H.B. 87 Animal Crime Victim Amendments

What this bill does

The bill creates a court process to decide where an animal lawfully impounded in a pending animal cruelty case should be placed, such as with a shelter, rescue group, foster home, or through forfeiture. The owner gets notice and a court hearing, the person asking for review must prove their case, and the criminal case itself stays unchanged.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the sponsor’s presentation in committee and on the floor. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 8 yes, 0 no, 3 absentHouse Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 2, 2026Who voted how
• 40 yes, 24 no, 11 absentFinal House vote · Feb 10, 2026Who voted how
• 3 yes, 2 no, 4 absentSenate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 17, 2026Who voted how
• 12 yes, 16 no, 1 absentSenate vote, which failed · Feb 19, 2026Who voted how
• 25 yes, 1 no, 3 absentFirst of two Senate votes · Feb 25, 2026Who voted how
• 22 yes, 0 no, 7 absentFinal Senate vote · Feb 26, 2026Who voted how
• 52 yes, 14 no, 9 absentHouse vote to accept the other chamber's changes · Feb 27, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Feb 2, 2026 House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (24 turns)

  1. Unknown speaker1:51:28speaker not certain

     Let's let him catch his breath. I was totally joking, but this works. He's hiding in the back. There you go. I was actually hoping he would miss it, so I could go soon. Oh, there you go.

  2. Rep. Verona Mauga1:51:43

     This works out. Thank you. Alright. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Committee. Uh, this is another bill that I brought to you all last session. Um, it passed here, just died on the last night. Um, and so this bill has one clear goal. It's to create a court supervised process for what happens to animals after they're lawfully seized. While a criminal animal abuse case is pending, it applies only to animals held in connection with a criminal animal abuse case. And it doesn't change existing livestock or agriculture exemptions under animal cruelty laws. It also doesn't apply simply because an owner is incarcerated. It's narrowly tied to existing criminal animal abuse statutes. Law enforcement already has the authority to seize animals in cases of criminal mistreatment, subject to existing probable cause and warrant requirements. What current law does not clearly provide is a process for what happens after seizure, while criminal cases still pending. As a result, animals can remain in shelters for long periods of times without judicial review. And so what we are seeing is extended stays in our animal shelters, which isn't just a burden on the shelters and taxpayers. It's also a strain on the animals. Oftentimes, they're stuck for months or even years in a shelter, and this will just speed up the process so that one part of their court case is addressed sooner than later. Again, it doesn't expand seizure authority or lower legal standards. It simply creates that process for courts to address, um, animals staying in animal shelters longer than they should while respecting and following due process. Um, I have, uh, Carl from Salt Lake County Animal Shelter here, um, to present as well. Thank you.

  3. Carl Carpenter, Captain, Salt Lake County Animal Services1:53:29

     Thank you. Um, I'm grateful to be back. My name's Carl Carpenter. Um, I'm the captain with Salt Lake County Animal Services. Um, when I had the chance to speak with you last year, um, we spoke about, um, a dog that we had that was approaching three years in our custody. Uh, because of a pending, a pending case, uh, we were able to find a home for that dog eventually. And that case has resolved, uh, since then. We have a, another animal in our custody that's approaching 13 months with us. Um, the result of this is obviously a welfare issue for the, for the animals. Uh, while we do provide great care at our agency, we're not a home. Uh, we want these animals in home. Um, the, uh, the, the bill that is, that is presented today, um, helps us with that, helps us to achieve that goal, to get animals, um, into the place where they should be. It protects the public purse, um, and it is a bill that, um, will be used, uh, sparingly and appropriately, uh, only in certain cases. Um, and we're here again to, uh, to urge favorable re uh, recommendation for this, uh, for this bill. Thank you.

  4. Committee chair1:54:48

     Thank you. That conclude your presentation? Yeah.

  5. Unknown committee member1:54:52speaker not certain

     I'll just say that in November, I had the opportunity to visit the animal shelter before, um, the dog he's talking about, her name is Biscuit, and I had the opportunity to visit with her. She stayed at Salt Lake County Animal Services for over three years. Um, when I did finally get to see her, um, she was behind a cage. And so, because she had been locked up for so many years before anyone could adopt her, they, it took some time for animal services to work with her to make her so that she was adoptable. Um, these are animals that just need homes. If we can pass this bill, um, not only helps these animals, but it saves a lot of taxpayer dollars and when we have loving homes for animals. Thank you. Okay.

  6. Committee chair1:55:43

     Um, I'll turn to the committee for clarifying questions.

  7. Unknown committee member1:55:46speaker not certain

     This is a, I suppose the only clarifying question I have is the same exact bill that we ended on last year, right?

  8. Rep. Verona Mauga1:55:52

     Yep. Nothing's changed. Yeah.

  9. Committee chair1:55:55

     Um, anyone here from the public to speak to it? Yeah. We'll have Holly Sizemore and Ian. Is that Williams? Okay.

  10. Brett Robinson, Chief Policy Advisor, Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office1:56:09

      Good afternoon, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. Brett Robinson, the Chief Policy Advisor at the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office. And we want to thank Representative Manga for bringing this forward again this year. This is really important. Um, inevitably we have at least a handful of cases every year that involve these animals that just languish in, in the shelters. And this will give them a chance to be adopted out much quicker. And so we encourage your support. Thank you,

  11. Committee chair1:56:36

      Holly.

  12. Holly Sizemore1:56:42

      Good day. Thank you for taking my call. I'm, um, Holly Sizemore. I'm a resident of, Okay. We got you now. Okay, great. Thank you. My name is Holly Sizemore. I'm a resident of Sandy City, and I'm, um, representing myself today as a taxpayer. And I would urge you to please support HB 87 and move it forward favorably. Thank you.

