H.B. 412 Energy Development Planning Amendments

What this bill does

For large solar and wind projects, the developer would have to consult the Division of Wildlife Resources, which would have 30 days to report wildlife impacts to the local government that licenses the project. The division would not have power to approve or deny projects, and the bill would not cover small farmers' irrigation system electrification.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. 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, 4 absentHouse Public Utilities and Energy Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 6, 2026Who voted how
• 8 yes, 0 no, 4 absentHouse Public Utilities and Energy Committee: Consent Calendar Recommendation · Feb 6, 2026Who voted how
• 70 yes, 1 no, 4 absentFinal House vote · Feb 19, 2026
• 5 yes, 0 no, 2 absentSenate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 26, 2026Who voted how
• 23 yes, 0 no, 6 absentFinal Senate vote · Mar 5, 2026
• 64 yes, 0 no, 11 absentHouse vote to accept the other chamber's changes · Mar 6, 2026

Hearings and debates

• Feb 6, 2026 House Public Utilities and Energy Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (33 turns)

  1. Chair Jack (presiding)53:35

     All right. Next before us is HB four 12 energy development planning amendments by Representative Owens, uh, Representative Owens. You have the floor.

  2. Rep. Doug Owens53:47

     Good afternoon chair and committee members. Nice to be with you. This is a simple bill. It's simp. It says that, uh, when you're gonna do a utility scale, solar wind project, you consult with DNR about wildlife impacts. As you all know, we're growing very rapidly, um, and we're doing a lot of construction and we're impacting wildlife. And this makes sure we try to take a look at that and not do anything inadvertently, or, sorry, not do anything accidentally without considering it in developing these large swaths of land that can get devoted to wind and solar projects. And, um, it's, I think, not unduly burdensome on industry. 'cause it requires DNR to respond within 30 days. And it doesn't mandate any particular action, but it lets the local licensing authority get that information from DNR and take account of what they may choose to do, um, as they license the project. So it's just a don't do, don't accidentally erase a wildlife corridor without even thinking about it with those large projects. And, um, uh, that, that concludes my presentation. It's fairly simple and I, I think not burdensome to industry and, uh, gives us a chance to look at those wildlife issues.

  3. Chair Jack (presiding)54:58

     Thank you, representative. That concludes your presentation. It does. All right. I have a light from Representative Peck.

  4. Rep. Nicholeen P. Peck55:05

     Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for your presentation. Um, I think it's a good idea to protect all of our wild lands, so I like that. Um, I am looking in here though, and it basically looks to me like that DWR would be notified, but then 30 days later, um, it would make it so that whatever project goes forward, is that true? So it's like, I just wanna make sure I understand what's going on here in the list logistical minute by minute. So, um, tell me how this plays out with the 30 days and then it says that the DWR is not going to deny or permit anything. Um, what's the purpose then? Right. It

  5. Rep. Doug Owens55:52

     Does not give DNRA right to give a thumbs up or down to the project. They just weigh in 30 days after an application. So we're not trying to let them slow down a project. You know, it's gonna easily take longer than 30 days to get these projects licensed. So we're just warning the entity to apply for the, uh, DNRs input. And then DNR has 30 days to respond, and that should give ample time to the license, license applicator or the person applying for the license to then turn around and give that information to the licensing authority. So it's putting a timeline on DNR to hurry up and give that information and not slow down the, you know, the application process between the, the person who wants to build the facility and the local authority licensing it. So DNR can't say yes or no. They just describe, hey, what are the wildlife impacts that facility is gonna have?

  6. Rep. Nicholeen P. Peck56:45

     Okay. May if I may ask another, is that okay? Okay. Okay. Thank you. Um, so in fact, maybe I have two, sorry. Whoa, We're pushing it now. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay. You know, the life of a questioner. Okay. So anyway, um, currently can DWR approve or deny any applications that come in for projects based upon

  7. Rep. Doug Owens57:13

     My understanding is they do not have that authority and we just wanted to make clear we're not giving them that authority. We're just wanting them to weigh in and help the local licensing authority to have that wildlife information.

