S.B. 100 Federalism Revisions: transcript

Thank you Chair. Appreciate the opportunity to, uh, be here today. Hi. There is a substitute online. I'd like to, if we have that substitute, I'd like to speak that substitute, if that's with your Leave. Okay. Let's, let's do that and then we'll, we'll have a, so, And then I actually have a little amendment to the substitute, but we're Okay. We'll Do it at Time. Well, that's what committees are for, right? So, thank you. Try and get it right. But let me just, uh, explain. Last year, this is, this is coming from the Federalism Commission. Uh, last year we, we created a piece of legislation to have the agencies begin reporting on, uh, federal guidance letter. A federal guidance letter is a letter comes from a federal agency to their counterpart at the state level. And it's, it's a way to communicate and, and, and go forward. But the concern that we want to make sure that we're addressing is there's transparency, there's a tracking, if this is, is breaching principles of federalism. I remember the good, uh, Senator Cullimore sandal, uh, two or three years ago. We ran that bill on, uh, you know, putting in a process to put a breaks on, on, on different actions that, uh, are taken federally. But this is a little upstream from that to identify maybe some potential hot spots and track 'em. And it's been a really good tool. We've been able to work through the summer, uh, through the interim and begin gathering, gathering the guidance letters and assessing 'em and, uh, evaluating 'em. It's really been helpful in identifying areas that we need to give attention to. And be aware of what this bill is. Last year, uh, it was intended to have, uh, our education board of Education involved in that. But, uh, in the definition there was some vague, some ambiguity, and a little bit of vagueness. And so this bill clarifies that it also softens some language, uh, on, on what would be required. There was a fiscal note that I think over stated the, uh, the intent. An agency receives a letter as we look at the language, let me refer the lines. There's, there's, there's some, um, in line 2 0 1, uh, through 2 0 5, there's some additional language there for the, the agency to just communicate their sense and feel from the guidance letter that's coming. And the substitute softens that a little bit to reflect. We're not asking you to go do a research project on it, but just gives, communicate logically what is, what you're, how you're digesting it, and how you're feeling about it, what it's, and then pass that on. And that'll be included in the communication. So that's really, uh, the softening language there to make, really what we're asking for them in the brief description is what they should be, uh, would likely and appropriately be assessing as they receive a letter very naturally and, and, and not, uh, a significant amount of time or effort to do that. So there is, that's, that's the purpose of substitute first education. Second, to put a little more context for the, the commission as, as we're doing the reporting. With that, I'd like to, uh, turn the, the, uh, microphone to my copilot here. Ms. Dun, I'll let him introduce himself as he begins. But, uh, he has some good information on what has been taking place and, uh, uh, even nationally, how we're helping this, the National Dialects will, please go ahead.

Thank, thank you, Senator, and thank you members of the Committee for your service. And after this opportunity, I'll just try and be brief because I think Senator Stratton described this really well. What, what federal guidance, the one thing that we sometimes forget is it's not actually legally binding. It's letters from federal agencies telling, uh, states what they ought to do. But it's really just the agencies sense of what they, what they should be, what they can require states to do. And we need to know what that, what, what that is. We meaning the citizens, but also the legislators so that they have some sense of what the agencies are being asked by the federal government to do. And the transparency essential for making that happen. And one of the challenges we have is once we know that these letters have come in and we've had 35 letters since July, sent by various federal agencies to various state agencies, uh, asking 'em to do one thing or the other, we don't have a good sense of, uh, yet of how much, um, that's going. Like how that's gonna change, uh, the functioning of state agencies. So if they're asked to do a particular project, is this gonna divert resources away from a state priority? Uh, where the state may be thinking, well, this employee ought to be doing this. Instead, they spend a spend time putting together, uh, reports for the federal government, for instance. So we, we, we want to have a sense of that. We think this is really forward looking because it allows us to assess precisely what's happening when the federal government is making, uh, uh, essentially making mandates for the states, um, through these letters. And so, so it, it really is still a, a, uh, uh, transparency bill. Uh, we, we just are so grateful for, uh, the center for continuing to lead this effort because it will make a big difference in terms of, uh, whether we can retain the principle that the state should be responsible for, uh, its own budget, for its own, uh, working. So,

Thank you. And just, just a little, if I may chair, as I conclude online, one 90 it current, the substitute reads the Utah Open Data Portal website, creating section 63 A 16 1 0 7 I, the amendment that I'm asking the committee to consider. If the committee adopts the substitute, I would like the committee to also consider this changing open data portal to the public notice website. And I think we have our state archivist here that could comment on this, in that section 6 0 1 7 1 0 7. The reason behind that is with our 5% budget cuts, we're all looking, the open data portal is one of those items. It's obsolete and it's much, um, more convenient, helpful to use that, use that. And that's probably gonna go away. We'll see what happens. But the public notices makes a lot more sense to post it there instead of that. So I hope that made sense. But that's, uh, what I

Have. So right now we need to move, uh, delete tile and body and move, uh, first substitute Senate bill 100.