  13. Unknown speaker1:57:05speaker not certain

      Thank you. I'm Ian Williams. Uh, Ian Williams. You there? I am there. Do you have me? Not quite. Is your camera on It? I did. Turn it on. There We go. Now we got you.

  14. Ian Williams, President, Utah Animal Control Officers Association1:57:22

      Wonderful. Well chair members of the committee. Uh, my name is Ian Williams, and I serve as president of the Utah Animal Control Officers Association. I'm here today representing them in support of HB 87. Um, you know, a lot's been said towards it in support of it. Uh, you know, the bill really is important because it gives Utah Animal Service professionals and our law enforcement partners a clear workable framework for handling animals tied to cruelty and other animal crime cases that can otherwise leave animals stuck in limbo for weeks, months, or, as you know, we've seen years. And, and there are, as indicated, a handful of those cases throughout our state every year, uh, and taxpayers carry that cost. HB 87 helps in three, you know, key ways. It strengthens animal welfare outcomes by clarifying the ability to act quickly, to provide minimum care and move animals into safe custody when the law allows. So animals don't continue, you know, suffering while the case unfolds or, or languish in, in some of our kennels, despite our best efforts, it creates a fair court supervised path to earlier forfeiture and placement when appropriate. And it improves accountability and cost recovery by allowing courts to order repayment of reasonable care costs, and require education and, uh, and treatment conditions that matters because local agencies are already stretched thin. And this bill helps ensure the, the burden doesn't fall entirely on the public. So just as important, HB 87 includes some key guardrails. There's clear notice procedures, judicial oversight, and placement restrictions. So the process is both humane and legally sound. So we appreciate the statements by some of our stakeholders and partners in, uh, the animal welfare community, uh, in Salt Lake County. And I'd like to thank, uh, representative, uh, uh, MAGA as, as well for her work on this. So for these reasons, uh, uh, the Utah Animal Control Officers Association respectfully asks that you give HB 87 a favorable recommendation. Thanks.

  15. Committee chair1:59:15

      Thank you, Ian. Okay. Looks like that's, uh, that concludes our public comment. Return to the committee for discussion or action. Representative Shepherd.

  16. Rep. Lisa Shepherd1:59:26

      Thank you. I move that, what do we need to adopt a sub, but was it already adopted? I don't, we don't have another sub today. Okay. I move that we favorably recommend first substitute house bill 87 animal crime victim amendments with a favorable recommendation.

  17. Committee chair1:59:44

      That's in order. Would you like to speak to it?

  18. Rep. Lisa Shepherd1:59:47

      I'll waive. Okay.

  19. Committee chair1:59:50

      Um, any discussion to the motion being none representative?

  20. Unknown speaker1:59:55speaker not certain

      I'll waive. Thank you. Representative Shepherd would like to somn I'll Waive.

  21. Committee chair2:00:02

      Okay. I'll go ahead and place the motion. All those in favor of pass or passing out to the floor for substitute hospital 87? Say, aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Okay. As unanimous. Thank you, representative. Thank you.

  22. Committee chair2:00:16speaker not certain

      I will note that Representative Sandberg voted against this last year, and, um, conspicuously voted in favor this year. So you've made progress. Congratulations. Thank you.

  23. Unknown speaker2:00:27speaker not certain

      I appreciate it. I just pulled it up and looked just to make sure for the record. I don't know why you did that. Oh, it says, says you.

  24. Committee chair2:00:39

      Yeah. Okay. Uh, how don't we let you catch your breath here?

• Feb 10, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (13 turns)

  1. Unknown speaker2:09:17

     The bill is circled matter, meaning clerk Per substitute house Bill 87 Animal crime Victim amendments by Representative Mauga. This bill was heard in law enforcement and criminal justice with the vote of 8 0 3.

  2. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)2:09:30

     Representative Mauga.

  3. Rep. Verona Mauga2:09:32

     Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. This bill creates a clear legal process for animals seized in cruelty cases. Um, sometimes, well, oftentimes it takes years, um, months for animals who are in trapped in a cruelty case. Um, during that times, animals are often held in shelters, um, stuck in limbo. This creates an overcrowding strain on our shelters. It also creates a burden on taxpayers as we are the ones who end up footing the bill for animals in, in the shelters. Um, it also establishes a court supervised process, um, and, and it respects due process at the same time. Um, this bill protects owners' rights for all addressing animal welfare. It doesn't expand seizure authority. It does not change criminal law. It keeps decisions with the court and it does not apply to animal agriculture practices or, or working farm animals. Um, there is an impact, again, on our shelters and, um, on taxpayer dollars if we don't address this. And this just speeds up the process in a criminal case, um, when it involves animal cruelty. And that's it. Thank you.

  4. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)2:10:51

     Thank you representative Mal. Good discussion to the bill. Representative Albrecht.

  5. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht2:10:58

     Thank you. Mr. Speaker ProAm with the sponsor yield.

  6. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)2:11:01

     Sponsor yield. Yes, Go ahead.

  7. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht2:11:05

     Uh, Mr. Speaker, she, she mentioned that this does not include, uh, farm working dogs. Uh, does it include hunting dogs?

  8. Rep. Verona Mauga2:11:16

     No. It, it does not. Those protections are still in place and it doesn't affect, um, hunting dogs or animal farm animals.

  9. Rep. Carl R. Albrecht2:11:25

     Does it specify Mr. Speaker? Does it, Mr. Speaker, does it specify that in the bill That's a different part of code and so it's not affected by this bill?

  10. Rep. Verona Mauga2:11:37

      Again, all this bill is doing is speeding up the process when a case involves animal cruelty for pets, dog fights. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Representative Albrecht.