  8. Rep. Nicholeen P. Peck57:26

     Okay. Thank you. And then my final question promises this will be the final, um, you all heard it. That is, we had another bill earlier on in the session that we heard in this committee about how, um, solar panels and solar panel projects needed to not be on agricultural land. This bill, uh, I don't know. I'm wondering if it could conflict with that bill in any way as far as like, oh, it was like turning in something saying this is wild land, but do we know it's not agricultural wildland? I don't know. I'm just wondering if there's any kind of a problem there.

  9. Rep. Doug Owens58:12

     It's a great question that I think you're referring to HB 16, which belongs to the chairman. Um, and that is a much broader scope about what it impacts, but it does have a clause in there that talks about getting wildlife information, um, when you're doing a solar project. So I think it dovetails perfectly. This gives just a little more meat on the bones. That was a little more cryptic, a little shorter when it addressed the wildlife issue. It's go that bill covers lots of other, um, like tax credits and or things like that, tax incentives that may relate and ag land impacts. And so it's a lot broader, but then it does have a wildlife clause in there, wildlife impacts. So I think this dovetails perfectly and would probably require eventually a, a, uh, coordination clause between them, I think. But I don't think there's any conflict.

  10. Chair Jack59:04

      Okay. Thank you. And I can contribute just a little bit to clarify or to add on to what Representative Owen said is yes, HB 16 had a brief paragraph to, to consult on wildlife migration. This bill is much, uh, uh, wider and more specific. So in HB 16, uh, if that passes and this passes, then in HB 16 we'll refer in that consultation sentence to this section of code that would be created in this bill.

  11. Chair Jack (presiding)59:43

      Thank you. Alright. So, uh, thank you. So I have another question from Representative Shelley.

  12. Rep. Shelley59:51

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, just a, a question. So, I mean, I've been in some of these meetings where people come in and notify us what they're doing and our input probably doesn't make any difference. So if the DNR is notified, or Division of Wildlife Resources is notified and they were to, uh, post an objection to this, would their objection carry any weight?

  13. Rep. Doug Owens1:00:18

      Well, I don't think so. And representative, I don't think this invites 'em to do an objection or a, you know, a a thumbs up or down in any kind of, even a, what's the word? It, they clearly don't have the lawful authority to give it a thumbs up or down. I don't think it gives them, suggests that they should, you know, do it as a suggestion. Thumbs up or down? I think it's just saying, what, what are the wi please weigh in within 30 days on what the wildlife impacts may be. So we don't lose our hunting and fishing potential in the state over time without thinking about it. So I don't, I don't think it would have any weight. I think it gives the local authority, I mean, the local authority could already require it. It just, uh, that's the entity that is gonna ultimately license the facility. Whatever the municipal or county, uh, licensing authority, they're, they're the ones that are the, gonna give it a thumbs up or down, just gives them a little more data point to not have 'em accidentally, you know, erase some, some wildlife corridor that might be important or something just to not, not not to do accidental erasure of our wildlife heritage.

  14. Rep. Shelley1:01:23

      So, Mr. Chair, one more question, please.

  15. Chair Jack (presiding)1:01:25speaker not certain

      Oh my goodness. Go ahead. Here we go. It's a Friday, we got, it's a Friday time And you see the clock.

  16. Rep. Shelley1:01:33

      So if the, uh, division of Wildlife Resources is, is the, uh, entity here to protect the public's interest in hunting and they have a serious concern, why would that not carry any weight in this application process?

  17. Rep. Doug Owens1:01:50

      Well, it just doesn't have any legal weight. They would just do the report about what the wildlife impacts are and then the licensing entity could take that into account or not. So it's, it's just giving information to the decision maker about it. It doesn't, It doesn't Give the DNR ability to do a thumbs up or down.

  18. Unknown speaker1:02:10speaker not certain

      Uh, can, can I, can I help? Please? And I think if I, if I understand, so if I understand your question, so the licensing authority is the local authority, the county typically, 'cause these are in the county. So then this project will have consulted in detail according to this bill with the Division of Wildlife. And they will make comments and then the local authority will have those and they will make the decision, not the DNR.

