H.B. 160 Statewide Initiative Modifications: transcript

House Government Operations Committee, Jan 26, 2026

1. Committee chair1:34:42

   And this is HB one 60 statewide initiative modifications, uh, with, uh, Representative Stoddard, did you bring your kilt? Oh, you did, did you bring your uh, bagpipes today? I left those in the car. Alright, sorry. Next time. Alright, Representative Stoddard, welcome, uh, member of the committee. Uh, the time is yours to share, uh, HB one 60. Go ahead.

2. Rep. Andrew Stoddard1:35:05

   Thank you Mr. Chair and committee members. Uh, I hope you've all had time to digest this bill. It's rather extensive. Lots of changes. That was, that was a joke to see who had read it. Thank you Representative Hayes. Looks like you pass. Um, so in our statutes we currently have two kinds of initiatives. We have direct and indirect initiatives. So a direct initiative is one that will go directly on the ballot and that requires a certain percentage of voters to be able to get it on the ballot. Then we have indirect, which puts it directly in front of the legislature. So under our current state code, it requires half the amount of signatures as the direct initiative. So what this does is just puts it in line. So whether something goes directly in front of the legislature, whether it goes directly on the ballot, it would require the same amount of signatures. And that is the bill. But I'm gonna keep talking so that any Davis County representatives don't get any questions.

3. Committee chair1:36:02

   Alright, well, representative, you were correct when you stated that it was short, but you weren't correct in, in the sense that there's gonna be some questions on this bill. So I'm gonna, I'm gonna go first to Representative Keller and then we'll go to Representative Welton next. So go ahead representative?

4. Rep. Keller (name not on roster)1:36:18speaker not certain

   Uh, yes, I'd Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'd like to ask our best finely dressed, uh, representative from Thank you, Murray, uh, Sandy, a couple of questions. Midvale, We can't decide where he lives. This, the, uh, it says Sandy's on your, uh, web page. So the purposefully the legislature, uh, made this indirect mechanism. So there will be two steps, one step of a lower threshold for gathering signatures and a higher, plus an additional step of legislative approval. My understanding is that you are now changing this so that it has, instead of a two step process, it would be that that is, uh, different. You would have a keep, you would increase the threshold, plus have the additional step of going to the legislature. Why would anyone run an indirect t indirect initiative if, if now there's if's even harder than a direct initiative? Uh, so it, it doesn't make it necessarily harder. We put it on the same level. So if you could gather, am I gonna talk? I'm sorry. You were answering my question.

5. Committee chair1:37:38

   I show you the respect to Representative Stoddard. Go ahead and answer the question and then we'll go back to representative killer. I mean, this Is what I supposed to do in court, not have you do it to Me. No, go ahead. Answer the question.

6. Rep. Andrew Stoddard1:37:48

   So, uh, it puts it in line. I I get what you're saying that, you know, 'cause there is that part in the section that says if you don't meet that and the legislature doesn't do what you want, you can add it and get the additional one. But here, you could go either route. I I mean, I think the bigger question is why do we have these legisl uh, these indirect legislative initiatives? In any case, you know, I think if someone wants to put something before the legislator legislature call your legislator and have them open a bill file. Um, so, but I, I, I think what I'm trying to do here, my intent is to cut, get rid of the shortcut to put something in front of a legislature. And, you know, if you want people to have a say in it, put it directly on the ballot.

7. Rep. Keller (name not on roster)1:38:28speaker not certain

   Thank you. I, I respect your opinion. I, I think the intended or unintended consequence of this would be that there would be no indirect ballot initiatives, because now they would have a, uh, it would be easier to do a direct initiative. But I appreciate your, your efforts and your constant creativity in, uh, in bill files.

8. Committee chair1:38:49

   Just wait. Alright. I appreciate the respectfulness as we go through this. Uh, Representative Welton, can you remain respectful?

9. Rep. Thomas W. Peterson1:38:58

   I, I can try. Okay, go, go ahead, sir. Um, I think my question was, was largely answered. I was just curious if, if we knew what the historical context is, the 4% versus the 8%, why it was a lower threshold? You know, I, I think originally the lower, sorry, that was the question for me to answer, right? Yes, sir. Okay. I don't wanna start a pining I not asked for. Um, I think the original intent was that you could do half the amount of signatures, get in front of the legislature, and then if you didn't like the outcome, then you can gather the other half the signatures and get it on the ballot. Um, and maybe I could phone in front of Kirsi knows. Okay. I, I don't know when this has actually ever been used in terms of an indirect initiative. I don't, I mean, if this committee would rather just get rid of that route, because I think it's, it's kind of silly to have it. I would be open to that and come back another day with a sub, but that's, that's where I'm at.

