Reader comments
2 UTA execs spent $47,000 on travels
32 comments | Read story
Travis | 7:14 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
I for one believe that the metropolitan area of SLC benefits from the top executives benchmarking and touring other states, and countries travel situation.
Douglas | 7:18 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Sounds like they are doing their job. Big story here!
Comments continue below
Anonymous | 7:20 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Corruption as usual here in Utah. And no accountability.
John | 7:47 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Steve | 7:52 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Noal | 7:53 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Douglas | 9:02 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Lou Dobbs | 9:03 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Ryan | 9:08 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Sam | 9:18 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Anonymous | 9:18 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Ron A | 9:22 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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!
C. Allen | 9:55 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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!
Klimber510 | 9:57 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Mark K | 10:02 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Marty | 10:07 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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).
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).
Kenny | 11:15 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
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.
L | 11:38 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
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.
Billy Bob | 11:40 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
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.
Sure glad I don't need it anyway.
Alternate | 11:45 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Accountability. UTA takes tax money and then cuts bus routes, flextrans for the
disabled, etc. and then comes news that the boss men travel like kings.
Accountability. Reminds me of the money wasted on advertisments about the nice
warm people in a bus on a wintery day. What they didn't show was all the
cold wet people waiting for buses that never come. UTA needs accountability.
Josh G | 11:51 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Well said, Kenny!
Angie | 11:57 a.m. Aug. 15, 2007
I think it's great that our transportation managers are investigating other
transit systems, especially in Europe. I look forward to the progress in
transportation that will be made to connect our Utah counties more efficiently.
I'm very excited! At any rate, I also think it's fine to keep those
managers' expenses in check, and make sure they are being productive.
1Adam12 | 1:22 p.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Anyone who has listened to John Inglish speak and witnessed his passion for
public transit will not fault him or his agency for these expenditures. This is
a man who uses the metro during his visits to Washington, D.C. in order to save
money and "walk the talk." UTA has done a great job for Utah (except
for the occasional missed pickup by a inattentive bus driver - speaking from
multiple personal experiences!)
Charles H | 3:13 p.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Innovative????
What exactly is innovative about electric trolleys running on fixed rails?
What is innovative about spending the same amount on one mile of those fixed rail trolleys as one mile of 4 lane highway would cost?
What exactly is innovative about a transportation system where the users pay so little of the actual costs while those who specifically choose NOT to use the system are forced to subsidize the bulk of it? Fares cover well under 50% of OPERATIONAL costs and ZERO of the capital costs. Federal gas taxes paid by DRIVERS, however, are the source of the bulk of that "free" federal money that is spent on these boondoggles.
If there is really a market demand for mass transit, the riders should be willing and able to fund it. Drivers fund roads via gas taxes and registration fees AND are forced to fund mass transit, hiking trails, etc from those same taxes.
Devote 100% of the State AND federal gas tax to ROADS. If they don't cover the cost of roads, raise them until they do. Even better, eliminate the federal portion of gas taxes and let the States handle these things themselves. In any event, drivers should be paying for roads. And mass transit riders, employers and businesses who lack adequate parking, and maybe high density housing that builds close to mass transit should be expected to bear the costs of mass transit.
What exactly is innovative about electric trolleys running on fixed rails?
What is innovative about spending the same amount on one mile of those fixed rail trolleys as one mile of 4 lane highway would cost?
What exactly is innovative about a transportation system where the users pay so little of the actual costs while those who specifically choose NOT to use the system are forced to subsidize the bulk of it? Fares cover well under 50% of OPERATIONAL costs and ZERO of the capital costs. Federal gas taxes paid by DRIVERS, however, are the source of the bulk of that "free" federal money that is spent on these boondoggles.
If there is really a market demand for mass transit, the riders should be willing and able to fund it. Drivers fund roads via gas taxes and registration fees AND are forced to fund mass transit, hiking trails, etc from those same taxes.
Devote 100% of the State AND federal gas tax to ROADS. If they don't cover the cost of roads, raise them until they do. Even better, eliminate the federal portion of gas taxes and let the States handle these things themselves. In any event, drivers should be paying for roads. And mass transit riders, employers and businesses who lack adequate parking, and maybe high density housing that builds close to mass transit should be expected to bear the costs of mass transit.
