H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments

What this bill does

The bill would add two items to the conflict of interest disclosure that candidates, incumbents, and appointees file each year: unresolved tax liens of more than $500 that are at least two years old, and certain criminal convictions. Disclosing these items would not disqualify anyone, and filers would have space to explain them.

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

• 10 yes, 0 no, 2 absentHouse Government Operations Committee: Amendment Recommendation · Feb 13, 2026Who voted how
• 7 yes, 3 no, 2 absentHouse Government Operations Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 13, 2026Who voted how
• 27 yes, 37 no, 11 absentHouse vote, which failed · Feb 23, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Feb 13, 2026 House Government Operations Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (36 turns)

  1. Committee chair48:09

     Okay, representative, you're, you're up.

  2. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton48:12

     Okay, great. Thank you. Um, yeah, we're still talking about this, but this is HB 4 46 and it's about our conflict of interest. Of course. Um, currently in Utah, of course, we all file every year we have to file our disclosures. Um, and that will of course continue. But this would add two items to disclose. One would be tax liens that are unresolved. Um, and, and I am anyway, so we're, that's one thing we were just talking about. This could be from federal or state, um, and from any state. And then convictions for criminal convictions from any state, again, or of course, federal. Um, not to include traffic violations, juvenile convictions when one was a juvenile or anything that has been expunged. So, um, that's what this would do. And the purpose for it is to preserve the integrity of people serving in elected office. This includes appointees and, um, just comes from a place of believing that voters need to know, um, who they're voting for. And there's been some recent issues with this, um, on the federal level, and I thought, oh, it's just a federal problem. But no, we've actually encountered this even with state candidates, um, for various offices. So it seemed to me, and, and, and in some ways, um, we don't know very much about other than what we see on a flyer about people who are running for office. So that's where this came from. And with that, I am open for questions.

  3. Committee chair49:54

     Wonderful. Thank you. Uh, we have some questions for you, Representative MacPherson.

  4. Rep. Matt MacPherson50:01

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. And, uh, thank you representative for talking with me about this. And just kinda walk through the, the one concern I have is on the, um, the, the tax lien issue is, um, for someone that may operate multiple businesses across multiple states, um, when there's several jurisdictions, sometimes city, county, state involved. And, uh, there's a lot of sometimes, um, fee and other type issues that come in on a constant basis that sometimes, uh, jurisdictions submit those with a lien in advance, um, before they're resolved. And, uh, I guess I was wondering if you might be open to the idea of potentially amending this to look at only unresolved, uh, tax liens that have been placed for maybe a period of time rather than, um, just from the incident they're put in. 'cause I, I worry about the, I guess the question is, how would a, a candidate that is in that situation respond if there's on a monthly or every other month basis a notice they may come in from some other state. Are they gonna have to update their disclosures constantly throughout a year? I'm just curious if, if you open to that or discussing that.

  5. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton51:13

     I think that's a really good point. Um, and so I would be amenable to an amendment that would say something like a lingering unresolved, you know, that has en endured for a period of maybe even five years or something that is still Unresolved. Uh, just much shorter, but Even Shorter, maybe 12 months or something, I think would be plenty of time to resolve those kind of issues. But I'm just, uh, I, I'm open to discussing that when it comes time for motion action,

  6. Rep. Matt MacPherson51:43

     but I just wanted to get your Feedback. Yeah, but I think that's a good suggestion because I do know that, you know, entities get it wrong too, and you may, and you're just Yeah. And how would you update Yeah, midyear con, you know, continuously with businesses and so forth. Thank you. So Good, good suggestion. Thanks.

  7. Committee chair52:01

     Thank you. And, uh, Representative Cutler, go ahead.

  8. Rep. Paul A. Cutler52:06

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to clarify and confirm the intent is that anybody who files a conflict of interest disclosure would, uh, answer these questions and it would be added to every, uh, uh, person that, that is required to file a conflict of interest disclosure.

  9. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton52:24

     Yes. As they file.

  10. Rep. Paul A. Cutler52:26

      So anyone who's currently midterm, you know, we are never midterm 'cause we're every two years. But, um, then they would, well I guess we all file annually anyway, so Yeah, they would file annually, right? We, we,

  11. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton52:40

      We file annually and there are others that are not elected, but appointed officials that are also required to, uh, disclose on a, on a regular basis. So Yes, anytime that that form is filled out, they would need to disclose.

  12. Committee chair52:59

      Okay. Thank you. Are there any other questions from the committee? Alright, then, uh, we'll, oh wait. Oh, you got one. There you go. Representative Loubet.

