H.B. 167 Signature Collection Modifications: transcript

House Government Operations Committee, Feb 3, 2026

1. Committee chair (presiding)39:58

   So, uh, what's before us now is House Bill 1 67. We're gonna jump to item number four. Uh, should have announced that at the beginning. I apologize. Uh, Representative Kohler signature collection modifications. Go ahead.

2. Rep. Mike L. Kohler40:12

   Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you committee for hearing this. This bill came from, uh, the last cycle that we went through as an, with the election. There was a lot of news and hype about the, uh, signature process used in the governor's race, whether they got enough, whether they didn't, being able to check it or not. And, uh, put this through last year. And we made it all the way through almost to through the process, but not quite. So I brought it back this year as an effort to, to do it 'cause I still think it's good policy. What this bill does is pretty three simple things. It, if, if you are a signator on a petition, whether it's initiative or referendum or a candidate's petition to get on the ballot five days after your signature is certified, this, your signature would go on the Lieutenant Governor's website for 90 days. That gives everybody a chance to get on and see if their name is on there or not. And, uh, it's easy to find and it's easy to see. So it wouldn't be, it gets rid of all the ambiguity has one, two other points. One would give a clear process for getting your name off if your name was put on there in either you didn't wanna leave it on or it was put on an error. And it, lastly, it also has a a point here that if your name is used fraudulently and put on there, it will be removed. And it'll also be referred to the, uh, county attorney to be checked if they find that there's enough initiative with it to, to have it checked for that purpose. So it, that's pretty clear. That's what it does. The big part is that your name's gonna be in a public place, so you'll be able to tell if it's there and know if it is right or wrong. And that's the bill answer questions if you have any.

3. Unknown speaker41:45speaker not certain

   Yeah. Uh, uh, representative point of clarification. You have a, a substitute. Oh, you bet. We gotta do That. Did you speak to that? And if you didn't, would you mention those changes?

4. Rep. Mike L. Kohler41:55

   Sure. Uh, I apologize for not doing that. Yeah. First sub is some clarification errors based on some, uh, references that were not picked up in the first shot. So, uh, it'll correct though. It also puts a clarification on the end, uh, uh, to, uh, if, if the bill at, uh, it's a coordinating clause at the end that if, uh, representative Tuscher's bill passes, his bill puts this in in 2030 to an all electronic process versus a hand signature. And it would, uh, coordinate that if that's happens. So that's the difference between the first and second.

5. Committee chair (presiding)42:32

   Alright, thank you. Uh, we'll move to the committee for clarifying questions. Representative Welton.

6. Rep. Doug Welton42:37

   Thank you Mr. Chair. I just have one question, Mr. Chair. Um, how do you know if a signature is fraudulent and what I'm, what am Well, yeah, I'll let you ask that. And then if I can have a follow up question.

7. Rep. Mike L. Kohler42:50

   Yes, I would expect that based on having signed some of these, I would know if I looked on it and found it to be so wrong, if I didn't make my signature, do it myself. It's fraudulent. If not, uh, if I put it on, I know, but that's the, the point of this is you'll be able to check personally.

8. Rep. Doug Welton43:07

   Alright. I guess just commentary, the only reason why I ask, 'cause I just worry with making names public, that there is going to be political brow beating that goes on and, and I, and I worry that somebody's, oh, oh, I didn't do that when they, when they really did. Uh, and then you're creating a, a potential criminal case for someone who just won't own their own signature. But there are times for sure, uh, I, I see it as a difficult area, but that's my only concern. One comment if I could, uh, If, um, yeah, yeah, you go ahead and then I've got another question for you. Go

9. Unknown speaker43:43speaker not certain

   Ahead. In looking into this and talking to people I've been in mostly, uh, individuals have a difficult time, but well-funded, uh, campaign involved groups have the money to find your, uh, voting number and find out who you are and do whatever they want to try and motivate you to take your name off. So the fact that the name's not there doesn't really, uh, say that you won't be found. It, it, they're out there and they can be found if you have enough money or desire to do it.