  19. Rep. Shelley1:02:48

      Perfect. Thank you. That's, that clarifies it because I was wondering who the authority is.

  20. Unknown speaker1:02:55speaker not certain

      Is this Yeah, I I could hear what you were asking. Yes, Thank you. Sorry if I was not hearing you correctly representative.

  21. Chair Jack (presiding)1:03:02

      Thank you. Alright, seeing no other questions from the committee, we'll open up to the public. Is there anyone in the public who would like to speak? We have a hand please come forward. Uh, two. Was there two? Alright, so then we'll is a minute and a half Good for you. We'll need. Alright.

  22. Chelsea Duke, Division of Wildlife Resources1:03:26

      Right. Um, good afternoon, Mr. Chair and committee members. My name is Chelsea Duke. I am the Assistant section Chief of Habitat for the Division of Wildlife Resources. Um, I'm here to say that the Division of Wildlife Resources supports this bill and appreciates Representative Owens bringing it forward. We have in the Division of Wildlife Resources five regions, and each region has an impact analysis biologist that works on projects like this and providing recommendations to members of the public and industry when it comes to wildlife impacts. And so, um, we are willing and eager to provide that information. We also have generated a new tool that is free to the public called the Wildlife Habitat Analysis Tool, which makes this process even easier. So we are willing and ready to provide information to industry in a timely manner. We also appreciate that this bill is non not regulatory. Our role here is to share data and information about wildlife and, um, we're, we're supportive of this bill. I guess I did need the whole minute and a half. Thank you very much.

  23. Chair Jack (presiding)1:04:30

      No, that was just one minute. That was just the 32nd warning. Okay. Thank you. Just right. Thank, thank you. All right, we'll reset the timer and, uh, the, our next, uh, commenter, please come up and state your name and who you represent and we'll start.

  24. Kasey Lindstrom, Wildlands Network1:04:46

      Thank you so much. My name is Casey Lindstrom. I'm the Utah Project Manager with Wildlands Network and I'm here to speak in favor of this bill. Thank you to Representative Owens for bringing this bill forward. Utah can and should expand its renewable energy industry. Um, but where we cite these large scale renewable energy projects is really important. Um, this bill strengthens our planning process, our siting process, and our permitting process, um, and kind of gets ahead of this, um, and making sure that critical wildlife habitats, migration, corridors, winter range, are considered upfront, um, before any conflicts happen. Um, HB four 12 is a fantastic bill and, um, we're greatly in support of it, so thank you.

  25. Chair Jack (presiding)1:05:31

      All right. Thank you. Hey, that was very timely. All right. Are there any comments online? All right. Seeing no more comments in the room, none online, we'll close the public comment period and we'll come back to the committee for, uh, action. Alright, Representative Brooks.

  26. Rep. Brooks1:05:54

      Thank you Mr. Chair. I make the motion that we pass HP 412 energy development planning amends with a favorable recommendation.

  27. Chair Jack (presiding)1:06:03

      Okay. That, uh, motion is in order HP four 12 energy development planning amendments with a favorable recommendation. Any comments from the committee with regard to that motion? Seeing none, we'll bring it back to the bill sponsor for comments to the motion.

  28. Rep. Doug Owens1:06:23

      I, I only want to add, I should have pointed out that the DNR really is ahead of the curve on this kind of issue where they're doing a great job planning ahead, looking at where our corridors are. And, and I, I just think it's, uh, an issue whose time has come with our construction rates and growth that we not accidentally, um, damage our wildlife. Not inadvertently not even think about the issue of damaging wildlife habitat. So I hope we take a look at it and hope and, and I do want to commend DNR for being ahead. They've got this website, wildlife habitat analysis tool. It's, uh, ahead of the curve and they're gonna speed up these analyses going forward.

  29. Chair Jack (presiding)1:06:59

      Excellent. Thank you, Representative Owens back to Representative Brooks for any comments maker of the motion. Thank

  30. Rep. Brooks1:07:06

      You. This is actually a super bill. You know, good deci good information, drives good decisions, and I think that you've done a great job. Thank you.

