The general manager of the Utah Transit Authority oversees an operation with an estimated ridership of about 100,000.

So who gets paid more?

That would be UTA General Manager John Inglish, though he has led his agency for about as long as his New York counterpart. Inglish also makes more than his peers in Washington, D.C., Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Oakland, Denver, Miami and Atlanta, even though UTA's ridership and staff are smaller, according to a 2003 survey by a transit-industry magazine.

The president of UTA's board of trustees, Orrin Colby, calls Inglish's $267,000 salary "puny." He says the board could double it and still get a bargain for the benefits Inglish provides in the form of progressive leadership and federal dollars for transit projects.

But lawmakers call Inglish's pay and the pay of other UTA executives "outrageous," "excessive" and "exorbitant." A group of legislators, including the Senate president, believe the state needs to rein in the UTA board, and possibly take control of the transit agency that serves the Wasatch Front.

Here's some of the reasons why:

l 72 percent of UTA's employees, or 1,235, earn less in a year than the $38,087 Inglish received in a bonus in 2004.

l That bonus is more than $10,000 higher than the amount UTA expects to receive from increasing the fare on disabled riders next year.

l Inglish makes more than any executive on the public payroll in Utah, excluding a few college coaches and four University of Utah administrators.

l Inglish's salary has risen by $97,000 in the past five years, a period during which fares increased three times.

Lawmakers and UTA officials agree the difference between Inglish's salary and others in public positions comes down to oversight: the board treats UTA like a private corporation, while lawmakers see it as an arm of government.

Actually, UTA is a little bit of both. It is quasi-public organization, funded mostly through tax dollars, but controlled by a part-time, 15-member board appointed by local government officials.

"What we do is as close to a business as you get," says Inglish, pointing out that UTA competes with automobile dealerships and cab companies for customers. And because of that, the board looks at the pay of private company executives, and those in charge of nonprofits, when determining UTA executive salaries. Corporate CEOs' pay is averaged with executive salaries of other transit agencies. If Inglish is 10 percent above or below that average, the board renegotiates his contract. He remains somewhere in the middle, Colby says.

UTA officials won't release those salary surveys. They cite nondisclosure agreements, though Colby acknowledges Inglish "does exceed the transit industry average." He says that is appropriate because of Inglish's years of service and the knowledge he brings to the job.

Inglish worked as the assistant general manager before taking the top job in 1997. He has overseen rapid expansion: the addition of light rail and the impending construction of commuter rail, projects that rely heavily on federal subsidies.

Inglish also has seen his pay balloon. His largest pay jump came in 2001 when he received a $50,000 raise, putting him over the $200,000 mark for the first time. He also received a $53,000 bonus that year, his largest in the past five years. Colby calls the raise "a correction" after a period when salaries were artificially depressed.

Inglish renegotiated his contract in 2003, obtaining automatic yearly 7 percent raises, potential bonuses up to 15 percent of his salary and a new car every four years. However, Inglish says he has not taken full advantage of the perks. In the past two years, he has not taken the full 7 percent raise and has kept his 1999 Ford pickup for the past six years, saying: "I feel good about that."

His rapidly growing salary and a special retirement plan put in place before the Olympics are meant to keep Inglish from being lured away by other transit districts.

It has worked.

"I haven't been recruited much in the past year because everyone knows I am in pretty good shape here," Inglish says.

Colby criticizes the public sector for not providing employees with similar incentives to get the kind of productivity seen out of workers at UTA.

"The political process is such a heavy influence that there is an arbitrary suppression of income for those people in those positions," he says.

But a number of legislators say the autonomous UTA board is force-fed by UTA executives, leading to salaries that are out of line.

For instance, Utah's Department of Transportation director makes about $116,000. The executive director of the Salt Lake International Airport gets $172,140.

New York transit chief Reuter could move to Utah, take a $100,000 cut in the $225,000 salary he received in 2003 and maintain his current lifestyle, according to several online cost-of-living calculators.

"This kind of compensation for public service is clearly an outrage," says Sen. Howard Stephenson, R-Draper, who is also the president of the business-supported Utah Taxpayers Association. "The reason these things happen is because the governing board is not elected. And not being accountable to voters, they are more inclined to be fooled on excessive compensation packages."

Rep. John Dougall, R-Highland, says he is interested in pursuing legislation that would curb the authority of UTA's board, though he is not yet sure of the particulars. Dougall would likely have the support of Sen. Curtis Bramble, R-Provo, who once served on the UTA board, and Senate President John Valentine. House Speaker Greg Curtis also expressed some concern about the board's autonomy.

"It appears there is a stronger need for UTA to be under the watchful eye of elected officials," Valentine says.

Lt. Gov. Gary Herbert, Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s point person on transportation policy, is willing to discuss the issue, but his office doesn't believe any action will take place "overnight."

Not all legislators are looking to exert control over the transit agency.

Sen. Greg Bell, R-Fruit Heights, who examined public transit as the former chairman of Envision Utah, a growth planning nonprofit organization, considers himself a UTA supporter.

"It is just interesting to me that the Legislature basically gives UTA a cold shoulder and essentially meets their initiatives with cynicism, but they are pretty darn interested when it comes to what people make," he says.

Lawmakers' frustration with UTA is not all about high salaries. Some also feel UTA pushes too hard for tax increases and some want UTA folded into the state Department of Transportation to create a cohesive vision for Utah's transportation planning.

Local officials have battled to keep control of UTA board appointments in the past and say they are ready to do so again.

Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon and Davis County Commissioner Dannie McConkie agree executive salaries may need to be scrutinized, but they say when taxes are collected locally, local governments should retain control.

No matter who controls the UTA board, Steve Booth, who represents the bus and light rail drivers in union negotiations says he would like to gain one powerful tool for future contract talks - "the bargaining power that John Inglish has."

mcanham@sltrib.com

UTA boss' salary among top 5 in nation

* 2005 salary: $266,614.40

* Raises: 7 percent annually through 2006

* Bonus: up to 15 percent of his salary

* Retirement: a 401(a) account, exclusive to executives, and a 457 account

* Vacation: 30 days a year, can sell back 10 days.

* Car: able to get a new car, worth up to $44,500, every 4 years; he gets to keep the old one.