You just stated my motion. You you did a great job on that. Um, and, and, and just to speak to that motion, your, your subsequent ask is, is kind of an amendment, but what, what I'm hoping is our staff can get the second one probably in a substitute and get it online. I don't see it online. I just see the first substitute. So my, my motion's limited to the first substitute, and then hopefully through the course of the presentation, let's, let's get it on the system if it's possible to do that quickly. And, I don't know.

Yes. Um, So Adam, sweet. With legislative research and general counsel. So just to confirm, the verbal amendment is to on line one 90, um, of the substitute to, uh, replace the Utah Open Data portal website with the Yeah. Utah Public Notice Portal website.

It's public notice website. Is it portal? Maybe I could Our, Let's vote a friend, and this is gonna be my motion, Mr. Chair, but, but Adam is going to state it really clearly for me.

Kanosh Williams. I'm the Utah State Archive archivist, and we met with Senator Stratton and, um, asked that this change be made the public this. So the change would be on one 90 and it needs to read the Utah Public Notice website created in 63. A 16 6 0 1. 6 0 1. Got it.

I would move, I would move that motion. And I, and a draft attorney has got it dialed in, so it was good.

Thank you. I'm wondering if this bill might create any extra work for our school districts, our, our LEAs and, uh, the way I read it, it looked like they might have some additional reporting requirements. Is that, is that accurate

Mr. Chair? Uh, yes. That what what it is, is, is the, when an agency receives a, uh, federal guidance letter, there is a presumed assumption they're going to spend some time to read it, to assess it, to see if there's a, uh, addressing the questions that we're asked to, to include in that and then take action. What we're asking them to do is, uh, that they would forward. That to us. Sense is, it's probably a, in an eight hour day, it's probably a three minute forward. I don't know how long it takes to push send on the computer, but not, it's the, the, the sense it's, it's a, it's a, a low, low threshold. A low low workload. I, they're not asking, I don't think for any compensation or, you know, fiscal note to do

It. Thank you. Have you, have you heard any concerns from school districts or other folks? Or is, or is, have they not weighed in on this? This specific piece adds them to do it?

What I can say is I have not heard any concern or resistance from all the other agencies that have been doing it again last year. We, we had, uh, all of our other agencies were included in it and the language and the, the, uh, response has been positive, appreciated the support and, and, and the coordination and the transparency opportunity to be aware of the challenges they're facing as, as in, in challenges and positives in working with our counterparts.

Thank you, uh, Mr. Chair. Um, and committee? Uh, my name is Alan Westman. I am a, uh, with the forward party and just have a, I want to speak a partial support and partial opposition to this bill, which is simply that, um, my, my concern is that in, uh, online 2 0 5 of, of the bill, which is, uh, section 60 3G 16, 3 0 2, subsection two C four, um, my concern is that this is asking, uh, state agencies to opine as to the principle of federalism. And I just am concerned that that is not the appropriate thing for a state agency to be doing since there are many, um, it's a political question and there are many, uh, different views across the state as to what constitutes a violation of the principles of federalism. And so I think that the other public disclosure, uh, aspects of this bill are very appropriate and I support those. I would just be concerned, and I would like to ask that, uh, the, the, uh, respectfully if he would be willing to strike that, that particular clause. Thank

So, Kanosh Williams, Utah State Archives, I just wanted to come up and support, um, Senator Stratton, um, on this bill and appreciate him making that change to where we will be posting this information. And I just wanted to speak to the appropriate appropriateness of the public notice website, because that is exactly what the website is created for or for all governmental entities to be able to post this type of information. And in answer, if I may, to the question that he had before these entities already exist in the system. We have an admin, a full-time administrator, that is there to assist and train the entities on how to post public information and make it available on the website. So we feel that this is the appropriate place for that to be posted. And then I might add that the information that's posted there is also indexed and fully searchable. So it provides even more transparency and insight into, into these type of, of records that are there. So thank you.

Senator ml. Thank you. Um, good discussion. I'd move that we favorably recommend Senate Bill 100 as substituted and amended federal guidance letter amendments.