  11. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)2:11:50

      Further discussion to the bill saying none represent Mount Good for summation.

  12. Rep. Verona Mauga2:11:56

      Um, again, this is just addressing a very specific issue. Um, I had the opportunity in November to visit the animal shelter and, um, I'll just share one incident from that visit. There was a dog there that had been there for three years. Um, it was involved in a criminal case that involved a lot of different things. Um, but because we couldn't address the animal cruelty part in court, um, we spent thousands of thousands of taxpayer dollars. It was a strain on the shelter, and this is happening all across our state in different animal shelters. Um, and with that, I ask for your support on this bill. Thank you.

  13. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)2:12:39

      Thank you. Representative Mauga voting is open on first substitute house bill 87. Representative Jack, would you like to vote? Seeing all present, having voted voting is now closed. Sorry. Seeing all present, having voted voting is now closed. First substitute HB 87 passes this body with 40 yes votes. 24 no votes be sent to the Senate for its consideration. Madam Marine Clerk

• Feb 17, 2026 Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (41 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)1:19:51

     All right. House Bill 87. First sub Animal Crime victim amendments.

  2. Rep. Verona Mauga1:19:55

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. And committee HB 87 addresses a gap in current law involving animals that are lawfully impounded in connection with criminal animal cruelty cases. When someone is charged with an animal with animal abuse, the criminal case can take months or even years to resolve. During that time, the animal involved often remains in a shelter with no clear legal mechanism to determine long-term placement. This places a strain on already. Overcrowded shelters impact the wellbeing of the animal and can become a significant burden on taxpayers. In some cases, the cost to house and care for a single animal during a case can reach tens of thousands of dollars. This bill creates a defined court process that allows judicial review of the animal's custody while the criminal case is still pending. So the court can address placement rather than requiring the animal to wait for the entire case to be resolved. Due processes re is preserved in this. The owner receives notice and is served under civil procedure rules. There is a court hearing where the owner has the opportunity to be heard. The petitioner carries the burden of proof, and the judge makes the determination based on the evidence, this process doesn't alter the criminal burden of proof in the underlying case. I also wanna be very clear, because I get a lot of questions about the scope of the bill. The bill doesn't expand seizure authority and it doesn't change animal standards. It applies only to animals already lawfully impounded in connection with criminal abuse or related charges. It does not regulate breeders or pet ownership. And it also doesn't impact lawful agriculture practices, livestock operations, working animals or farm animals, existing protections for agriculture and practices remain fully intact. Nothing in this bill alters those protections or creates new authority over farmers and ranchers. HB 87 simply separates the criminal adjudication timeline from the question of custody and placement, allowing the court to provide a fair and timely determination instead of leaving animals in limbo for years. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions.

  3. Unknown speaker1:22:06speaker not certain

     Thank you. I don't have any questions, but this looks like a really good bill. I'm surprised that we've left this many gaps in the law. Uh, so I'm glad, I'm glad that you're bringing it.

  4. Committee chair (presiding)1:22:16

     Thank you. Thank you. Um, Senator Brammer?

  5. Sen. Brady Brammer1:22:20

     Yeah, I'm, I'm looking at line 3 0 5. It says the court may not transfer the animal owner's rights to the animal to any person who resides with the animal owner. Um, that actually seems like a higher standard than we have for children and their parents. Is it?

  6. Rep. Verona Mauga1:22:42

     Um, I, so this is, I I don't believe so. And, and hopefully I I think there's others in the room who might be able to answer it better than I can. Um, but this actually goes through an actual court hearing. I believe when it has to do with the children, it doesn't, there's a judgment that can be made that doesn't go through trial. And, and this does go through a court procedure,

  7. Sen. Brady Brammer1:23:06

     But this says the court, even if the court goes through the procedure, they can't do that. Right?

  8. Rep. Verona Mauga1:23:12

     Well, it does, but it says in line 2 98. Only if, if they have already ordered the animal rights to be forfeited as part of the criminal case. But yeah, you're, if, if, if they do go through that, it does say that.

  9. Sen. Brady Brammer1:23:23

     Yeah. And so I, I do have concerns that it actually, uh, gives the court less discretion when it comes to animals than it does with children, which is an interesting dichotomy. And then, uh, up above where it has, you know, an animal's involvement in a crime, you know, what does that mean? Like if the animal is, uh, for example, let's say that somebody had trained an animal to attack someone and the animal is involved in the crime, what happens then?

  10. Rep. Verona Mauga1:23:52

      So, so what we're, what we're wanting to address in this is if the animal is involved in an animal ac cruelty case and it's, it's been abused. And so while the case is pending, the judge, the courts are able to address this part that would normally be addressed. Um, it just makes it so we can address it sooner than later.

  11. Sen. Brady Brammer1:24:14

      So let me be a little more specific. On line 79, it says, an animal that is associated with a crime or an animal abuse charge. So what does it mean to be associated with a crime? Does that include if the animal is part of the crime, It's when the animal is being abused? Um, but it, would it be okay if I asked someone to come up and, and answer that question? Sure. Yeah. Okay. I just wanna make sure it's answered correctly. And the reason why I ask is because there's clearly two different categories. There's an animal abuse charge, which is one, and then there's something else called associated with a crime. But that doesn't seem to be defined anywhere that I can find in the bill. So those are different things, and I wanna know what it means to be associated with a crime.