10. Committee chair (presiding)44:10

    Alright, thank you. And thanks for the questions representative. I, we'll go to Representative Keller.

11. Rep. Keller44:15

    Thank you Mr. Chair. In addition to the individual's name and date, will other information be publicized such as their city or the precinct, or the Senate district? As, as we see today in some of the information that's pub publicized?

12. Rep. Mike L. Kohler44:34

    Uh, the, the purpose of my bill was name and the date that you're there. Uh, it's interesting. I better go back and read 'cause I didn't read it since last year in completeness, but I think there's another bill that puts all of that information you're talking about. Mine does not. It's simply the date and your name. Thank

13. Committee chair (presiding)44:49

    You. Alright, thank you for the question, Representative Hayes.

14. Unknown speaker44:55speaker not certain

    My button is working, so I pushed her microphone. It's you.

15. Committee chair (presiding)44:59

    All right, sir. Representative Stoddard. Go ahead, sir.

16. Rep. Andrew Stoddard45:02

    Thank You, Mr. Chair. So, oh, fix the mic. Okay. It's getting over here now. Good Work. It's always difficult to know exactly which mic we're gonna grab, so problem solved. Yeah, there you go. Go ahead. Um, so I know that there's certain ways for people to keep their information private. I'm thinking specifically like victims of domestic violence, stuff like that. Does this bill take any of that into consideration?

17. Rep. Mike L. Kohler45:30

    It does not. So say I'm gathering signatures for my legislative race, someone signs that they're a victim of domestic violence. Their address is private for security reasons. If someone were checking an abuser, they would be able to see that that person lived inside my district. Correct. The understanding that I have is that that has not addressed here. Your name is simply used there, but if it is private, my understanding is that it remains that. Okay.

18. Rep. Andrew Stoddard45:58

    So then Someone based on the laws that have, because you do have, like you said, there are some state laws that allow that. So then the person would be able to be at least pinned down to my legislative district If they've gone through the process of, of removing their name

19. Rep. Mike L. Kohler46:13

    or having that privacy act on it. Yes, they stay that way.

20. Rep. Andrew Stoddard46:16

    Um, I, I see what you're trying to do here. I do have some real concerns about the privacy aspect of it. Um, not just physical safety of victims or anything like that. I think that's a large part of it. Um, but also I think we live in a time when positions and politics are so hyper-focused and extreme that there are gonna be a lot of people who are going to be hesitant to sign anything based on the fact that someone who disagrees with them can go and see publicly what they did. I mean, we don't require people to put out there that they, who they voted for how they voted. That is a very private personal decision and I think that signing up to support a signature gathering candidate should be as well. And I, I worry that this will have a really negative consequence in being able to gather signatures and getting candidates and options onto the ballot. Thank you.

21. Committee chair (presiding)47:15

    Alright, thank you Representative Stoddard. Appreciate that viewpoint and question. Um, seeing no further questions from the committee at this time, we'll open it up for public comments. So, uh, raise your hand out there if you wanna talk this bill. We've got one. Alright. You're, you're a professional speaker, sir. Designated speaker for this committee. Come on up and, uh, uh, tell us who you are again and, uh, who you're represented. Go ahead.