  13. Rep. Anthony E. Loubet53:12

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, curious on the tax lien. So in the event somebody has a tax lien on their property, but they're not aware of it, um, I know that happens from time to time where somebody doesn't know until they go to sell their house and they realize, realized that somebody had filed a lien on the property. Um, what's the, what's the effect on this if somebody had not disclosed, uh, that there was an unresolved tax lien because they weren't aware of it?

  14. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton53:37

      Boy, that, that is, I had not heard of that situation. That's a really good question. If you're unaware. Um, that's a really good question. These tax liens are becoming a problem, aren't they? But, um, I mean, I just feel like we need to know, especially since we are the appropriators, you know, at least in the legislative office, um, and actually city councils and so forth, um, we need to know if they are responsible, you know, paying their own taxes, I suppose is where the, the origin of the idea was. But, um, I, I think we could maybe in the same sub or whatever make it so that, you know, if you're aware of, if you've been notified of a tax lien, we could make that clear, underline that.

  15. Rep. Anthony E. Loubet54:29

      Do you know what the consequences if somebody fails to disclose like an unresolved tax lien or for like forgets to or doesn't disclose like convictions and stuff like that?

  16. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton54:39

      There is, um, built in, did my attorney leave? Okay. Um, there is built into the, um, to the code already penalties for failure to disclose. Okay. So I'm not sure what those are, but I think, I think it may even be covered within the, the bill here in, in these pages.

  17. Rep. Anthony E. Loubet54:59speaker not certain

      Okay. So Yeah, I was looking at, I wasn't a hundred percent sure, but that's okay. Um, There are some penalties definitely. Okay. For failing to now that may be just for not filing and I can't remember what they are, but, um, but I know that there are penalties. Let's see. I'm sorry, I dunno, exactly, but I wouldn't, I wasn't changing the penalty. Okay. I wasn't changing it from whatever it currently is where it's Okay. Mm-hmm. Alright. Well thank you Mr. Chair. You know, I'm not always a fan of you attorneys, but sometimes you ask interesting questions.

  18. Committee chair55:32

      Appreciate that. Are there any other questions from members of the committee? All right. Are there any, uh, members of the public who'd like to speak to this bill online? We have Seth Stewart. So Seth, you've been with us before. If you'd, uh, unmute your micro or your, uh, turn on your camera, unmute yourself, tell us who you are and who you represent. We're gonna give you two minutes.

  19. Seth Stewart, American Fork56:04

      Great. Thank you. Yeah, my name is Seth Stewart. I'm representing myself. I'm from American Fork. Um, I, I have concerns about this bill because it imposes additional barriers to entry for running for public office, uh, that have a, a real fiscal impact on the campaign spending question. Um, I will just say I have little or no doubt in the ability of political opponents to dig up dirt on people that they don't want to have competing for them, uh, with them for office. Uh, but this would force disclosure of things that are potentially immaterial, uh, to the question of running for public office. And in instances where it might be related to their candidacy, their bid for office, um, there they could have been convicted, wrongfully convicted over, um, a a bad law that they would like to challenge. I don't think we want to place impediments to people rising to public office on, on the public's vote, uh, who are running on a platform of repealing excessive and overbearing laws. Uh, and so I just have questions and concerns about that of would we be, uh, imposing this impediment on people if they have some kind of dispute with the IRS that's unresolved or some misdemeanor in the past. Um, there's, there's just, I, I don't know. It seems, seems like it's a kind of a, a, the practical effect of it to me appears to be a dig up dirt on, on political opponents kind of a bill. Um, and I mean, laws and regulations, if they're ever selectively enforced or weaponized like agencies sometimes are, uh, I would just urge uh, taking a step back here because, you know, how often do we actually have agencies that are, uh, entangling people with these encumbrances and disputes and so on, uh, or charging people with frivolous laws. I, i, I don't think that should be a barrier to entry. Alright. So urge you to pose this bill. Thank you.

  20. Committee chair58:00

      Thank you. Alright. There's no more online and no one in the room would like to speak to this. So we're gonna bring this bill back to the committee. And, uh, your Honor, on Verson, am I right?

  21. Rep. Matt MacPherson58:22

      Yeah. Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, yeah, I'd like to make a motion to amend on line 3 0 5. Um, the amendment would read starting at the very beginning for each tax lien unresolved for more than two years. And that would replace for each unresolved tax lien. So it would read for each tax lien unresolved for more than two years for which the regulated office holder is personally liable or that encumbers real property in which the regulated office holder holds an ownership interest.