  31. Chair Jack (presiding)1:07:13

      All right, so then we'll bring it back to the committee for a vote. All. Oh, we're voting on passing out with a favorable recommendation HB four 12 Energy development planning amendments. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed, say nay. All right. The chair rules that passes out, uh, unanimously and having heard it unanimous with only positive public comments. Uh, Representative Shelley,

  32. Rep. Shelley1:07:44

      did you have a follow up motion? I would Like to make a motion. We move it on to consent.

  33. Chair Jack (presiding)1:07:49

      All right. That motion is in order. Uh, any comments from the committee to that motion? Uh, okay. So seeing no comments other than a thumbs up? All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right, then, uh, we will move this to the consent agenda if he was in favor. Are you in favor? I saw two thumbs up there. All right. So does anybody wanna stay and talk more? I can give an extra lecture. Okay. Motion to adjourn. Non debatable. Happy weekend. All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you. Aye. I'm gonna go do a bill and another perfect. Nobody ever wants to hear my lecture. I.

• Feb 11, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (5 turns)

  1. Clerk (reading bill)11:31

     House bill four 12 energy development planning amendments by Representative Owens. This bill was heard in public utilities and energy with a vote of 8 0 4.

  2. Speaker (presiding)11:43

     Thank you, Madam Reading. Clerk, these bills, uh, or let, sorry.

  3. Speaker (presiding)11:46

     Let's go to Representative Owens. No, um, representative Daley Provo.

  4. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost11:52

     Motion to Circle Thank you, representative.

  5. Speaker (presiding)11:54

     We'll go ahead and place the motion to motion before us the house Circle P four 12. All in favor say aye. A. Any opposed? Will that motion passes. The bill's been circled, Madam Reading Clerk

• Feb 19, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (6 turns)

  1. Rep. Doug Owens1:22:01

     Representative Owens.

  2. Rep. Doug Owens1:22:02

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, this bill is for you if you like wildlife either hunting, trapping, or cuddling with it. This relates to solar and wind projects, which tend to have large footprints and can really impact wildlife, either migration corridors or occupying winter range and other issues they can cause. And so the way this bill works is that if you're a proponent of such a, a wind or solar project, that you consult with the Division of Wildlife Resources as part of your licensing process. And, uh, DWR responds within 30 days with, uh, some, uh, information about the wildlife impacts of your project. And then that information goes to the licensing authority. We're not giving any licensing authority to the Division of Wildlife Resources. Uh, but it, that information is then made available to the local licensing authority. So it just helps us not accidentally, uh, cause unintended negative impacts to wildlife. And, uh, that concludes my presentation, Ms. Speaker.

  3. Speaker (presiding)1:23:08

     Thank you Representative Owens discussion to the bill Representative Jack.

  4. Rep. Jack1:23:14

     Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro tem. I would rise to support this bill. Uh, this, this bill dovetails very nicely with the HB 16 that we passed out of this body earlier and is on the consent calendar or the concurrence calendar for tomorrow. In, in that bill, I had three lines to say we should, a developer should consult with these wildlife Division of Wildlife. This bill has given flesh to those bones, and I think this is very helpful and will give the, the governing bodies, typically the counties much better information to work with. Thank you.

  5. Speaker (presiding)1:23:57

     Thank you, Representative Jack Ger. Discussion to the bill. See none, Representative Owens for summation. I'll waive. Thank you. Commission is waived.

