LETTERS TO THE EDITOR — The following is a collection of letters submitted to St. George News from Southern Utah residents in response to a field hearing held April 22 about the Northern Corridor Highway.
Letter No. 1: Submitted by Washington City resident MARY JO VILICICH
I attended the April 22, 2024, Congressional field hearing at the Rock Bowl at Sand Hollow and was extremely disappointed that it was a one-sided hearing. Not allowing the public to speak on the issue of the Northern Corridor through protected land was disingenuous and lacked openness to be heard on this matter.
Being called “fringe environmentalists” by one of the speakers was intolerable. I am a conservationist. I advocate for the protection and preservation of the environment and wildlife.
A four-plus highway through the Red Cliffs Conservation Area is not only unlawful, but it will also set a precedent for other states to upend conservation areas.
There are alternatives for a freeway other than the proposed Northern Corridor that are less expensive and more feasible. The Northern Corridor would tremendously increase the traffic on Green Springs and Telegraph which defeats the purpose.
As a homeowner in Washington County, we are blessed to have our home skirt the conservation area. We are outdoors every day enjoying the beauty of the Pine Valley Mountains and the hills and valleys between. The proposed Northern Corridor would seriously impact my mental and physical health with the constant noise, air pollution, dust, bright lights and crime.
Letter No. 2: Submitted by Washington City resident JERRY HAFFLEY
As a Green Springs homeowner, I’m opposed to the Northern Corridor Highway because it would harm the protected habitat of the endangered Mohave Desert tortoise in addition to numerous other animals. It would also destroy the natural beauty, peace and quiet and our quality of life. We moved here for these reasons.
Story No. 3: Submitted by St. George resident RICHARD SPOTTS
Dear Editor:
Three Utah House Republicans accomplished a lot this past April 22. They held a Congressional public hearing in Hurricane where the public was not allowed to speak. They simultaneously managed to transform this sham public hearing into a dizzying political spin campaign event at the public’s expense, blast “fringe” environmental groups and “deep state” Bureau of Land Management, disrespect Earth Day, and cook their public opposition sitting out in the mid-day heat.
Utah Congressional Reps. John Curtis, Blake Moore, and Celeste Maloy dominated the hearing. Based on Maloy’s endless whining about BLM, Ammon Bundy must be so proud of his cousin in Congress. And who could question these Republican politicians’ conservation credentials on federal lands legislation? Actually, anyone who is paying attention.
For example, the League of Conservation Voters would because their 2023 voting chart on conservation measures in Congress (with zero as the worst and 100 as the best) shows Maloy (and her former boss, Stewart) scored zero, Moore scored zero, and Curtis scored three. Curtis said that Democratic Congressional Representatives were invited to attend but did not do so.
If you were one of them, during the House recess, would you rather attend a sham field hearing controlled by MAGA Republicans or spend Earth Day in your own district with your actual constituents? Curtis also said that the public could submit testimony after the hearing, but I’ve since learned that that may be problematic or incorrect.
I organized an event as a senior in high school for the first Earth Day in 1970. I’ve attended many positive Earth Day events over the 50-plus ensuring years. I attended this Congressional field hearing and I was appalled. It ruined that Earth Day for me. In less than the first hour of testimony, I heard more falsehoods and misrepresentations of fact than I could count.
For example, it was alleged that the federal statute that established BLM’s Red Cliffs National Conservation Area also required approval of the controversial Northern Corridor Highway through the heart of the conservation area. In truth, that law only required BLM to “identify” one or more northern transportation alternatives to accommodate east-west traffic. BLM did so when they analyzed five such alternatives in draft and final Environmental Impact Statements. Three of those alternatives were within the conservation area, and two were outside it. The two outside it were found feasible, including the Red Hills Parkway Expressway with a flyover to Interstate 15.
If they were willing to put aside their arrogant aversion to following federal laws and the best science, UDOT and Washington County could have proceeded with this feasible alternative years ago with broad public support. But they did not. Why? I think because of a specific development scheme.