  22. Committee chair59:06

      And if I could speak to that, if we've got that. Yes, please. Go ahead. Um,

  23. Rep. Matt MacPherson59:11

      I think my primary concern here is just the practicality of, again, dealing with the, especially, uh, when you're operating in multiple states, that there's, there's sometimes, uh, uh, a lot of these issues that come and go. And most of them are typically just resolved quickly. There may be some concern, I think that Representative Loubet brought up as far as the, the knowing aspect of it that I think, um, we might wanna wordsmith as well. But I think that this, this helps provide some protections already there, um, for the party. But, um, maybe it's something we can keep working on. I would, I, um, curious if, uh, the sponsor and the committee would support that change.

  24. Committee chair59:53

      We'll ask the sponsor would like to respond to that.

  25. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton59:56

      I would, I would support that change. I think it's a good change. Thank you. Alright,

  26. Committee chair1:00:01

      Thank you. And, uh, any members of the committee wanna speak to that? Thank you. Alright. I don't see any, so this is the, the, I I'm gonna restate the motion. The motion is that line 3 0 5 be amended to say so, uh, k for each tax lien unresolved for more than two years for which the office holder, uh, for which the regulated office holder is, is that correct? That's

  27. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton1:00:29

      Correct.

  28. Committee chair1:00:34

      Alright. Alright. So we're gonna take a voice vote on that. Uh, all in favor of, uh, this motion say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Alright. So we are now looking at an amended, an amended bill.

  29. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:00:54

      Mr. Chair, I'd continue if you'd like. Yes, go

  30. Committee chair1:00:56

      Ahead. Um,

  31. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:00:57

      I'd, uh, make a motion we pass out favorably HB 4 46 as amended.

  32. Committee chair1:01:07

      Would you like to speak to that? I think I

  33. Rep. Matt MacPherson1:01:09

      Already did. I think you're done. We're good.

  34. Committee chair1:01:10

      Okay. Perfect. End of the sponsor.

  35. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton1:01:13

      Um, I would appreciate, I appreciate that motion. And I wanted to make a response to the online caller that, um, there will be space also on the form, um, for explanation for anything that is, um, that they do disclose, for example, a conviction or something of that nature. They can explain online. And sometimes, you know, people have been elected, of course, um, despite some, um, convictions and so forth. And so it's, um, and, and I don't see it at all as an opportunity to dig up dirt, but rather to disclose and, and, um, I just, I think that's good for public, um, public information for voters to know. But I do appreciate this motion and thank you.

  36. Committee chair1:02:01

      Thank you. I, I, I asked for the sponsor to, to, to respond and maybe there would've been a may could have been a question from anybody on the committee. I don't see any. Oh, all So the motion before us is that we favorably recommend HB 4 46 conflict of interest disclosure amendments as amended. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. No. All right. So we have three, uh, Stoddard Hayes and Representative Romero. Seven. Everyone was seven. So seven to three. So seven to three? Mm-hmm. All right. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So Representative Dominguez, if you'd like

• Feb 23, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (27 turns)

  1. Reading clerk11:58

     House Bill 4 46. Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments by Representative Acton. This bill was serving government operations with the vote of 7 3 2.

  2. Speaker pro tem (presiding)12:10

     Representative Acton.

  3. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton12:13

     Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tim Motion to adopt.

  4. Speaker pro tem (presiding)12:16

     First substitute of HB 4 46. Motion is to adopt first substitute house bill 4 46. That's in order. Would you like to speak to it?

  5. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton12:25

     Yes. The original bill said that, um, it would, you would disclose any unresolved tax lien, but this extends that. I mean, it makes it so that the tax lien must, um, be of at least $500 and it must, um, it must be disclosed if it's unresolved after at least two years.

  6. Speaker pro tem (presiding)12:47

     Thank you Representative Acton. The motion is to adopt first substitute house bill 4 46. Discussion to the motion. See none Representative Acton for summation.

  7. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton12:58

     Um, that was all for the sub

  8. Speaker pro tem (presiding)13:00speaker not certain

     Summation on the sub.

  9. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton13:02

     Okay, thank you. I'll place a motion to adopt first substitute house bill 4 46.

  10. Speaker pro tem (presiding)13:06

      All in favor say aye. Aye. I Opposed say no. Motion carries. The substitute is adopted Representative into the bill.