  12. Brett Robinson, Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office1:25:05

      Good morning, uh, Mr. Chair and members of the committee. My name is Brett Robinson. I'm the Chief Policy Advisor for the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office. And to address that question, I, I think I first want to point out on lines 2 55, 2 56, 2 57, 2 58, um, when it is the, um, like the order to, uh, of impoundment, um, and even again in lines 2 87, 2 88, these are the specific crimes for which an animal may be removed under this process. Um, and those are specifically enhanced, uh, penalties for cruelty to animals. Um, 76 13 2 0 2 is cruelty to animals, aggravated cruelty to animals, torturing a companion animal, dog fighting game, foul fighting, allowing a vicious animal, um, at large and bestiality. So there is that one allowing a, a vicious animal to go at large. Um, that would be included as well. But those are the crimes that would specifically put an animal in, in the realm where they can be placed according to 77, 11 a 2 0 7, if that makes sense.

  13. Sen. Brady Brammer1:26:15

      What does it mean to be a, for an animal to be associated with a crime? Okay.

  14. Brett Robinson, Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office1:26:19

      And to, and I, I'll do my best to, to explain what I believe that means. Um, because there's some other places in the statute where an animal, it doesn't necessarily have to be the one that's abused, but it can be one that's also, um, impounded at the same time. So if they're like two dogs there, one of them maltreated, both could be subject to these provisions as well. Would it also include if an animal is involved as part of the commission of a crime And only if it is one of these, like allowing a vicious animal to be at large, in which case it would be, um, that animal would, would count as well. So if it were vicious or even if it would be trained to be vicious and the owner allowed to, to go out and basically attack other people, then that would subject to be subject to this as well. But I don't believe that it would apply to animals, for example, like an ag assault where you're saying, I'm releasing this animal to go do that. That's not one of the enumerated statutes where this would, where this would apply.

  15. Sen. Brady Brammer1:27:17

      I mean, wouldn't, if an animal was associated with a crime like that, wouldn't we typically put it down? And I, I believe that that's an under existing, you have a Right to place it somewhere else because of this.

  16. Brett Robinson, Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office1:27:30

      I don't believe that it would impact that scenario. Um, but I can definitely do some more research on that and get back to you.

  17. Sen. Brady Brammer1:27:37

      Senator. Thanks.

  18. Committee chair (presiding)1:27:40

      Thank you. Um, further discussion from the committee. If not, we'll go to the public. Are there members of the public that would like to be heard on this bill? I see four hands. Five. One person scratching their nose. Six one online. Alright, um, I guess we're gonna take seven public comments on this bill. I'm gonna limit them to about a minute 'cause we still have a full agenda. Uh, would you like to go first? Yes. Thank you Mr. Chairman. You'd have to move to let somebody else go, so No, no. Well that's fine. You can stay either way is fine. Go ahead.

  19. Brett Robinson, Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office1:28:21

      Brett Robinson, chief Policy Advisor for the Salt Lake County District Attorney's Office, and we do encourage, um, support for this bill. It is something that animals, every year we have a few cases where animals through no fault of their own, are left in animal shelters for sometimes a matter of years. And this is a bill that will not only help them get to a safe and caring home, but also, uh, save taxpayers as much as $6,000 per year per animal. So we encourage it. Support. Thank you.

  20. Committee chair (presiding)1:28:47

      Thank you. You can, if you'd like to testify, you can sign in when you're done.

  21. Alexis Schulof1:28:52

      Thank you. Good morning. My name is Alexis Schoff. I'm here today in support of HB 87, also known as Biscuits. Bill, I wanna start by telling you about biscuit. Biscuit isn't just a name on a bill. She represents thousands of dogs who have survived abuse only to be failed by the system and to protect them. I first met Biscuit while volunteering to f facilitate dog playgroups at Salt Lake County. She was a rockstar, social and resilient. It was as if she understood that playgroups was a few, one of her few chances to be outside of her kennel. But even being a rock star couldn't save her from the reality at hand. For the other, I'm sorry, I'm a little shaky because I'm very nervous. This is my first time speaking. Um, for the other 20 hours a day, she sat in solitary confinement in her kennel. Not because she was unadoptable, but because she was stuck in legal limbo. We cannot call that humane eye. Witnessed a dog who after three years of confinement following abuse, still showed us who she wanted to be a good dog. Yes, there are challenges three years in Kanosh. Kennel doesn't just disappear overnight. Healing takes time. Bowen Biscuit finally became available. I took her home because I wanted to show her that her fight wasn't for nothing. HB 87 exists to prevent dogs like biscuit from ever being put in that position and to give them the chance at a happy ending much sooner. Biscuit now spends her days the way every dog should. Walking through Liberty Park training and playing with our local Utah GRC clubs and falling asleep each night, snoring louder than my husband, all things she should have been allowed to do three years ago when she was first confiscated. I'm asking you to support HB 87 today, not just for biscuit, but for every animal still waiting for their chance to be seen, to be chosen, and then to go home. Thank you for your consideration.

  22. Sen. Brady Brammer1:30:34

      Thank you. Just one question. So who in your situation with Biscuit, um, who paid for those three years of sheltering? Do you know? Did you have to pay for that?

  23. Alexis Schulof1:30:43

      I did not. No. Okay. I mean, I assume it probably is going through my taxpayer dollars, but the shelter would be able to answer that question directly.

  24. Committee chair (presiding)1:30:51

      All right, thank you very much.