10. Committee chair1:39:54

    Alright. Did that answer your question? Representative Welton? Alright. Representative MacPherson.

11. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:39:59

    Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, so I also think this is funny, but question on this. Um, do you think you made a, a statement you're not sure why we even use these legislative initiatives? I kind of agree. And so I'm curious, do you support, uh, then perhaps removing the legislative initiative process?

12. Rep. Andrew Stoddard1:40:23

    Yeah, I mean, I think if you're going to gather signatures and go that route, you should just put it to the people. I, I don't think we need a route where you gather signatures and then get it in front of the legislature. I, I can't think of a time when that would be necessary.

13. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:40:38

    Chair, can I Follow up? Yeah, please proceed.

14. Committee chair1:40:40

    This is a very interesting line of questions. Go ahead. I'm interested.

15. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:40:44

    Yeah, so I guess, uh, my, my question is, you said that you know that if you, if you have a desire for legislation, you contact your legislator. So why, why would you suppose we should have initiatives at all?

16. Rep. Andrew Stoddard1:40:55

    Well, you see, historically, there's times when the legislature refuses to listen to the will of the people. And there are things that pull very highly in the public, but the legislature refuses to act year after year. So I'm not opposed to ballot initiatives in a hole because I think it's a good gauge. If you've got enough people who want something and the legislature isn't acting, go for it. But if you're gathering signatures to get the legislature to act because they're not acting, why would you do it? To get that in front of the same body that is hypothetically not listening

17. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:41:25

    Be you said that you're not sure if this has ever actually occurred. Correct. Okay. That's all. I was just trying to make sure I understood the whole logic and thought process. Thank you.

18. Committee chair1:41:37

    All right. I don't see any further questions, representatives, so we're gonna go ahead and go to public comment if you are completed with your presentation.

19. Rep. Andrew Stoddard1:41:46

    I am. Alright. Alright.

20. Committee chair1:41:47

    Um, if you're for this bill, raise your hand if you are against it. Raise your hand. We have one in the audience against Come on up, sir. And, uh, we have one online. One online, and that's Seth Stewart. So you go ahead first, sir, we've seen you before. Thanks again for being here. Do you Need me to sign in again? Uh, You've already done it, so you're fine. Go ahead and, uh, let's Bury you the introduction. Um, so Again, well tell, tell me who you are again because I don't know you personally. So just say it again for the record.

21. Richard W. Bangel III, resident1:42:16

    Understood. My, my name's Richard w Vangel ii. I'm a resident of Clearfield, Utah. Lived in Utah since January of 2022. Um, active duty service member after 20 years, about to retire in April. Um, while there is no federal ballot initiative process, states like Utah have chosen to recognize citizen initiatives as an expression of that retained authority or popular sovereignty of the people, especially when representative bodies fail to act. HB one 60 doubles the signature threshold for that indirect method that would effectively push the signature threshold for a citizen led indirect option to go to the legislative body in Utah to 140,000 from 70,000 based on the active voter numbers that were posted on January 12th, 2026. That is a huge threshold now to answer the question as to why would somebody use this. Sometimes it's not the entire legislative body that would be opposed to an initiative or a particular item. Sometimes it is just that representative in that district that would be opposed or they're busy or for whatever reason the message doesn't come across. So Article one, section three of the U Utah Constitution recognizes the supremacy of the United States Constitution as Supreme and the citizens voted to do this back in 1900 through a constitutional initiative. Over the years, it's been amended and adjusted. Uh, chair for the record, I'm also submitting a written formal notice of protest and constitutional objective, if that is okay. And I respectfully request that it be entered into the committee record.

22. Committee chair1:43:58

    Um, why don't you just complete your public comment and then, uh, you can stay after school and talk to me if you would.

23. Richard W. Bangel III, resident1:44:06

    Yes, sir. That is the end of my public comment. Alright. I am, uh, obviously opposed as it increases the threshold.

24. Committee chair1:44:14

    Alright. Very succinctly done. You had seven seconds left, sir, and we appreciate you being involved in the process. Thank you. Alright, we'll bring back the committee and committee chair recognizes you wanna do Seth? Oh yeah. My, my bad. We, we have Seth back. So Seth, go ahead and turn your camera on for public comment before we close out. You'll be the last public commenter on this bill. We Just added one more too if you want. Yeah, go ahead Seth. You know the drill. Turn your camera on so we can see you. There you are. Okay, sir. Yeah, so two minutes. Go ahead.