  11. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton13:14

      Okay. Um, well, currently, as we all know, we file a conflict of interest disclosure annually and that will continue of course. Um, and at, um, let's see. So this is for candidates for office incumbents and office and appointees as well, and that's as it has always been, but, or at least as long as I know. But this bill adds two items to the disclosure. Any unresolved tax liens, as I said, that are more than $500 and are at least two years old. Um, and then any criminal convictions, unless that conviction has been expunged or it happened as a juvenile or it was traffic related or a very minor class, um, class C misdemeanor. So, um, tax liens and criminal convictions would be disclosed, but that is not disqualifying. And in fact there will be space to explain, um, the circumstances or whatever anyone would like to explain about those if they need to. Um, so why the reasons for this bill? It's a voter information bill. Really, other than what we receive in flyers and so forth, we don't know much about the candidates for office and a voter shouldn't have to conduct a, an actual background check on every candidate on their, um, ballot. And, um, as appropriators, you know, we should be demonstrating that we follow, we're compliant with tax laws and state and federal laws as well. And in office we're often given access to, um, schools, to secure locations. The prison bank vaults, um, occasionally, you know, just being in office. Sometimes we have access to places. It also promotes public confidence in elected officials. And, um, you know, in the private sector and even in state jobs, most state jobs, if not all, require a very extensive background check. So I'm not proposing that we require background checks, but that these two self-disclosure provisions are in this bill. And with that Mr. Speaker pro tem, I'm open for questions.

  12. Speaker pro tem (presiding)15:31

      Thank you Representative Acton discussion to the bill Representative Thurston.

  13. Rep. Rob Bishop15:37speaker not certain

      Thank you, Mr. Speaker ProAm, will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Will The sponsor yield to a series of questions?

  14. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton15:43

      Yes, I, yes, I'll ahead.

  15. Rep. Thomas Thurston15:45

      Uh, so my first question is, um, conflict of interest usually, uh, in the world that I live in, a conflict of interest means that my action as a legislator might benefit me personally, financially, or a member of my family in some way. Um, could you explain how, um, tax liens and criminal records are conflicts of interest,

  16. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton16:10

      Mr. Speaker? I would say that the case could be made that they could be a conflict of interest. However, I would actually prefer to call the form disclosure rather than conflict of interest disclosure, candidate disclosure or public office disclosure or something else. But it is called a conflict of interest disclosure.

  17. Rep. Norman K Thurston16:31

      Um, my second question is, it would seem to me that the things that you're asking to be disclosed are already matters of public record. Is there a circumstance in which they wouldn't be matters of public record?

  18. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton16:46

      Um, Mr. Speaker? Yes. Well, no. Okay. You're correct. They are matters of public record. However, there are firewalls basically to accessing that information. We're currently working in some other bills on resolving some of these transparency issues with the courts, but it's very difficult and fees are usually involved to ascertain anyone's criminal history. Um, anyone's, um, tax history. I mean, we don't need details on those things. This is just self-disclosure for anything that's unresolved and so forth or un expunged. But, um, no, you're correct. These are public records and that's one reason that disclosure should not be, um, too off-putting for anyone. Most people would already have resolved these issues before seeking public office or appointment, but, um, this way the, the voter will know.

  19. Rep. Norman K Thurston17:48

      Thank you Mr. Speaker. My last question is, um, does the fact that somebody has a tax lien inherently signal something bad about them? A moral failure or lack of judgment or something like that is, is a tax lien necessarily mean a black mark against them?

  20. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton18:08

      Mr. Speaker, as I divulge today in a chamber meeting, um, I myself had a tax lien for quite a long time as we were working through the bureaucracy and we thought we had resolved it, it was like for $28. So no, I would say that it does not, um, reflect any sort of character flaw. Um, this would just be informational for the voter, but this specifies that the tax lien must exceed $500 and it must be unresolved after a period of at least two years. So it does give the person at least two years to resolve the tax lien. And then even additionally, it gives them space to explain like, this is still being worked out with the state or, and this could also be from out of state.

  21. Rep. Norman K Thurston18:59

      Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, I have a lot of pause about this bill because I, I think we're conflating a lot of things. We're conflating conflict of interest, which is inherent to the nature of our business with potentially requiring people to disclose prejudicial information, information that may be misinterpreted or misused by, um, campaigns against each other and, and claiming, oh, this person's not a fit candidate because they have an unresolved tax lien that's not even their fault. Or that they had a criminal record 30 years ago or 40 years ago. And assuming that there are some, I think the things that we're being asked to disclose in this bill, first of all, could also be discovered through public information. Somebody that really cared, could go find out. And second of all, that they're, it's just prejudicial. It just makes the person look bad, even if they're not bad. And so I'm concerned that we're requiring people to self incriminate in a way that's just really not fair. So I just have some concerns. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

  22. Speaker pro tem (presiding)20:03

      Thank you, Representative Thurston. Further discussion Representative Cutler.