  6. Speaker (presiding)1:24:07

     Voting is open on house Bill four 12, seeing all present, having voted voting will be closed house bill four 12 having received 70 yay votes and one nay vote passes the house and will be transmitted to the Senate for further consideration. The matter meeting clerk

• Feb 26, 2026 Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (18 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)58:48

     next item, we'll go on the agenda here is item two, energy development planning amendments. Representative Owens, welcome to our committee. Good

  2. Rep. Doug Owens58:58

     Morning, Mr. Chair and committee members. Um, thanks for hearing this today. Um, the bill, uh, this bill says that when you're doing a new, uh, solar or wind project that you, uh, the, the issue is that we know those can impact wildlife, uh, migration corridors and winter ranges in particular, they've got large footprints. And so when you're a proponent, the way this bill would work is if you're proposing such a project that you consult with the Division of Wildlife Resources, and then Wildlife Resources has 30 days to collect, uh, the wildlife impacts of your project and transmit that to the licensing authority so that when that license is considered, the, uh, typically it'd be a county would have that wildlife impact information before it when it makes that licensing decision. So it kind of, it is aimed at ensuring that we don't accidentally erase some wildlife resource. And, um, wind and solar farms tend to be in winter ranges down in valley bottoms or migration corridors through valley bottoms. So that's the point of doing this. We're not giving any licensing authority to the division of Wildlife Resources that's still gonna rest where it would naturally already rest with the county or potentially a municipality. But, um, we, and then the, we are, we're not trying to slow the project down because DWR has to respond within 30 days. And I hope they'll make a comment here today. They already have some wonderful tools available where they're, this information is not something they usually have to go generate, um, from scratch. It's usually stuff they already are well apprised of. And so it's just trying to facilitate that discussion and, uh, that essentially, yeah, that will conclude my presentation. Thank you. Great.

  3. Committee chair (presiding)1:00:50

     Thank you, representative. Let me bring it to the committee for any clarifying questions. Senator Blouin,

  4. Sen. Nate Blouin1:00:56

     Thank you. Thank you to the sponsor. I think this is a good direction. Uh, I do wonder, you know, could you discuss why we are not doing this with all forms of energy development? I, I think a couple of reasons. You know, if it was up to me, I think I would like to cover other forms of energy development. I think this is the most critical, from what I understood, talking to wildlife advocates because the other forms of energy are not the ones that are growing as fast, and they typically aren't occupying the big footprints in valley bottoms where it's winter range or corridors. Um, and, uh, but if it was up to me, we would, in fact, I had another bill that, uh, I ran about municipal planning. I thought our cities ought to plan wildlife impacts it. I couldn't get the support of the home builders on that. You know, I, I recently, I just want to see us, uh, as Utah grows so rapidly and intensifies the, I just don't wanna lose our wildlife heritage. And so this is a piece that I think is politically achievable and actually has some impact because these, these large developments are, are having an impact on wildlife. But to me, I'd, I'd like to assess all our activity for impacts. I, I recently was in, sorry for the philosophy, but it was recently in Austria looking at the Alps range. And this, that range is so big, it has seven enormous rivers that come out of it and water all of a continent, Europe. And they don't have any animal in the, that range bigger than a one of these tiny little shammy goats. They got no predators they got, and I like having a heritage in the wild West here where we have almost a, a fully intact wildlife chain. So anyway, philosophically I'd like to assess all our human impact. This is a piece that I thought was, was kind of the low hanging fruit and where we could go.

  5. Committee chair (presiding)1:02:46

     Thank you. Appreciate that.

  6. Unknown speaker1:02:47speaker not certain

     And, uh, yeah, I would encourage us to, to consider all the impacts when we're looking at energy development, because certainly we've, uh, cut regulations in so many spaces that are gonna, uh, encourage other industries to, uh, probably harm many of these same species we're trying to protect here with, uh, with the good stewards and the clean energy industry.

  7. Committee chair (presiding)1:03:07

     Thank you, Senator. Um, lemme go to Senator Hinkins.

  8. Sen. David P. Hinkins1:03:10speaker not certain

     I I'm good. I was just, okay, we'll come back to you in a little bit.

  9. Sen. David P. Hinkins1:03:15speaker not certain

     I, uh, Senator, I went or representative Uintah a development, uh, in Lehi this past year to look at what they're doing, a large development out there solar, and asked this very question, um, what is there any thought? And I was pleased to hear that they had actually designed some routes through that, didn't have it all blocked off. They had access routes through for migration. So I appreciate what you're doing here and, and just with the little forethought, those things can be put in, but not everybody does that. So I think it's important. Was that an energy development? Yeah, solar energy. Yeah. And, and right near there, Eagle Mountain has left a migration corridor right through town. It works as a park, it works to enhance property values. Like I think this is a, a value that whose time has come. Yeah, I appreciate that. You know, you don't, uh, give them wildlife authority to stop a project, but they can have weigh in on, um, some ideas that would help enhance it.