Go back to the sponsor summation, appreciate The work on the committee on this and helping me get, get it to the language where it needs to be. And I appreciate, uh, the motion. And, uh, I would just say that this is an effective tool. I don't, it's really not a political tool. It's a process tool. As we look at federalism, it, it really goes to who, who has the constitutional stewardship to determine, uh, the, the direction and, and appreciate the support of the, the committee on this bill.

Thank you, chair. And it's so good to be here, and I, that feeling is mutual and grateful for the chance. Any time we have to interact, I'm always grateful. Uh, you'll chair, you'll remember this was one of the bills we talked about during the summer in Federalism, our federalism commission. It's just one of our Federalism commission bills that, uh, we had. It's a third substitute because we needed to add some issues related to the trade, the federalism trademark that we have, uh, that, that's reflected in the service. Third substitute, as well as, uh, making sure that we don't have any gaps in our agencies that are coordinating with federalism commission on the issues related to those. We primarily, we had the ED education was one that was left, uh, out, uh, in our first tran first goal last year. But there's been really been a lot of positive from this interaction. Boy, if we can just begin to ask, is this, when we receive these guidance letters, is this, is there a federalism issue or not here? We would be just, uh, leap years ahead, but I'd like to turn time over. I'll let, uh, Mr. Duncan introduce himself, but, uh, like to have him give a quick report and a perspective on what we've been able to do. And then if you'll come back to me real quick and then we'll conclude. Thank you. Sure.

My name is Bill Duncan. I'm from the Sutherland Institute. I, I, I'll be brief, I know you're in a hurry with everything now, but the, um, one of the things that's been so positive since last year is that this, the agencies have disclosed all of the letters they've gotten from the federal government, uh, different kinds of agency guidance. We've got about 30 in a basically a six month period. So there's a lot of guidance coming to the, from the federal government to the state. We want to ensure we cover all of that, and that's the purpose of this bill to capture Department of Education or a Board of education, uh, guide guidance sent to the Board of Education in the schools as well. So will, it will close that little gap, but I wanna just sort of maybe mention how, what a modest, uh, uh, request this is, just that the agencies, uh, make that guidance they get from the federal government transparent, and then give us a sense of kind of what the likely fiscal impact of that guidance will be. We know that will be essential in helping the state plan for, uh, the kind of shortfalls that we see happening when the federal government makes demands on the state, but doesn't fund those. So, so we think this is modest, but still impactful. Very impactful. And it's already been so far. So thank thanks for your consideration and thanks, Senator, for raising this important issue.

Presentation? Yes. I'll leave it to the committee at that point. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, we don't have a sub amendment. We don't. Okay, great. So I'll make the motion that we pass with the favorable recommendation, uh, third substitute SB 100 federalism revisions.

You for the motion. Thank you for, uh, my, the, all the work of Southern Institute and, and the work they've done in this, uh, from the inception. This is a great example of the strength and the outcomes of, to charity, your point, bipartisanship working together, the strength of bringing different points of view and how that, that, uh, adds to the benefit and the, the richness of the fruit of the outcomes. And I, I, I appreciate, uh, my good colleagues on both sides of the aisle. And again, appreciate the motion. A good

You so much. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Oh, yes. Seems Like a, Yeah, I think that's in order. Um, make the motion. Okay.

I hate it when you cuss right before my name, but I know, Uh, did, does the sponsor want it on consent? I think that'd Be great. Thank you. Or Do you think it's faster that way, or slower than that? I don't know. I've not, I've not been tracking the reading calendar, so I think

if they keep track of the amount of legislation they pass and rule and the, the amount of rules the agencies, there's it, it is like a one to a hundred in terms of comparison. And One way that our federal counterparts, uh, used to interact with and implement rules that are created is they send federal guidance letters to our agencies here in the state. This is a federalism, uh, bill that we worked on. And last year we passed a first version of this that really made a, we made a lot of ground in beginning to track the different letters that are coming in, uh, pulsing getting to getting te on the pulse to see whether or not there's, there's a challenge in, uh, breaching federalism PR principles of federalism. This bill is closing a couple of gaps from last year. We wanted to just start, we had a good start, but this, uh, brings an education as well as put some opportunity on each of the agencies to begin asking themselves. Hey, ask the question, is this a federalism misute or are we having problems with that? And summarize, and then pass that on to the federalism commission for, for tracking and, and categorizing the, the effort. So that is the bill itself. I'll be glad to answer any questions. Mr. President,

so I'm going to go to you for a Motion. Thank you. I move that we move and pass, uh, federal guidance letter amendments SB 100 to third reading calendar.