  23. Rep. Paul A. Cutler20:09

      Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. I wanna stand in support of this bill. I believe that, uh, when people have more information, they can make good decisions. I support more disclosure. We're in a period of time where there is a distrust in government, and I believe, uh, additional more disclosure helps improve trust and help people make good decisions. So I am, uh, in, in favor of this. Thank you.

  24. Speaker pro tem (presiding)20:35

      Thank you, Representative Cutler. Further discussion to the bill. Seeing none, Representative Acton for summation.

  25. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton20:44

      Thank you, Mr. Speaker ProAm. Well, as, um, one of my colleagues already stated, this information is already available publicly, however, it is hard to access. It does have a cost and it's also very difficult to find. So, um, that's why we ask, we would ask them to, to disclose. Um, and, and the other commenter was also correct that there's a, it's a time right now where there's a lot of distrust in public officials. Um, and I think it would be, it would be beneficial if we could say there is some sort of, you know, disclosure requirement. This bill supports transparency and the public interest and the integrity of serving in public office, and I would appreciate your support. Thanks.

  26. Speaker pro tem (presiding)21:36

      Thank you. Representative Acton voting is open on first substitute house before four six. Conflict of interest disclosure amendments seen all present, having voted voting will be closed. First substitute house bill 4 46, having received 27 yay votes and 37 nay votes fails to pass this body and will be referred to staff for filing.

  27. Speaker pro tem (presiding)22:58speaker not certain

      Madam Reading Clerk

• Feb 23, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (21 turns)

  1. Speaker pro tem (presiding)12:20

     Motion is to adopt first substitute house bill 4 46. That's in order. Would you like to speak to it?

  2. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton12:25

     Yes. The original bill said that, um, it would, you would disclose any unresolved tax lien, but this extends that. I mean, it makes it so that the tax lien must, um, be of at least $500 and it must, um, it must be disclosed if it's unresolved after at least two years.

  3. Speaker pro tem (presiding)12:47

     Thank you Representative Acton. The motion is to adopt first substitute house bill 4 46. Discussion to the motion. See none Representative Acton for summation.

  4. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton12:58

     Um, that was all for the sub Summation on the sub. Okay, thank you. I'll place a motion to adopt first substitute house bill 4 46.

  5. Speaker pro tem (presiding)13:06

     All in favor say aye. Aye. I Opposed say no. Motion carries. The substitute is adopted Representative into the bill.

  6. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton13:14

     Okay. Um, well, currently, as we all know, we file a conflict of interest disclosure annually and that will continue of course. Um, and at, um, let's see. So this is for candidates for office incumbents and office and appointees as well, and that's as it has always been, but, or at least as long as I know. But this bill adds two items to the disclosure. Any unresolved tax liens, as I said, that are more than $500 and are at least two years old. Um, and then any criminal convictions, unless that conviction has been expunged or it happened as a juvenile or it was traffic related or a very minor class, um, class C misdemeanor. So, um, tax liens and criminal convictions would be disclosed, but that is not disqualifying. And in fact there will be space to explain, um, the circumstances or whatever anyone would like to explain about those if they need to. Um, so why the reasons for this bill? It's a voter information bill. Really, other than what we receive in flyers and so forth, we don't know much about the candidates for office and a voter shouldn't have to conduct a, an actual background check on every candidate on their, um, ballot. And, um, as appropriators, you know, we should be demonstrating that we follow, we're compliant with tax laws and state and federal laws as well. And in office we're often given access to, um, schools, to secure locations. The prison bank vaults, um, occasionally, you know, just being in office. Sometimes we have access to places. It also promotes public confidence in elected officials. And, um, you know, in the private sector and even in state jobs, most state jobs, if not all, require a very extensive background check. So I'm not proposing that we require background checks, but that these two self-disclosure provisions are in this bill. And with that Mr. Speaker pro tem, I'm open for questions.

  7. Speaker pro tem (presiding)15:31

     Thank you Representative Acton discussion to the bill Representative Thurston.

  8. Rep. Norman K Thurston15:37

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker ProAm, will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Will The sponsor yield to a series of questions?

  9. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton15:43

     Yes, I, yes, I'll ahead.