  10. Committee chair (presiding)1:04:16

      Yeah. So thank you. I'm not saying any other questions. I open it to the, uh, public. Is there anyone here came to speak to this bill? Yep, we have. Come on up. Director.

  11. Justin Shannon, Deputy Director, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources1:04:33

      Hi again. I'm Justin Shannon with the Utah Division Wildlife Resources. We want to thank the sponsor for running this bill. The, we're well equipped to handle this right now. We have what we call mitigation biologist in every region in our habitat section. And they, they help with this. Um, and we also put together something called a wildlife habitat assessment tool. It's an online, um, resource that people that are getting into this space and energy development, they can use it and, um, better understand the impacts. And I, I really like that this isn't regulatory in nature, that it's, we're just providing the best practices to, to help wildlife. And, and there are impacts. Um, when you look at these wind farms, they're good. We need energy and they can harm bats, they can harm birds, they can do some of that. Solar has a big imprint. And so just being able to have the discussion and offer up the suggestions on, on how to do this in a way that helps wildlife, I think is, is wise as we grow as a state and try to meet our energy needs and, um, our supportive. Thank you.

  12. Committee chair (presiding)1:05:35

      Great. Thank you, director. Thanks. Appreciate that, uh, insight. Anyone else in the public would like to speak to the bill? Sure. Come on up. Just please introduce yourself and if you represent any group or just yourself.

  13. Kasey Lindstrom, Utah Project Manager, Wildlands Network1:05:49

      Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members. Um, my name is Casey Lynn Linstrom. I'm representing Wildlands Network in support of HB four 12. I'll be brief. Um, we're in very much in support of this bill and we thank the sponsor for bringing it forward. Um, this bill, um, really streamlines the planning process and supports and strengthens it with early consultation with DWR. Um, you know, right now, um, currently, uh, renewable energy developers are only required to consider federally listed species. Um, but some of you know the species that Utahans value so much are, um, you know, big game like mule deer, elk, pronghorn. Um, and so this important consultation will, will we'll make sure that, um, we're considering these, these wildlife species, um, and their migration corridors early in the permitting process. Thank you.

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

      Great. Thank you. Appreciate your participation. Anyone else in the public going online? Okay, I'm gonna close public comment. Bring it then back to the committee for further action or clarification. Senator Blouin, go ahead.

  15. Sen. Nate Blouin1:07:09

      Let's see, what's the bill number on this? Four 12 HB four 12. Uh, I'll make a motion to favorably recommend HB four 12 to the full Senate.

  16. Committee chair (presiding)1:07:16

      Thank you Senator Motions in order, uh, the motion is we pass out favorably house Bill four 12. There are discussion to the motion. Uh, say any, I'll come back to you for summation. Waive waive Senator Waive wa I'll place the motion. All in favor of passing out house bill four 12 Energy development planning amendments indicate by saying aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? If any say nay. I rule it passes unanimously. Thank. Thank you, representative. Representative.

  17. Unknown speaker1:07:45speaker not certain

      I have a, uh, Jonathan came and switched it out for you. Oh, we switched it out already for us. Okay. You know how we get mixed up? D Owens and d Owens that happened this morning. We got 'em straight. Now, as I always say, Mr. Chair, I like being mixed up for you, even though it makes you nervous to Be mixed up.

  18. Committee chair (presiding)1:08:05

      Feelings are mutual. Thank you, representative.