  25. Talia Butler, Salt Lake County Animal Services1:30:54

      Hi, my name is Talia Butler. I'm the division director for Salt Lake County Animal Services. And, um, to answer your question, um, taxpayers paid for biscuit's care. Um, and that's one of the main reasons we want this bill to pass. Um, as Lexi talked about, biscuit was in our care for over three years. Over half of her life was in our care because she was a victim of animal cruelty. Her kennel mate did not survive, um, the animal cruelty that she did, and she was at the Kanosh at the shelter for that long, waiting for the court proceedings. Um, to answer your ques question, Senator Brammer, even in cases of animal cruel or even in cases of abuse, we are holding animals for multiple years just to euthanize them. Um, so the impact on our staff is, um, extreme, and then the cost. So for biscuit, we spent $21,000 taking care of biscuit. If this bill passes HB 87 biscuit's bill, we would've been able to handle, um, the outcome of biscuit in the first hearing. Um, this would've saved biscuit over a thousand days at the shelter and over $20,000. Um, biscuit. This bill, we call it biscuits bill, but it could be called La Forges Bill Blues. Bill Bunny's bill, um, I can name 'em. There's so many. Um, these are specific to cases where they are really extended and take a long time. Um, and it's heartbreaking for our staff to have to sit and watch these animals wait for a criminal case to continue. So please support biscuits. Bill HB 87.

  26. Committee chair (presiding)1:32:23

      Thank you. Please proceed.

  27. Michelle Hicks, Animal Care of Davis County1:32:26

      Are you ready for Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chair. My name's Michelle Hicks. I'm the director of Animal care of Davis County, and I will shorten my statement just because there's a lot. A shelter is meant to be a short term refuge, not a permanent home. After months in a kennel environment, even the most resilient dogs begin to deteriorate mentally and physically. These dogs aren't just property. Their lives are being spent in suspension. While the legal system grinds slowly while we wait, they take up kennel space that could be used for animal, other animals in need. And we are essentially just providing indefinite boarding for defendants who in many cases are intentionally trying to delay justice. Furthermore, I want to highlight the significant impact this has on our staff. Our team members enter this profession because they care deeply about animals, yet they are the ones that must wi witness this legal limbo every single day. Watching dogs like frostbite and piana lose their spirit and their strength over the course of several months takes a devastating toll frostbite, in particular, uh, we were holding, um, over 80 days, and he was losing his mind in, in his kennel, um, eating everything, eating the walls, that kind of stuff. So, delaying this only further, um, uh, hurts them. It fuels compassion, fatigue and burnout among the most dedicated public servants. It is heartbreaking to explain to a staff member that we cannot move a dog into a living home or a rescue, and not because we don't have one ready, but because the lobby use the dog is an inanimate piece of evidence, rather, rather than the victim needing of resolution. Um, HP 87 provides the necessary legal mechanism to transfer or release animals more efficiently, and ensures that the defendants cannot use an animal's wellbeing as a bargaining chip or a way to punish the system through delay. Uh, we urge you to support h HB 87 to ensure that no more animals and no more shelter teams have to endure the indefinite suspension of justice. Thank you.

  28. Committee chair (presiding)1:34:16

      Thank you.

  29. Dea Theodore, Salt Lake County Council1:34:21

      Hi there. I'm de Theodore from Salt Lake County Council, and I just wanna, um, say I'm supportive of this bill. I think it's great. I think it's a humane thing to do, and it's been mentioned already, but this does cost taxpayers a lot of money to keep animals in for a long period of time. And so, um, we definitely wanna save taxpayer dollars by all means. And if we can keep our animals outta the shelter, it's, it's very helpful. So, and it just, again, it's just a humane thing for these animals. Shelters are a sad place. It's sad for the employees, it's sad for the staff to have to deal with these situations that are, uh, a little different in nature. And so, um, this bill is really important, so I appreciate your support on that. Thank you.

  30. Karl Carpenter, Salt Lake County Animal Services1:35:04

      Thank you. Good morning. My name's Carl Carpenter. I'm a field captain with Salt Lake County Animal Services. Um, most of the points that I had have already been covered. Um, basically what I want to say is that this bill does not, uh, empower animal services agencies to impound any further animals than we already impound. Um, it does speed up the process, which is a benefit to the animal, um, and to the agencies, uh, Senator Brammer. Um, there is, uh, legislation and ordinance county and city ordinances that cover vicious and dangerous animals. So animals used in a commission, in commission of an offense, uh, that relate to, um, to aggressive or even intentional, uh, aggressive acts with the animal, uh, are covered. It does empower us to, um, to take ownership of the animal, and, like you said, to put the dog down. We, uh, we, we will euthanize a vicious animal. We do have other mechanisms as well, such as, uh, dangerous dog permits and things like that. Um, but it is already covered. So the commission of the offense in an aggressive way is, is already covered. Um, and I'd happily answer a question if, if you have one, What we're, well, it may be covered in other states under grammar. Yeah. It may be covered in other statutes, but that doesn't mean that this doesn't create ambiguity within the statute by, with the language that's used, Of course. So, yeah. Um, and, and as the, uh, the, the DA's office representative said, um, there are, um, offenses that are, that are listed specifically there, um, either way, on behalf of Salt Lake County Animal Services, um, we are seeking, we support the bill, we seek your support, and we urge you favorable recommendation for it.

  31. Committee chair (presiding)1:36:59

      Thank you.

  32. Sophia Deacon, Salt Lake County Animal Services1:37:00

      Thank you. I am Officer Deacon with Salt Lake County Animal Services. Um, I am speaking in favor of this bill. When an animal is seized due to abuse or involvement of a crime, that animal becomes a silent victim to the legal process. While court courts work towards justice, the animal waits confined, powerless, and entirely dependent on others for survival. Without clear pathways for bond or forfeiture, these animals are left suspended in uncertainty for months or even years. In practice, delay becomes suffering. Shelters are not meant to be permanent homes, even in the best facilities. Extended confinement takes a toll. Dogs develop anxiety, fear-based behaviors or aggression. Cats become withdrawn, stop eating and decline mentally and medically. Animals who entered the system as victims of cruelty slowly become casualties of this delay. This bill will prevent that outcome. This legislation ensures that animals are not punished during lengthy legal proceedings, forgotten by behind kennel doors, or even used as leverage. What changes is not fairness, but who bears the consequences. And animals should not be the ones paying for drawn out litigation with their health, their behavior, or their lives. This pro, these provisions, um, give the court the courts tools to act humanely shelters, the ability to function sustainably and animals, the chance to move towards safety, healing, and permanence. Instead of endless confinement, animals cannot speak in court, and this bill will speak for them. Thank you.