  10. Rep. Norman K Thurston15:45

      Uh, so my first question is, um, conflict of interest usually, uh, in the world that I live in, a conflict of interest means that my action as a legislator might benefit me personally, financially, or a member of my family in some way. Um, could you explain how, um, tax liens and criminal records are conflicts of interest,

  11. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton16:10

      Mr. Speaker? I would say that the case could be made that they could be a conflict of interest. However, I would actually prefer to call the form disclosure rather than conflict of interest disclosure, candidate disclosure or public office disclosure or something else. But it is called a conflict of interest disclosure.

  12. Rep. Norman K Thurston16:31

      Um, my second question is, it would seem to me that the things that you're asking to be disclosed are already matters of public record. Is there a circumstance in which they wouldn't be matters of public record?

  13. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton16:46

      Um, Mr. Speaker? Yes. Well, no. Okay. You're correct. They are matters of public record. However, there are firewalls basically to accessing that information. We're currently working in some other bills on resolving some of these transparency issues with the courts, but it's very difficult and fees are usually involved to ascertain anyone's criminal history. Um, anyone's, um, tax history. I mean, we don't need details on those things. This is just self-disclosure for anything that's unresolved and so forth or un expunged. But, um, no, you're correct. These are public records and that's one reason that disclosure should not be, um, too off-putting for anyone. Most people would already have resolved these issues before seeking public office or appointment, but, um, this way the, the voter will know.

  14. Rep. Norman K Thurston17:48

      Thank you Mr. Speaker. My last question is, um, does the fact that somebody has a tax lien inherently signal something bad about them? A moral failure or lack of judgment or something like that is, is a tax lien necessarily mean a black mark against them?

  15. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton18:08

      Mr. Speaker, as I divulge today in a chamber meeting, um, I myself had a tax lien for quite a long time as we were working through the bureaucracy and we thought we had resolved it, it was like for $28. So no, I would say that it does not, um, reflect any sort of character flaw. Um, this would just be informational for the voter, but this specifies that the tax lien must exceed $500 and it must be unresolved after a period of at least two years. So it does give the person at least two years to resolve the tax lien. And then even additionally, it gives them space to explain like, this is still being worked out with the state or, and this could also be from out of state.

  16. Rep. Norman K Thurston18:59

      Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, I have a lot of pause about this bill because I, I think we're conflating a lot of things. We're conflating conflict of interest, which is inherent to the nature of our business with potentially requiring people to disclose prejudicial information, information that may be misinterpreted or misused by, um, campaigns against each other and, and claiming, oh, this person's not a fit candidate because they have an unresolved tax lien that's not even their fault. Or that they had a criminal record 30 years ago or 40 years ago. And assuming that there are some, I think the things that we're being asked to disclose in this bill, first of all, could also be discovered through public information. Somebody that really cared, could go find out. And second of all, that they're, it's just prejudicial. It just makes the person look bad, even if they're not bad. And so I'm concerned that we're requiring people to self incriminate in a way that's just really not fair. So I just have some concerns. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

  17. Speaker pro tem (presiding)20:03

      Thank you, Representative Thurston. Further discussion Representative Cutler.

  18. Rep. Paul A. Cutler20:09

      Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. I wanna stand in support of this bill. I believe that, uh, when people have more information, they can make good decisions. I support more disclosure. We're in a period of time where there is a distrust in government, and I believe, uh, additional more disclosure helps improve trust and help people make good decisions. So I am, uh, in, in favor of this. Thank you.

  19. Speaker pro tem (presiding)20:35

      Thank you, Representative Cutler. Further discussion to the bill. Seeing none, Representative Acton for summation.

  20. Rep. Cheryl K. Acton20:44

      Thank you, Mr. Speaker ProAm. Well, as, um, one of my colleagues already stated, this information is already available publicly, however, it is hard to access. It does have a cost and it's also very difficult to find. So, um, that's why we ask, we would ask them to, to disclose. Um, and, and the other commenter was also correct that there's a, it's a time right now where there's a lot of distrust in public officials. Um, and I think it would be, it would be beneficial if we could say there is some sort of, you know, disclosure requirement. This bill supports transparency and the public interest and the integrity of serving in public office, and I would appreciate your support. Thanks.

  21. Speaker pro tem (presiding)21:36

      Thank you. Representative Acton voting is open on first substitute house before four six. Conflict of interest disclosure amendments seen all present, having voted voting will be closed. First substitute house bill 4 46, having received 27 yay votes and 37 nay votes fails to pass this body and will be referred to staff for filing. Madam Reading Clerk