25. Seth Stewart, resident1:44:49

    And I, I think it's clear that this is kind of a two-edged sword, right? Because we want a check against, uh, the legislature when they don't listen to us. I have this exact problem actually because there are various proposals that I have made trying to, uh, get I, my, um, representative and my senator and so on to listen to the proposals that I have. And there just hasn't been appetite in my perception to actually go and pursue those things and implement the checks and balances that we need. And so, uh, I I share the concern that, uh, by raising the threshold, we're actually limiting our citizen access and limiting popular sovereignty. But again, uh, with the problem of legislators being out of sync, I think that's what this demonstrates is that there's this initiative process precisely because there's that drift between the will of the people and what the legislature is interested in pursuing. And the solution to that, again, is, is to revert to the constitutional norm of having true bicameralism that is having a house that is actually elected through a direct popular vote by the people. And having the Senator Vickers represent the more, uh, institutional interests of the local governments in the, at the federal level, that would be through the state legislatures, right? So to provide a check against ambition, you, you orient different factions against each other rather than allowing them to collaborate and conspire. And that would solve the problem of institutional drift away from the will of the people. And there would still be the checks and balances against unwise ideas by having two differently oriented, uh, houses in the legislature. So that's, that's my counter proposal, if you will. And obviously I likewise oppose raising the, uh, threshold simply because this is a valid and valuable check against the, uh, legislature whenever there's that disconnect, which is again, apparently the reason why this exists is because that out of sync condition has arisen.

26. Committee chair1:46:48

    Alright, thank you. Wow, that was excellent. You did it in two minutes. Thanks Seth. Alright, we're gonna close out public comment right now and go back to the committee on this bill, uh, HB one 60 and the chair's gonna recognize Representative Fifi.

27. Rep. Fiefia1:47:08

    Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I move to table this.

28. Committee chair1:47:18

    Okay. That motion is in order. Uh, the move is, or the motion is to table any discussion to that motion. Okay. I knew I was gonna see a light Representative Hayes and then Representative Welton. So go ahead.

29. Rep. Sahara Hayes1:47:38

    I would make a substitute motion to hold.

30. Committee chair1:47:41

    Okay, that's in order. Substitute motion is to hold discussion to that motion. Uh, Wetton, are you gonna talk about that one? Okay. Alright. The, the motion before us is to hold, we'll go to the, uh, because this is a a pretty heavy motion, we're gonna go to you to, to sum that or to speak reference to the motion. Go ahead.

31. Rep. Thomas W. Peterson1:48:05

    Uh, thank you. Um, and thank you for the good questions and the work. Um, I mean, obviously I much prefer a motion to hold as opposed to a motion to table. I think based on the questions and commentary, there's at least some interest or something we can do on this bill and look into it. And I'm happy to put in the work, um, just to answer a couple of questions that have come up. So this, this statute, as far as I can tell, it was enacted in 1953. That's when this process was created. The indirect initiative is not protected by the Utah Constitution, only the direct initiative to go on the ballot. So this has no constitutional protections and in the 73 years that it has been around, it has not ever been used. So, like I said, I'm happy to change this. However, if, if the will of this committee is just to get rid of the process as is, um, I just don't see a purpose in having this process with a lower number of voters. And so I'm, I'm willing to submit to whatever the body likes, but, uh, if you vote to hold, I will continue to work on it, so.

32. Committee chair1:49:02

    Okay. Very good. And, uh, everybody understands the difference between hold and table. Table. The bill's dead hold. The bill could come back. Alright. Back to you. Maker of the motion.

33. Rep. Sahara Hayes1:49:13

    Yes. I just think that this is a really interesting concept as has been demonstrated by the comments today and as the sponsor said, he's willing to work on it. And so I think we should give him that opportunity.

34. Committee chair1:49:24

    Alright, thank you. Alright, so the, uh, motion before us is to hold HB one 60 and we'll do a, uh, roll call. Vote on that. So we'll turn the time over.

35. Unknown speaker1:49:39speaker not certain

    Let me get your mic on. What's that? What's that? We have to vote on this? No, we're gonna vote on this one first. Uh, so let me see. There you go. I never get your mic on, ma'am. I'm sorry. It's up. Go ahead.

36. Committee clerk (roll call)1:49:56

    Representative Welton? Yes. Representative Stoddard? Yes. Representative Romero? Yes. Representative Ucci. Sure. Representative MacPherson? Yes. Representative Loubet? Yes. Representative Hayes? Yes. Representative Fiefia? Yes. Representative Cutler and Chair Burton? No. Broke the street.

37. Committee chair1:50:30

    All right. Uh, the motion is to hold and, uh, you and I'll have a discussion. Thank you. Representative for your work. You Voted in the, what's that? You just have to say you voted The, okay. I'm the only one that voted no on that. Thank you. Um, and thank you committee for your work on this and listening to these last couple of bills, which got pretty intense. I do appreciate it, but that's what the committee process is about.