  33. Committee chair (presiding)1:38:35

      Thank you. Alright. We have Ian Williams online. Mr. Williams, will you please turn on your camera? Tell us your name and where, what county you live in.

  34. Ian Williams, Utah Animal Control Officers Association1:38:45

      Sure. Uh, my name is Ian Williams. Uh, I live in Salt Lake County, and I currently serve as president of the Utah Animal Control Officers Association. Uh, so chair members of the committee, I, you've got a lot of people talking. I know you got a lot on the agenda. A lot of what I would say has already been covered by, uh, many of our stakeholders. Uh, the division directors, uh, shelter directors, uh, and I wanna thank them for what they've expressed. I wanna thank, uh, uh, Representative MAGA for bringing this forward. Uh, I represent animal agencies around the state, and, uh, I could echo and tell you the stories that, uh, really just retread what, what's been said. This is needed, uh, legislation. Uh, it improves lawful pathways, uh, you know, for release and transfer and appropriate. It strengthens accountability, allowing the courts to order forfeiture and repayment of reasonable care costs. Uh, so the burden's not falling on the shelters and the taxpayers, uh, I think this is, uh, you can hear all the voices out there saying, please support this. And so, uh, as a statewide representative of those animal shelters and, and control, uh, care control officers and l Leos, uh, we respectfully ask for favorable support of HB 87. Thanks.

  35. Committee chair (presiding)1:39:56

      Thank you. All right. We're gonna end the public hearing and bring it back to the committee for further action. Senator Escamilla.

  36. Sen. Jerry Escamilla1:40:07

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. I make a motion that we, um, recommend for substitute HB 87 Animal crime victim amendments to the, to the Senate.

  37. Committee chair (presiding)1:40:18

      Alright, we have a motion to favorably recommend the bill discussion to that motion. Senator Brammer?

  38. Sen. Brady Brammer1:40:26

      Yeah, I, I still have concerns with the language. I think it's a little loose. I also think the, the policy is quite cumbersome. I, I'd probably prefer something that says, you know, you have to give notice to the owner in their household, and if nobody picks it up, it's forfeited, or you have to, they have to pay the bill to care for the animal, or the, the ownership is forfeited and they can, and, and ownership transfers, uh, rather than what I view as a pretty cumbersome process. And I understand that forfeiture gets, uh, you know, gets in the middle of all of this, but I, this just seems, uh, a very procedurally cumbersome process with, and I still have problems with the associated with, I, I think that's really loose language that opens up a lot of, a lot of problems. And so, I'll be a note today. Um, I, I think there's a more bright line rule process to do this with. And so, uh, with that, that'll be my vote.

  39. Committee chair (presiding)1:41:26

      Thank you. Any other comments?

  40. Unknown speaker1:41:29speaker not certain

      So, representative, if the bill passes, I'm gonna vote. Aye, I, I would encourage you to work with your Senate sponsor, Senator Plumb, and maybe bring some amendments or a substitute on the floor to address some of Senator Brammer concerns. Um, for me, I, I, um, I don't disagree with his points. I do think that the crimes identified that would bring a forfeiture action are pretty clear. And I can understand why if a dog's been used in dog fighting, or if the dog's been abused in the home, why you wouldn't want to return the dog to the same home. Uh, but I, I do think the associated with language could probably be tightened up.

  41. Committee chair (presiding)1:42:06

      Alright, any further discussion? All in favor of the motion to favorably commend, amend the bill, say aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? Say nay. Nay. That motion fails us. Oh. What's that? 3, 2, 3 to two, uh, with, with Baldy Bramer and Muscle Men voting in the negative? No, I voted. Okay. And then the, you voted on both. Okay. I'm gonna do this again. The motion passes Yes. On a vote of three to two with Baldy and Bramer voting in the negative. And maybe I need a break. Um, okay. All right. Thank you, representative. Thank you.

• Feb 19, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (15 turns)

  1. Sen. Jen Plumb1:33:27

     that I would like to introduce. And this amendment, uh, comes out of some discussions that were had during committee about, I think appropriate concerns that there wasn't enough clarity around what offenses would be included in. Um, this bill, for example, it just mentioned that an animal was involved in a crime and this, uh, amendment has gone ahead and added the actual sections where the offenses are. Um, I would like to make that amendment, if I may. Thank You. I see it on Line Amendment one in your name.

  2. Presiding officer1:34:02

     Any discussion to Senator Plums amendment? See, I'll place it. I'll, I'll in Face it. All in all in favor. The motion to amend say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rollout? Motion passes. The bill is amended. Senator Plumb, Uh, thank you again.

  3. Sen. Jen Plumb1:34:21

     Uh, members of the body. This bill was brought to our colleague in the house and now here to us in the Senate to address a concern that has been noted in our shelter systems. And just to paint a picture, if there's an animal that's been involved in, uh, for example, say an abuse situation, and there's going to be a trial the animals held in our shelters. And there's one example that they, uh, cited that where the animal was held for three years. But you can imagine this is a pretty costly undertaking for our shelters. And that kennel could also be filled by the other needs that the community has. So this bill is trying to kind of disentangle that and make a process so that our shelters don't become long-term storages while our judicial system works it out. This bill provides a process and permits governments, uh, entities in the shelter settings to be able to put those animals in, say, for example, a rescue group or a shelter, or if there is the desire of the owner, uh, a forfeiture like scenario. And I do know there are some concerns about this adding additional government burden, but it's challenging. Animals are property under our law. And without process in place, it would be concerning to just take someone's property without process. Uh, there's been very good support for this and I think it's actually trying to remedy a situation that's never going to be perfect, but this is a better solution than what currently exists. With that, I'm certainly open to any questions or feedback.