Kenny | 4:33 p.m. Aug. 15, 2007
He should have passion for public transportation; after all it is paying him
$300,000+ a year. Yet somehow he doesn't seem to have the passion
"walk the talk" and ride the public transit system to work when he is
in Utah. It is funny that the head of a public transit agency gets a personal
car allowance which Mr. Inglish uses to drive around in his gas guzzling truck!
jmdspk | 9:29 p.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Charles H, I would like to see you build a four lane mile of highway for the
same cost as one mile of TRAX. Highways are much more expensive to build plus
they take up a ton more taxable land than a light rail line.
LLL | 10:12 p.m. Aug. 15, 2007
Everyone knows that Honolulu is the Mecca for public transportation.
Billy Bob | 8:41 a.m. Aug. 16, 2007
If gax taxes and registration fees completely pay for our roads, why do we keep
hearing that the state of Utah is about $30 billion underfunded in building and
maintaining highways??? If you actually wanted to cover the cost of your roads,
you'd have to hike the state gas tax about a buck! I am all for it. But
my guess is you still like your subsidy...
Zed | 12:57 p.m. Aug. 16, 2007
They really put the faith into the tax payer to pass another million dollar plus
tax project for the sake of the light rail don't they?
LH | 3:03 p.m. Sept. 27, 2007
John Inglish is a big talker! He claims to be a fan of UTA yet he doesn't
ride the bus in Utah, probably because it doesn't get him where he needs to
go. If he really believed in UTA he would willingly give up his vehicle which we
the taxpayers have purchased, and continue to fuel and maintain.
I challenge Mr. Inglish to give up his 'personal' vehicle for three days and take the bus to his office, to all of his meetings and apointments, and then home again in the evening. He will learn quickly what we bus riders already know, it's not easy and it's sometimes impossible to get from here to there.
As for his travel money, it is true he spends much less than some executives and employees in the provate sector. BUT MR INGLISH DOES NOT WORK IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. He is spending public money for which he is not accountable. you can't compare apples to oranges.
I challenge Mr. Inglish to give up his 'personal' vehicle for three days and take the bus to his office, to all of his meetings and apointments, and then home again in the evening. He will learn quickly what we bus riders already know, it's not easy and it's sometimes impossible to get from here to there.
As for his travel money, it is true he spends much less than some executives and employees in the provate sector. BUT MR INGLISH DOES NOT WORK IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR. He is spending public money for which he is not accountable. you can't compare apples to oranges.
DB | 12:04 a.m. Oct. 13, 2007
UTA is not a government agency, yet it is not a private company either. I
believe John Inglish has done an excellent job at walking the fine line between
spending enough to get his job done but saving enough not to be excessive. Just
what exactly will satisfy everybody?
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Jeffrey D. Allred, Deseret Morning News
UTA General Manager John Inglish says his out-of-state travel ($32,982 in 2006) keeps the agency current on new technology.
Related content
- Birthdays for Monday, Nov. 9 9:51 p.m.
- Ray helps food bank in Ohio town 9:50 p.m.
- Queen leads ceremony to honor dead 9:48 p.m.
- Dalai Lama's Himalayan visit 9:47 p.m.
- Ex-Ute Miller leads Blazers to rout 9:46 p.m.
- Hurricane Ida slogs toward coast 9:45 p.m.
- Mourners flock to Cleveland 9:45 p.m.
- Hasan tied to mosque of hijackers 9:44 p.m.
- Drug treatment: Will U.S. step up? 9:43 p.m.
- Karzai vows to stop corruption 9:43 p.m.
- Gay advocates trek to LDS office
216 - House passes health care bill196
- Lobo suspended173
- Cougars crush hapless Cowboys150
- Speed has never been BYU's game136
- Utah Jazz fall apart against Kings125
- RSL rallies to advance103
- Thousands protest health bill102
- Provo company innovating engines100
- Utes pound winless Lobos88
Why do so many people live so close to refineries in Utah and elsewhere?
NASA's Stardust probe continues to bring new knowledge about the nature...
Advertisement
Latest comments
Wow! Two, count 'em-two!-dumb dem congressmen. Sounds like a landslide...
Aggies don't play cupcakes as many assume just because they are in the WAC. ...
Sink baby sink! American Senators....do the right thing.....crush this...
I see a great defeat in the Senate for socialized sick medicine. And a great...
'98 was good, but 2000 was the real heartbreaker for the cats. 4th and long...
He read his history. The US did provoke a war once in Colombia. We had to...
Very innovative - This should change the industry. Hope it happens early on...
Is parents living vicariously through their kids. The kids want a balanced...
park city is gunna kill hurricane
Poor backers of greedy insurance companies still spreading fear and lies to...
Advertisements
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.