Senator Vickers Baldy Lein Brammer Bus colmore as Camia Fillmore Grover Harper Kins Ipson Johnson Juab McKay Mikel Milner Milner Mussman Owens pitcher Plum Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton Vickers Ler Wilson Winterton Harper,

Thank you Mr. President Potm. Senate Bill 1 44 came from a real person and a real Utah story.

Thank you Mr. Tim. Online we have the third substitute. Uh, I would like to move this third, third substitute, uh, in title and body.

What we're doing here is we have, uh, uh, uh, last year we created a federal guidance letter process where agencies at the state level, when they receive communications and guidance from the federal agencies, that they would post it and inform the federalism commission of it. This gives the, the commission the opportunity to assess and look at and gather and co compile that information that's taking place. One of the things challenges we have in our area of federalism is not only what is taking place legislatively and with the executive branch, but also with the agencies in the executive branch, uh, implementing policies of the, the sitting, uh, executive branch leaders. With this in mind, we have this opportunity to then receive, receive the communications, assess and, and analyze and, and track the progress and impact on principles of federalism. Be glad to answer any questions.

Mr. President Prote, will the sponsor yield to a question?

Um, just looking at line 2 0 4, you change the, there was a change in the word from violates to may violate. Can you ex expand on why we're changing that term to a may?

Senator? So on line 2 0 4, uh, what we're doing there is rather we're giving the, the agency the opportunity to give their opinion and, uh, and look at, uh, look at how that impacts the agency and with that, uh, how the response will be.

Follow up question, Mr. President ProAm? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for that answer. And I, just to clarify, will there be an, uh, within that process, so after the agency provides its opinion on a potential violation, will it come back for the legislature to confirm that violation before the letter or, I mean, it, it said, is there a process after that where there's a, a oversight of the legislature to engage at that point?

Senator, Thank you for the question. Let me just go upstream a little bit to answer that. What we're trying to do is, is begin asking good questions and, uh, there's a simple question, question you can ask if, if, uh, if we want understand the constitution. It says if govern who governs, if govern, who governs. And a lot of times we should we even govern it, you know, within our constitutional members. This goes to who governs and it we're trying to educate and educate and encourage our agencies to begin asking those questions. And looking at that before, just, just moving forward specifically the question of the good, uh, good, good senator is does it come back for legislative review? Yes, absolutely. That begins the process. The federalism commission then in turn reports to the legislative management committee on, on all issues and it's thoroughly vetted with and make sure there's alignment with the agency and the legislature.

Thank you Mr. President Pro. That answers my question. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, Mr. President, I pro Tim, I rise more as the parliamentarian with the substitute bill. Um, uh, Senator Fillmore pointed out it, it changed the short title and it's unclear, um, where that leaves the bill, but I would recommend, uh, I would recommend as a parliamentarian that we have the sponsor when he is ready, move to suspend the three reading requirements for this bill and then move under suspension of rules to pass it with a changed short title. I don't know that it's absolutely required, but it's certainly the safer route. Uh, the secretary is saying it's not required, but alleged research told me it's unclear, so thank you.

President pro tem. I am hoping I, I would like, uh, if we are thinking to, um, pass this all the way through, oh, this is on a third rating. I was hoping that we could circle this so that we can, um, consider the changes in what that means. So I'm gonna Juab it's just a request to the sponsor.

Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. The, in responding to the comments of the, uh, the, the Good Senator Vickers, this substitute, the reason it, uh, has changed in title is, is you look at the, the information on line 1 48 to 1 57. This is a, this is a clarification on the trademarks that the federalism commission has been working on and established in, in, uh, this space. And it allows then that those trademarks to be carried and protected. And so that, that is the, the, the significance change of this, uh, substitute, uh, was it's been discussed in the federalism commission is, is being included, including part of our federal guidance letters. And I, I'm happy to circle it if we'd like to do that. I'd be open for that motion. If so, I guess I can make that motion. I'm glad to circle it, move to circle it and then bring it back this afternoon after had chance to review it.

Thank you Mr. Fred ProAm. What we're doing here is we have, uh, uh, uh, last year we created a federal guidance letter process where agencies at the state level, when they receive communications and guidance from the federal agencies, that they would post it and inform the federalism commission of it. This gives the, the commission the opportunity to assess and look at and gather and co compile that information that's taking place. One of the things challenges we have in our area of federalism is not only what is taking place legislatively and with the executive branch, but also with the agencies in the executive branch, uh, implementing policies of the, the sitting, uh, executive branch leaders. With this in mind, we have this opportunity to then receive, receive the communications, assess and, and analyze and, and track the progress and impact on principles of federalism. Be glad to answer any questions.