22. Ricky Hatch, Weber County Clerk/Auditor47:41

    Thank you Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Uh, Ricky Hatch. I'm the Weaver County Clerk auditor and here representing the clerks of the State of Utah. Um, the, as far as clerks go, uh, we, uh, have taken a position of oppose of this bill. Um, there are a couple of, uh, a couple of reasons why, which I'll share. First off, the, uh, our understanding is that the date of the signature of the voter's signature would need to be displayed. And currently we're not aware of any technology that, uh, allows that, that would actually accomplish that get water. Uh, we have a concern there. We do share representative Stoddard's concern with at-risk voters. Um, thanks. And I need to go back and reread the bill. And I, uh, our thought was that those at-risk voter names would be, uh, would be shown, but we, we could be incorrect on that one. Um, next, the removal deadline, if a voter wants to remove their deadline is based off of the, um, the signature date. And the voter doesn't actually know when the clerk is going to be processing that. So there's some ambiguity surrounding that. And then really the last two reasons why is first off, voters currently have full ability to look up and see if they have, if their name is on, if they have signed a petition, uh, that, that technology and that process already exists within state law. Uh, and so clerks do, or voters do have the ability to double check and see if, if they have or have not signed a petition. And then lastly, some of the provisions in this bill are also included in house bill 32, which is Representative Cutler's bill, which this committee will hear in it shortly. Um, and the, the clerks are supportive of that bill and, um, feel that that bill could be either altered or will meet many of the concepts and, and goals that are provided in this bill.

23. Committee chair (presiding)49:30

    Alright, thank you. And I was, uh, chatting about something when you first sat down. Did you state, sir, that, that the, your, your group of, uh, clerks oppose the bill?

24. Ricky Hatch, Weber County Clerk/Auditor49:42

    Correct. Alright, thank you.

25. Committee chair (presiding)49:44

    I I made sure I heard that right. Thank you, Ricky. Thank you. Um, anybody online for public comment? Seth Stewart and Marilyn. Alright, we'll, we'll uh, do one on this one, Marilyn, if you'll come, uh, forward by turning on your microphone and your camera so we can see you and we'll give you, um, two minutes.

26. Marilyn Momeny50:20

    Okay. Can you see me? Sorry. Yes,

27. Committee chair (presiding)50:22

    Ma'am. Yeah, go ahead.

28. Marilyn Momeny50:23

    Technology takes a minute. Um, yeah, I would like to speak, oh, Marilyn Momani. I live in American Fork and I am speaking, I'm a citizen representing myself. I would like to speak in favor of this bill. Um, there are numerous kinds of petitions, referendums, and initiatives and all of those under Utah law, the names of the signers are published. Um, I'm sensitive to the issue that Andrew Stoddard, uh, Representative Stoddard just brought up that if someone was an at risk voter, but that issue exists now with if they sign an initiative or a petition. Um, if there really isn't the technology to post the date, that might be something that, um, could be discussed and maybe figure out something else. But I know the date is on the petition when people sign it. So the date is available and just, I looked at line 5 42 and the person has five days from when the signature is certified to remove their signature at, that's on line five 40, well, five 40 to 5 45. So I think the clerk, it's the same way that you would remove your signature from a, an initiative or a petition. I think this would address a lot of the issues that we've had in previous, um, elections. And so I speak in favor of this bill. I think this is a good thing to do.

29. Committee chair (presiding)52:01

    Alright, uh, Marilyn, thank you for your comment today. Um, we're gonna, we're gonna close public comment and come back to the, uh, committee for, uh, further clarifying questions or action.

30. Chair Burton52:14

    Um, and I'm gonna start, I just have a question for you for the bill sponsor really quick. Um, so theoretically if there's an at risk person who, who doesn't want to be found, and this kinda gets back to representative Stoddard's question, who doesn't wanna be found by someone they're afraid of, let's just say a, a domestic situation? Nothing in the bill that I've read says anything about how their identity's protected from not being listed. Um, is there anything in there that does that, that protects that individual? My

31. Rep. Mike L. Kohler52:49

    Understanding is that, and, and I didn't, when I addressed this, I didn't, nec didn't address that specifically. So if you're protected now, you should be then too. Uh, that's how I understood it was written. That's the intent of it.

32. Committee chair (presiding)53:01

    Okay. Alright. Thank you. Uh, committee, any other questions? Oh, I thought your hand went up, but no light. All right, no problem.

33. Committee chair (presiding)53:10

    I have one from, uh, representative Mike Peterson. Go ahead, Mike.

