sales, a local bond issue and by tapping into money the authority has saved.
Significantly, and unequivocally, taxes would not be raised to cover the cost.
The federal government needs to approve $235 million in grants over the next several years to make up the rest.
One of light rail's biggest opponents happens to be the hometown congresswoman, Rep. Enid Waldholtz, R-Utah. Normally, her opposition would be damaging, perhaps even fatal, to the project. But in this case it is more than countered by Utah Sen. Robert Bennett, who is a light-rail supporter and who sits on the Senate Appropriations Committee - the group that, in concert with a similar committee in the House, would authorize the money.
His support means the UTA has a good chance of starting construction as scheduled in the fall of 1996.
Light-rail opponents are likely to step up their efforts now that the project has momentum. For one thing, they can be expected to argue that voters soundly rejected the system in a 1992 referendum.
On the contrary, voters did not reject light rail. They rejected the quarter-cent sales tax increase that was proposed as a way to finance the project.
Opponents also may try to insist that the contract approved by the UTA board means the federal government can force the authority to build the project even if Congress fails to fund its share. That would be a curious tactic on the government's part, considering light rail is a local project with no direct benefit to Washington.
Such arguments amount to little more than desperate attempts to counter the sound logic behind light rail. Worse, they are stalling tactics that show little regard for the quality of air or the ease of mobility in the state's fast-growing metropolitan corridor.
The 12 board members who voted in favor of light rail did so after years of study. Their conclusion is the only logical one for solving traffic problems. The sooner a light-rail system can begin operating, the better.