Mr. President Prote, will the sponsor yield to a question?

Um, just looking at line 2 0 4, you change the, there was a change in the word from violates to may violate. Can you ex expand on why we're changing that term to a may?

Senator? So on line 2 0 4, uh, what we're doing there is rather we're giving the, the agency the opportunity to give their opinion and, uh, and look at, uh, look at how that impacts the agency and with that, uh, how the response will be.

Follow up question, Mr. President ProAm? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for that answer. And I, just to clarify, will there be an, uh, within that process, so after the agency provides its opinion on a potential violation, will it come back for the legislature to confirm that violation before the letter or, I mean, it, it said, is there a process after that where there's a, a oversight of the legislature to engage at that point?

Senator, Thank you for the question. Let me just go upstream a little bit to answer that. What we're trying to do is, is begin asking good questions and, uh, there's a simple question, question you can ask if, if, uh, if we want understand the constitution. It says if govern who governs, if govern, who governs. And a lot of times we should we even govern it, you know, within our constitutional members. This goes to who governs and it we're trying to educate and educate and encourage our agencies to begin asking those questions. And looking at that before, just, just moving forward specifically the question of the good, uh, good, good senator is does it come back for legislative review? Yes, absolutely. That begins the process. The federalism commission then in turn reports to the legislative management committee on, on all issues and it's thoroughly vetted with and make sure there's alignment with the agency and the legislature.

Thank you Mr. President Pro. That answers my question. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Um, Mr. President, I pro Tim, I rise more as the parliamentarian with the substitute bill. Um, uh, Senator Fillmore pointed out it, it changed the short title and it's unclear, um, where that leaves the bill, but I would recommend, uh, I would recommend as a parliamentarian that we have the sponsor when he is ready, move to suspend the three reading requirements for this bill and then move under suspension of rules to pass it with a changed short title. I don't know that it's absolutely required, but it's certainly the safer route. Uh, the secretary is saying it's not required, but alleged research told me it's unclear, so thank you.

President pro tem. I am hoping I, I would like, uh, if we are thinking to, um, pass this all the way through, oh, this is on a third rating. I was hoping that we could circle this so that we can, um, consider the changes in what that means. So I'm gonna Juab it's just a request to the sponsor.

Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. The, in responding to the comments of the, uh, the, the Good Senator Vickers, this substitute, the reason it, uh, has changed in title is, is you look at the, the information on line 1 48 to 1 57. This is a, this is a clarification on the trademarks that the federalism commission has been working on and established in, in, uh, this space. And it allows then that those trademarks to be carried and protected. And so that, that is the, the, the significance change of this, uh, substitute, uh, was it's been discussed in the federalism commission is, is being included, including part of our federal guidance letters. And I, I'm happy to circle it if we'd like to do that. I'd be open for that motion. If so, I guess I can make that motion. I'm glad to circle it, move to circle it and then bring it back this afternoon after had chance to review it.

Thank you Mr. President pro Tem. We did indeed work through the issues. I, uh, had some questions about the process, but I think that is all set now and I'm ready to, uh, support this, this bill.

Well we don't have a third sub. We cannot pass it. So Senator Stratton. Senator Stratton, let's take a motion to circle till we get the fiscal note.

I approve that. I think that's a friendly motion.

Senator Wilson. Thank you Mr. President Pro Temp. The Safe Harbor Storage Program has been a program that, uh,

Thank you Mr. President pro tem the, uh, fiscal note process. Finally cut up with a lightning speed of this body. And so we have a fiscal note and we've had a good discussion. I would move this be read for the third time.

Senator Vickers Baldry Aye. Lein Aye. Brammer Aye. Buss. Aye. Comore Aye. Escamilla. Aye. Fillmore Fillmore Grover Harper Aye. Hankins Aye. Ipson Aye. Johnson Aye. Juab Aye. McKay, Mikel Mikel Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Rebe Aye. Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers er Wilson Winterton

Thank you Mr. Speaker. Last year we passed a bill to deal with federal guidance letters. These are kind of the dear colleague letters from the federal government and we've now been reviewing them from all of the various departments and, and then helping provide guidance as to any impact it has on state jurisdiction. Uh, this just asks for additional information from the agencies. Basically, what impact does it have on jurisdictional, uh, input and then, uh, also has some additional, uh, matters that pertain to the work, the National Federalism Initiative work. And that Mr. Speaker is, uh, is the bill.

Mr. Speaker, just thank you for your leadership on this and, uh, as you know, this has been a big deal nationally. And with that, uh, uh, commend this to the body support.