The Utah State Institutional Trust Lands Administration owns about 700 acres near Green Springs and the border of the conservation area. There are ambitious developments planned for this SITLA land and adjacent to it around the new Exit 13 to Interstate 15. The UDOT and county-preferred Northern Corridor Highway alignment is designed to join the recent extension of the Washington Parkway. This Northern Corridor Highway alignment would directly serve this SITLA and related proposed development. Pity those who purchased expensive homes next to the scenic conservation area if they get stuck with the Northern Corridor Highway’s noise, pollution and night lights. Developers would win and those homeowners would lose.
Of course, that is the pattern here where developers, land speculators and construction business owners call the shots. The Vision Dixie public process years ago resulted in a positive set of principles to guide future growth in the county. Those principles have since largely been ignored by local Republican officials. Greed and sprawl growth are actually driving land use decisions.
Zone 6 is part of this county and SITLA development scheme. It was created to allegedly mitigate for the Northern Corridor Highway destroying critical tortoise habitat in the conservation area. It is about half SITLA and half BLM land. The SITLA land cannot be permanently protected because SITLA must maximize profits for its beneficiaries and it does not have the authority to set aside land for conservation. The BLM land should already be protected if BLM follows its Endangered Species Act statutory mandate.
Zone 6 is, therefore, not true mitigation but a ruse to confuse the public and intimidate federal officials. Indeed, if the Northern Corridor Highway is not approved, the county is threatening to remove SITLA land from Zone 6 even though this SITLA land could be subject to harmful human development. The only way to permanently protect this SITLA land would be to purchase it and transfer the title to an entity with legitimate conservation authority.
Moreover, Zone 6 is already threatened by approaching development. A proposed western corridor highway could degrade Zone 6 tortoise habitat quality and connectivity on its west side. And the county supports putting the southern terminus parking lot and staging area for the new statelong High Desert OHV Trail (https://www.utah.gov/pmn/files/798607.pdf ) in the middle of Zone 6. Inviting many thousands of annual OHV users into an area supposedly set aside for tortoise mitigation shows the county’s true priorities.
There was another blatant falsehood at the hearing. It was alleged that the illusory tortoise benefits on Zone 6 SITLA land far outweigh the harm of the Northern Corridor Highway. The direct footprint acreage of the Northern Corridor Highway was deceptively used for this comparison, not the much larger indirect acreage where science shows that the tortoises would decline. The previous environmental impact statements clearly describe this science. I think that it is despicable for these Republican politicians to defend this blatant SITLA and county development scheme.
These politicians are likely to use this hearing record when they push Congressional legislation to circumvent the relevant laws, science, and public opposition to cement this Northern Corridor Highway development scheme.
I hope that most in Congress have the good sense to summarily reject this ridiculous, destructive, and precedent-setting legislation. For more information, explore this web site: https://www.protectredcliffs.com/ .
I’ve lived in Washington County for 22 years and I’ve closely followed BLM issues. I have my own strong concerns about BLM management here, but the Earth Day Republican testimony was hyperbolic, hypocritical and shameful. I guess throwing “red meat” to the MAGA crowd before an election is more important than honesty, integrity or mature governance.
Letter No. 4: Submitted by St. George resident Trevor Anderson
I’m writing in response to the article “Hearing held over Northern Corridor dispute highlights federal overreach; opponents say it was 1-sided.” I was not able to attend the hearing because I was working, but I wanted to share that: I feel the red sands and red rocks of Southern Utah in my blood.
I have had 38 years of red sand staining my feet, and I want my son, Arlo, to have experiences of joy and awe that come from exploring these wild places. A highway is no place of joy. A highway is not a place a father and son can bond. Please do not build a highway through this part of Southern Utah’s identity.
Letter No. 5: Submitted by Washington City resident KAREN VINCENT
We were at the April 22 field hearing in Washington County. We didn’t have a chance to speak, but here’s what we would have said if we had the opportunity. As residents of the Reserve at Green Spring, the community most impacted by the proposed Northern Corridor Highway, We are asking our elected officials to perform for the best interest of the people. Keep public lands in public hands.
They were entrusted to uphold the Federal Laws that designated the Red Cliffs National Conservation Area for the benefit of present and future generations. Do not bend to special interests seeking to develop these lands at the expense of homeowners and the threatened Mojave desert tortoise.
Letters to the Editor are not the product of St. George News, its editors, staff or news contributors. The matters stated and opinions given are the responsibility of the person submitting them. They do not reflect the product or opinion of St. George News and are given only light edit for technical style and formatting.