The scandal-tarnished Utah Transit Authority could come under closer state control under changes being discussed by a legislative task force studying possible transportation reforms.

One scenario discussed by a subcommittee on Friday would have the state take over the now-independent UTA — and essentially make it a state division answerable to a new state secretary of transportation. Maryland uses such a system to govern its separate transit, highways and ports departments.

Another option would allow UTA to continue as an independent agency — but the state would oversee its big building projects, such as extending or adding new rail lines. They would compete for funding and prioritization with some state highway projects now funded through transportation-earmarked sales taxes.

Sen. Wayne Harper, R-Taylorsville, co-chairman of the Transportation Funding and Governance Task Force, said a subcommittee of that group is also looking at leaving the UTA as it is currently, or perhaps simply change the structure of the UTA board and how it is chosen.

During this year’s session of the Legislature, Harper introduced legislation that would have restructured the UTA board — but it was rewritten to create the task force and authorize the study instead.

This review followed years of controversy over high UTA executive salaries and bonuses, extensive international travel, sweetheart deals with developers and abandoned attempts to close transit board committee meetings to the public.

Also this spring, UTA and prosecutors announced the transit agency was given immunity in an ongoing federal probe into current and former officials — including scrutiny of its real estate deals. UTA agreed to submit to several years of federal oversight and pledged cooperation with investigators.

A subcommittee of the new state task force met Friday to discuss some of the options for change, and seemed to lean toward allowing UTA to continue operating as an independent agency — but have the state oversee funding for its big projects.

Harper noted that is largely because another main option, the state takeover of UTA, has “some huge financial questions” and is more risky for the state.

For example in that option, the state might take over all of UTA’s assets, but also all of its heavy debts. Working out how to make that fair for all state residents beyond just those living in the six counties served by UTA could be tricky — including how to handle now-local sales taxes that provide the bulk of UTA funds.

As proposed currently, that option also would exempt the state from taking over smaller transit agencies — in Park City, Cache County, St. George and the Uinta Basin. The state would assume control only of transit agencies serving more than 250,000 people.

Going with another option without such tangled issues might lead to “an easier sales job,” Harper said.

So much of the discussion Friday centered on an option to give power to the Utah Transportation Commission to prioritize funding for UTA’s large projects. That commission already prioritizes how to spend state money for highways and smaller airports.

Harper noted such a change could help UTA qualify for additional state funds, if projects are important enough.

UTA would still oversee and fund bus and train services once facilities were built. Members noted the agency would still need to come up with funding to operate new projects before the commission likely would approve building them.

That could be a problem, because Salt Lake, Utah and Box Elder counties rejected Proposition 1 in 2015 to raise sales taxes that would help boost UTA services (but Davis, Weber and Tooele counties approved it). UTA has said it likely cannot afford more services without the sort of sales tax increase Prop 1 would have brought.