• Mar 5, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (15 turns)

  1. Sen. Derrin R. Owens1:34:32

     And with that brings a little bit of conflict. And so what this bill does is it requires consultation with the Division of Wildlife Resources as part, part of a local, uh, government approval, uh, for utility set scale, solar, wind power plants. And, and this will, doesn't give the Division of Wildlife Resources, the ability licensing authority. They can't, uh, shut a project down, but they can consult with the energy developers so that they don't disrupt habitat, uh, corridors or, you know, where the animals might be moving through in the winter times. Um, so it, it's a wise move forward and, uh, and what they can do is the wildlife resources will come back and get plans. So let's say you had a 10,000, 5,000 acre solar field, you would leave, um, some corridors, lanes in between there, fenced in so the animals would still be able to, to move through their migratory paths. That's the main part, uh, that the bill does. And, uh, just applies to solar plants that are building up to 10 megawatts, uh, or wind power. And, uh, with the, with the wind power, of course, there you take into account the birds and the flight path and migration path. So this is a consulting with Wildlife resources. What the bill does, I'd be open to questions President,

  2. President Adams (presiding)1:36:05

     Say no questions. Senator Owens, I'm gonna go to you for a motion.

  3. Sen. Derrin R. Owens1:36:10

     A president, I failed to move a substitute, so if it's

  4. President Adams (presiding)1:36:18

     I wondered about that. Go ahead.

  5. Sen. Derrin R. Owens1:36:19

     Okay. I would move to delete Title Body House bill four 12 and replace it with first substitute House bill four 12.

  6. President Adams (presiding)1:36:29

     That motion's in order. I see it online. In your name. Do we have, uh, any explanation the motion to sub That puts in the cooperating agreement with the Wildlife Resources?

  7. President Adams (presiding)1:36:41

     Thank you. All in favor of the motion to substitute, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will let motion passes. Any further presentation on the bill?

  8. Sen. Derrin R. Owens1:36:51

     No. President, I would call a question

  9. President Adams (presiding)1:36:52

     Looking for, well, lemme look for any further discussion now. We subject say none. Going to you for that motion.

  10. Sen. Derrin R. Owens1:36:58

      Thank you President call a question.

  11. President Adams (presiding)1:37:00

      Thank you. And the question is, under suspension of the rules shall first subject to house Bill four 12 pass, roll call vote.

  12. Unknown speaker (roll call)1:37:08

      Senator Vickers. Baldy Aye. Lein Aye. Brammer bus? Aye. Comore. Escamilla Fillmore Aye. Grover Harper Aye. Kins Aye. Ipson Aye. Johnson Aye. Quan Aye. McKay? Aye. Mikel Aye. Milner Aye. Mussman Owens Aye. Pitcher Plum re Aye. Sandal Stevenson Aye. Stratton? Yes. Vickers. Miler Aye. Wilson Winterton Aye. President Adams Aye.

  13. President Adams (presiding)1:38:10

      First substitute house Bill four 12. Having received 23 a votes, zero nay votes, six being absent passes, his body will be returned to the house for the signature of the speaker.

  14. President Adams (presiding)1:38:24

      Senator, oh, let's go up. Next Bill up is second substitute house bill 3 0 3. Second Substitute house Bill 3 0 3. Family Court Amendments. Senator Mikel. Senator Mikel.

  15. Sen. Michael K. McKell1:38:36

      Thank you. I moved to DeLeT and Body entitled, uh, second substitute House bill 3 0 3 and replace it with third substitute.

• Mar 6, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (4 turns)

  1. Floor clerk25:07

     First substitute House bill four 12 Energy Development and planning amendments by Representative Owens.

  2. Speaker (presiding)25:13

     Representative Owens. Motion

  3. Rep. Doug Owens25:15

     To Concur and Senate Amendments. That motion is in other, would like to speak to it briefly. It's, uh, added a coordinating clause and another clause to make sure we weren't accidentally covering small farmers, uh, electrifying their irrigation systems. Thank you Mr. Speaker.

  4. Speaker (presiding)25:30

     Thank you Representative Owens Discussion to the motion to concur with the Senate amendments on first substitute HP four 12. Seeing none, we'll go ahead and place the motion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule that motion passes Voting will now be open on final passage on first substitute vote quickly. Representatives seeing all present having voted voting is now closed for substitute HB four 12 passes his body with 64 yes votes zero no votes will be sent to the Senate for the signature of the President matter meeting clerk.