Reader comments
2 UTA execs spent $47,000 on travels

Travel is not fun. Travel anywhere outside Utah is expensive. To be counted in the domestic or international scene requires being there (often and long).

Thanks DN for keeping tabs on folks but you make too big a stretch (and headline) to make this appear somehow sinister. The real travesty of mispent travel is the official that visits someplace once for day or two and returns considering themselves "experts" on that country or issue -- an approach more typical of our elected representatives.

For anyone to have a problem this travel cost, you seriously should consider what a sales executive spends in travel annually.
I for one believe that the metropolitan area of SLC benefits from the top executives benchmarking and touring other states, and countries travel situation.

Sounds like they are doing their job. Big story here!

Corruption as usual here in Utah. And no accountability.

Why do folks keep comparing UTA to UDOT? UDOT is an old fashioned state road building department. UTA is widely recognized as an innovative provider of bus and rail service. The two entities don't provide the same services, therefore comparison's are inappropriate. This article is pointless. It should have been written to show what has been produced from the travel, such as hundreds of millions in dollars in funding for commuter rail into Davis County.

Wow, $47,000! UTA received over $80 million dollars in federal funds to build rail projects this year. I'd say it's a pretty good return on investment. Must be a slow news day.

Do you have nothing better to report on? Executives often incur large travel costs performing their duties and responsibilites. I seem to agree with other postings that it seems as though these officials are actually doing their job vs. doing nothing. If it were a scandal of them using monies to take their family on some elaborate vacation that is something different but lets be realistic. You must spend money to make money. I see nothing inappropriate here.

What is the return on investment for the hundreds of millions of dollars UTA has brought back from the federal government versus $47K in annual travel? Enormous! It's the same deal with the salary issue legislators keep carping about. You could pay these guys less. You could make them travel less. But then, instead of building projects, maybe they'd be stuck in the same situation as UDOT, with no end in sight to the depths of their funding shortfalls.

Why UTA gives cars for supervisors to drive home while disabled riders have fight for their right to ride the public transporation system is beyond me. UTA officials should be elected or selected for a short term by the governor. UTA is corrupt.

How shocking that an agency (UTA) that spends three times more on their executive's top salary than UDOT does, also spends twice as much on travel. Hope those rate increases keep happening so we can retain such fine leadership.

I can't believe all the UTA apologists. Are you John Inglish's child or farm hand? I worked for UTA for several years (management position) and I can tell you that John Inglish is the poster child of government waste. His bloated salary and perks will never be justified.

UTA does not have to worry about making a profit. In fact, our tax dollars keep UTA from having to worry about the bottom line at all. UTA's upcoming rate increase isn't even enough to cover Inglish's christmas bonus. UTA has no worries! Out tax money keep them fat and happy.

My travel expenses last month were over $1800 for a trip to New Mexico for four days, and a trip to Idaho Falls and Jackson hole for 5 Days...traveling is expensive......this is not a story! Rocky's travels however,....now there is a story!

I dont see the big deal. As long as they are flying coach, that is fine with me. I would prefer that UTA be the best in the US! As for the amount spent, I work for a large F100 company, way down at the bottom. One year, my travel expenses were over $60,000!

I have no problem with traveling for the purpose of contextual inquiry into systems and procedures that could improve our transit system. It would have been a more interesting read to know what was learned and how it is affecting us.

Looking over these comments, it looks like Ron A, Ryan, Douglas, Noal and the other sympathizers have some connection to UTA and John Inglish (possibly his farm hands?). I think it is great that the DN and other media groups report on over spending of public executives. It keeps them in-check and lets them know that their actions are being watched. If UTA is receiving public funding, then they are open to public criticism.

Sam, you say Inglish's "bloated salary and perks will never be justified," but have no come back to the fact they're getting hundreds of millions for their projects from the federal government we wouldn't otherwise have, they actually are moving forward and building exactly what we voted them tax increases to help build, TRAX ridership has blown away projections from when it was opened, people will be taking Commuter Rail to work from Ogden early next year, and they're always on time and under budget with their projects.

If UDOT hadn't been late and 10% over budget with I-15 in SL County, they would've saved hundreds of millions of dollars. Most would agree it's worth a few hundred thousand extra to hire the right group of people so we don't go through that with UTA. They more than justify their travel and salary with the results (I'd say even more so than UDOT with their lower salary and travel budgets).

You UTA apologist are hilarious. Marty, do you really think that without John Inglish UTA wouldn't get funding from the federal government. You defenders of Mr. Inglish�s salary can only sight the amount of money he gets from the government to justify his salary and expenses. So when Ken Lay was running Enron did you say to yourselves, �Well the stock price is going up so he must be doing a good job.�

So how did traveling to Europe twice help get federal dollars? Can he please site one specific thing from those trips that brought a return in value to UTA that would justify the cost? And don�t give me any �cutting-edge� crap. This is the same �cutting-edge� organization that purchase San Jose�s old light rail cars that are slow, have no A/C, and ended up costing has much as a new car to refurbish. The only thing UTA is cutting-edge with is its ability to spin stories and convincing the public that they are a quality run agency.

Also, please remember that money from the federal government is not free money just magically exists. This type of careless attitude towards taxpayer�s money is what leads to the waste and frivolous spending that has become way too prevalent in our government.

As a former public official and one who approved travel vouchers for many others I would agree that often times a personal trip is the best way to get things done. I would also say there are times when the same results could have been obtained via teleconference or phone calls.

It may have been that UTA would have received zero instead of $80 million if the trip had not been made, but that may not be true. If it is, there is a serious problem on how proposed projects are reviewed.

The trips may have answered questions the reviewers had, brought back ideas for modifications etc., but if it was a well prepared and justified project, that total approval shouldn't hang on a couple of visits.

From my experience another measure of travel is which hotels the government traveler stays in, what price meals they eat, what size tips they claim, etc. I do not advocate that government employees be required to stay in fourth rate, insect infested motels, but I do not think it is necessary to stay in the hightest price suite in the fancy hotel (as some do) to accomplish their business. Most eat lobster at home, (maybe some are used to doing that, but ...) but some do submit bills for expensive meals like that.

Personally I used to travel to Washington,(always coach class). I sometimes spent weeks at a time working there. I stayed in an less-expensive downtown hotel where I had only a few blocks to walk to where I was working. I ultimately discovered that I could actually go out to the end of the Metro in Springville, get a nicer room, rent a car and have a better choice of places to eat, all at a cost lower than the downtown hotel. What it cost me was going to the Park-N-Ride a few blocks away, getting on the Metro and then getting off a block from where I was to work.

I would have to agree that business travel is not always "fun" and sometimes I worked late at night getting ready for the next day. Sometimes at home working for the government was not "fun" either and I did spend evenings in getting ready for tomorrow.

My point of this long remark is that you CANNOT judge merely by the cost, whether the travel was justified or not. I think each public employee (and supervisor) must use good judgement not only when and where to travel, but to also be judicious on how travel money is spent. Travel is expensive. The DN brings up the travel costs but does not provide enough detail for citizens to judge whether the trip(s) by the UTA were excessive in number or cost. I do think you can compare UTA and DOT as well as any other agency spending public money on travel.

Just figured that since things are slow on the pumpkin patch that I'd look at the DN. How is it that a non-government agency leader is praised because he spends a lot on travel and his most notable accomplishment is getting lots of tax dollars - hey, isn't that my money he just got again?

Sure glad I don't need it anyway.