34. Rep. Michael J. Petersen53:14

    Thank you. So I might understand that this would, that this would, uh, make it so that, um, initiatives referenda and campaigns would be the same then. So it sounds like right now they, they operate a little bit differently and this just puts us in com, makes everything uniform. Is that, is that correct?

35. Rep. Mike L. Kohler53:36

    I don't think this changes mechanically how they're collected and what the process is. But once the names are collected and turned into the lieutenant governor or the clerk, whoever is in the county that's taking care of it, then this would apply to all of them. The same meaning they'll go public.

36. Rep. Michael J. Petersen53:49

    Okay. Thanks. Okay. And, uh, chair prerogative here. Per, per your bill, it looks like this applies just to candidate nominations, right? I mean, you're, you're talking about signature collection for a candidate and that's what this is about, correct?

37. Rep. Mike L. Kohler54:08

    It is correct. Alright.

38. Committee chair (presiding)54:10

    'cause referendum. Yeah. Alright. Yeah. Any further questions from the, uh, committee? Alright. Seeing none will, uh, open it up for a motion. Okay. There's a Brave Soul Representative Stoddard for a motion.

39. Rep. Andrew Stoddard54:39

    Thank you Mr. Chair. Uh, I would like to make a motion to hold at this point and if I could speak to that Yeah.

40. Committee chair (presiding)54:46

    To hold. Yeah. Uh, understood. Motion to hold. That's in order. Um, do you wanna speak to that? Yeah,

41. Rep. Andrew Stoddard54:52

    If I could. Um, I, I think there's a few logistical issues that I have with this bill. I, I see what you're trying to do, but I, I would like to see one where we're at on Representative Cutler's bill that the clerk's office said that they agree with and see what's still, what issues you still have outstanding. Um, not saying you don't have anything here and not trying to kill the bill, but Understood. I, I think there's some things that need to be worked out before we can hear it as a committee.

42. Committee chair (presiding)55:19

    Alright. Um, to the bill sponsor, your response to that motion to hold.

43. Rep. Mike L. Kohler55:25

    Um, I would, uh, obviously oppose the motion and hopefully it would move on. I think this is a simple effort based on, and, and it's interesting what a year makes after the last election cycle. There was a lot of support for such as this and went through, especially on the house side, pretty easy last time. But I get that there's, uh, some concerns about it. It's an effort, I think, to be very simple. It doesn't get too complicated in the process either getting on or getting out, but it does put your name there. It also has, um, it makes a good effort to, to be clear, to clarify the process and then be very transparent. Um, I get the issue that there's gonna be some people concerned about having their name on there, but we certainly won't run into the problem we had last time in the governor's race where a lot of news media took up time, uh, trying to play both sides of this. So in an effort to be transparent, I think this bill does a good job with that.

44. Committee chair (presiding)56:16

    Alright. Thank you. Uh, representative. Uh, the motion before us then is to, uh, to hold this bill, um, house Bill 1 67. Uh, any any further discussion of that motion? If not, uh, we'll go ahead and take a, you wanna discuss the motion? Did I, alright. Representative Peterson, go ahead. I,

45. Rep. Michael J. Petersen56:36

    I, I would just say, I, I I think this, the sponsor is correct. We did this last year. Uh, I don't think it's doing anything really, uh, new or earth shattering. It puts us in conformity. And so, uh, I'm gonna, I'm gonna oppose the hold motion and hope that we can send this through. Thank you.

46. Committee chair (presiding)56:55

    Alright, thank you. Um, I see no further discussion, so we're gonna go ahead and vote and we'll do it. Uh, roll call. Vote on this motion to hold house. Bill 1 67. Uh, let me turn you on, ma'am. Corinne, there you go. Representative Welton? Yes. Representative Stoddard? Yes. Representative Loubet? Yes. Representative Hayes? Yes. Representative Cutler? Yes. Representative Peterson? No. And Chair Burton? No. Thank you. Alright, uh, representative, uh, we'll hold that five to two. Thank you for being here. Alright, we'll move on to the next item.