  4. Presiding officer1:36:00

     Thank you. Senator Plumb is open to questions on the bill It got adopted. Senator Weiler.

  5. Sen. Todd Weiler1:36:09

     Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, you know, one thing as a lawyer that I really never thought about before this committee presentation is, you know about the animals that are caught up when, when people are arrested and, um, you know, it's horrible to think about them, you know, an animal staying in a kennel for a year or even three years, and then who's going to pay, um, for, for the care and the housing and the storage of that animal. Um, and there were some concerns brought up in committee, I believe, um, that the amendment that was passed addresses many of those concerns. Um, and I know, um, you know, one of the issues is, is, is if an animal has been used, you know, trained to fight other animals, uh, that there, there is some concern about that animal being, um, returned to the same household because, uh, the people in that household probably were at least aware of may have participated or may have at least consented, uh, with their silence even, uh, to the animal being used in that way. So I do think that this bill, although not perfect, I do think it's a step forward and it helps, um, uh, push that policy, especially in the terms of the payment, uh, for these counties that end up having to house these animals while people are in jail. So I'll be voting. Aye and I appreciate the sponsor, uh, addressing some of the concerns from our committee.

  6. Presiding officer1:37:25

     Thank you. Senator Weiler. Senator Brammer,

  7. Sen. Brady Brammer1:37:28

     I, I had a lot of concerns in committee. The, this does address one of the main concerns, which was the language that was very vague as to associated with a crime, when an animal is associated with it and what that means, uh, which really I never received a great response to, but this language helps clarify that the, the concern that I have is I just feel like it builds so much procedure into a process that I, I think it is a problem. I think it does need to be addressed. This may be be making it better, but it creates a procedure that I just view as, uh, very opaque and a difficult procedure to follow, to follow along with. I mean, uh, you know, I'm pretty familiar with court procedure and as I was reading through this, I wasn't exactly clear on what happens when an animal is impounded and how that all works and you know, what kind of petitions. And so now you're dealing, now anyone who's dealing with this has both a court proceeding and they now have an animal proceeding that they have to do in conjunction with their court proceeding. Uh, but as a separate proceeding, you know, just simultaneously, I I think there's a responsibility to, uh, pay for the care of the animal and it should be paid immediately. Otherwise they forfeit the animal. And I don't think this is a, uh, crazy Fifth Amendment taking issue. Uh, I know people love their animals, but I, I am, I'm not there on this just because I think it, the, the solution is not more procedure. The the solution needs to be clarity and I just don't think that the procedure built in very much clarity. Thank you.

  8. Presiding officer1:39:00

     Thank you. Further discussion. Seeing no further discussion. Senator Plumb summation and then a motion. Uh,

  9. Sen. Jen Plumb1:39:08

     Again, as always, I, I appreciate the continued education and the thoughts on this and, and I am very open as I, I believe the house sponsor is as well to, uh, improved language that we could, uh, if we're able to move forward to this on third, that we could certainly incorporate. Uh, I've talked with some prosecutors and, and tried to find suggestions for that language and it's, it's almost a little bit of a, it's a policy call. It's not so much the language, it's a policy call, but very open to any suggestions as well. And with that, I would call the question

  10. Presiding officer1:39:38

      Thank you. And the question is, shall first substitute House Bill 87? Be read a third time. Roll call vote.

  11. Senate clerk1:39:43

      Senator Vickers. Baldy Lewin Aye. Brammer bus Colmore. Aye. Escamilla Fillmore Grover Harper Kins Ipson Johnson. Quan McKay. Mikel Milner Aye. Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Aye. Rebe Aye. Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers. Weiler Aye. Wilson Winterton, president Adams Aye.

  12. President Stuart Adams (presiding)1:40:56

      It's coming. A chance to know President Adams.

  13. President Stuart Adams (presiding)1:41:02

      Oh. First subject, house bill 87, having received 12 nay votes. 16 y excuse me. Six 12 yay Votes, 16 nay votes, one being absent, fails to pass and will be returned to the house for filing.

  14. Presiding officer1:41:26

      Senator Kel, are you ready? Yes,

  15. Presiding officer1:41:34

      We have a motion to encircle, second substitute house Bill 2 74, sentencing amendments. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule The motion passes. The bill is Uncircled. Senator.

• Feb 25, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (10 turns)

  1. Sen. Jen Plumb22:07

     This Bill, uh, after committee, it was brought to the attention that we could do this more thoughtfully with less, um, involvement of processes in the judicial. Uh, much thanks to my colleague, Senator Brammer for assisting with that. And so at this point, what this bill essentially does is it makes some amendments to what happens when an animal is held, uh, say in an animal shelter while a criminal case is pending. Currently, uh, there's a case that has been described in this bill where it costs, uh, $21,000 to hold an animal during a judicial process. We can do this better and we can do this in a more fiscally responsible way. And this bill sets a path forward for that. It allows for animals to be held in the shelter or in a private or rescue space, as well as in fostering so that that burden doesn't have to be borne by the shelters. And it also allows for a process to be started where the owner can be responsible for paying those fees. And if they don't, there's then a, a forfeiture process that, uh, goes into place. Uh, I think we do have this bill in, in a better place. And I am open to any questions or thoughts.

  2. Presiding officer23:15

     Thank you for the presentation discussion of the bill. Senator Brammer?

