In July 1996, Gov. Mike Leavitt announced that Utah was embarking on a 21st century transportation plan. The centerpiece was Legacy Highway, with the first segment in southwest Davis County. Environmental studies would be "expedited."

Republican legislative leadership initiated an aggressive plan. To speed the effort, an attempt was made to make the road exclusively a state (non-federal) project. But its path - across Great Salt Lake wetlands - required federal permits and an environmental impact statement.

From the beginning, local communities were invited - appropriately - into Legacy Highway planning. But persons or entities with other ideas were excluded, inconsistent with the "enlibra" philosophy of consensus decision-making touted by Leavitt.

I recall meetings with the governor, Republican legislative leadership and Utah Department of Transportation officials when I raised questions about alternative corridor alignments, meshing highway planning with alternative modes of transportation (transit, rail), or mitigating environmental impacts.

I was told that the "opponents" to Legacy Highway were going to learn a lesson (get rolled). Unfortunately, that attitude would prove costly to Utah commuters and taxpayers.

As a legislator and owner of a small business that consults on environmental impact statements, I tried to inform state officials about where their plans may run afoul of requirements. I raised with them the risks from delays and possible legal action. I was told that UDOT, having hired lawyers from Washington, D.C., was certain it would prevail.

In the Democratic legislative Centennial Highway plan, we included Legacy Highway construction in the latter half of this decade, recognizing the timing of the environmental impact statement process and the potential for court action. Our proposal was summarily dismissed.

In the summer of 2001, with litigation pending in federal court, UDOT took an astonishing step: It granted a contract and began construction on Legacy Highway even though plaintiffs had announced and commenced an appeal. In the fall of 2001, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals stopped construction, concluding that the State of Utah had failed to adequately address environmental impacts and consider alternatives.

The court also observed that "although [UDOT has] presented substantial evidence that they will incur a financial loss if the injunction is granted, it appears that much of this harm is self-inflicted . . . [T]he state agency was aware that there were several court cases challenging approval of the Legacy Parkway, but chose to proceed nevertheless."

Four years and hundreds of millions of wasted taxpayer dollars later, with prospects for continuing litigation, we may be approaching an agreement to move forward with Legacy Highway. As Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. stated in his announcement of the settlement agreement, that cost to Utahns need not have occurred. Had our state leaders been more inclusive and open-minded in the beginning, construction on Legacy Highway may have started by now and we could have a better road than originally envisioned.

Now we hear a chorus of blame unleashed on the plaintiffs by some angry Republican legislators. We hear that the legal avenue followed by citizens who were shut out of a government-sponsored process was the action of "terrorists."

As Utahns, do we feel that way about the court system when we challenge the creation of a national monument without our involvement? Would we want our constitutional right to the courts denied when it is our issue that we feel deserves redress?

We should commend and support the efforts of UDOT and Gov. Huntsman for negotiating this settlement and for demonstrating leadership. They appear to have learned from the mistakes of their predecessors.

I hope that Utah will have a legacy from this experience. All opinions can help bring the entire state forward. My colleagues and fellow citizens with different ideas can contribute to better solutions by respecting each other. Wisdom emerges from many viewpoints and transparent decision-making.

I hope that future Utah transportation decisions will include all interests. Not everyone will agree, but understanding can grow and better decisions can result.

---

Rep. Ralph Becker, D-Salt Lake, is Democratic leader of the Utah House of Representatives, a principal in the consulting firm Bear West and adjunct professor in the University of Utah College of Architecture and Planning.