  3. Sen. Chris Brammer23:19

     Yeah, I I just wanted to rise in support. I was not in favor of it the first time. Uh, they've made some good fixes, cleaned up a lot of the process and I appreciate, uh, the bill sponsor and the floor sponsor working with me on that. Thanks.

  4. Presiding officer23:38

     Thank you. Senator Brammer.

  5. Sen. Chris Brammer23:40

     I see, I see a, uh, have we have we got the right a bill in front of us. So I'm realizing as I'm looking at the one in front of you that Looks like there's a second substitute. The Second sub is the one that I would actually like to move and I have, Yeah, I thought so. So I'm going to, I'm gonna take a motion to substitute Senator Plumb. So yes, I think is what you described in the second substitute. Exactly. That's the one I described. So I'm gonna go ahead and place that motion if that, that's a motion.

  6. Presiding officer24:08

     The motion is to delete and title embody first substitute house bill 87. Replace it with second substitute house bill 87. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes. Now we've got the right, uh, bill in front of us. Thank you for the discussion. Do we have additional discussion on the bill Senator Plumb to you?

  7. Sen. Jen Plumb24:30

     For summation and a motion, I would waive summation and, uh, call the question please.

  8. Presiding officer24:34

     Thank you. And the question is, shall second substitute house bill 87? Be read a third time roll call vote.

  9. Clerk (roll call)24:40

     Senator Vickers Spery Lewin Brammer Bus Comore Escamia Aye. Fillmore Grr. Harper Kins. Senator Ipson Johnson k Juab Aye. McKay. Thank you. Mikel Milner Musman work on Owens pitcher slum Aye. Rebi Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers work on Weiler Weiler Wilson. Senator Weiler Aye. Still gonna work? Aye. Winterton, president Adams Aye. Second substitute house bill 87.

  10. Presiding officer25:42

      Having received 25 yay votes. One nay vote three being absent shall be read a third time.

• Feb 25, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (3 turns)

  1. Presiding officer24:05

     So I'm gonna go ahead and place that motion if that, that's a motion. The motion is to delete and title embody first substitute house bill 87. Replace it with second substitute house bill 87. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes. Now we've got the right, uh, bill in front of us. Thank you for the discussion. Do we have additional discussion on the bill Senator Plumb to you?

  2. Sen. Jen Plumb24:30

     For summation and a motion, I would waive summation and, uh, call the question please.

  3. Presiding officer24:34

     Thank you. And the question is, shall second substitute house bill 87? Be read a third time roll call vote. Senator Vickers Spery Lewin Brammer Bus Comore Escamia Aye. Fillmore Grr. Harper Kins. Senator Ipson Johnson k Juab Aye. McKay. Thank you. Mikel Milner Musman work on Owens pitcher slum Aye. Rebi Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers work on Weiler Weiler Wilson. Senator Weiler Aye. Still gonna work? Aye. Winterton, president Adams Aye. Second substitute house bill 87. Having received 25 yay votes. One nay vote three being absent shall be read a third time.

• Feb 26, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (6 turns)

  1. Sen. Jen Plumb22:14

     and we've moved it into a really great place. Uh, and I'm grateful for the body support on it.

  2. Senate presiding officer22:19

     Discussion to the bill. Seeing none.

  3. Sen. Jen Plumb22:23

     Senator Plumb With That I'd call the question please.

  4. Senate presiding officer22:26

     The question is, shall second substitute house bill 87 pass. Roll call vote.

  5. Senate clerk (roll call)22:31

     Senator Vickers Baldry Aye. Lewin Brammer Bus Comore Escamilla Fillmore Aye. Grover Aye. Harper Aye. Kinins. Aye. Ipson Johnson. Aye. Quan McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Owens picture Alum Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton Vicar Aye. Weiler Aye. Wilson. Aye. Winterton President Adams

  6. Senate presiding officer23:19

     Second substitute house bill 87. Having received 22 yay votes, zero nay votes seven being absent, uh, passes and will be returned to the house for further consideration.

• Feb 27, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (6 turns)

  1. Speaker (presiding)9:15

     of the president. Madam Reading Clerk Second Substitute House bill 87 Animal Crime Victim Amendments by Representative Mauga. There we go. Representative Mauga.

  2. Rep. Verona Mauga9:37

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'd like to concur with the changes made in the Senate.

  3. Speaker (presiding)9:41

     Thank you representative. The motion before us is we con the House concur with the Senate amendments. Would you like to speak to that?

  4. Rep. Verona Mauga9:47

     Yes, just briefly. Um, this is my animal amendments bill. The issue that we are trying to solve is that once animals are impounded because they are part of a criminal case, um, they are stuck in limbo at our overcrowded shelters. Um, what our friends in the Senate did was they helped me clean this bill up a lot. And so if you look at the old bill and you look at the new sub, um, it just does a very simple thing. It still resolves the issue that we have, but it just makes it so that now there's an opportunity and options for animals to be placed not only in a shelter, but they can go to the Humane Society. They can go to a family or a friend, um, anywhere where someone can actually care for them in a loving way. Um, I really appreciate the changes that were made and I ask for your continued support. Thank you.

  5. Speaker (presiding)10:42

     Thank you Representative Mauga. Discussion to the motion to concur with the Senate amendments on second substitute HB 87. See none will go ahead and place the motion, the motion before us the house concur with the Senate amendments on second substitute HB 87. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes?

  6. Speaker (presiding)11:01

     Voting will now be open for final passage on second substitute HB 87, seeing all present, having voted voting is now closed. Second substitute HB 87 passes body of 52. Yes. Votes 14, no votes and will be, uh, sent to the Senate for the signature of the president. Madam Reading Clerk