S.B. 148 General Oversight Amendments

What this bill does

The bill renames the legislative oversight committee and raises its membership from 10 to 13 by adding two House members and one Senate member. It removes the monthly meeting requirement, lets the committee review any legislative issue, allows closed meetings for whistleblower testimony, and lets the committee pause an agency rule for 60 days.

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

• 6 yes, 0 no, 1 absentSenate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee: vote to change the bill · Jan 23, 2026Who voted how
• 5 yes, 1 no, 1 absentSenate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee: vote to approve it · Jan 23, 2026Who voted how
• 23 yes, 5 no, 1 absentFirst of two Senate votes · Feb 6, 2026Who voted how
• yes, undefined nocircled · Feb 9, 2026
• 18 yes, 5 no, 6 absentFinal Senate vote · Feb 20, 2026Who voted how
• 7 yes, 1 noHouse Rules Committee: vote to change the bill · Feb 25, 2026Who voted how
• 6 yes, 2 noHouse Rules Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 25, 2026Who voted how
• 74 yes, 0 no, 1 absentFinal House vote · Mar 4, 2026Who voted how
• 26 yes, 1 no, 2 absentSenate vote to accept the other chamber's changes · Mar 5, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Jan 23, 2026 Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (24 turns)

  1. Chair Winterton2:46:26

     We will call up senate bill one forty eight General Oversight amendments. Senator McKay, you've been patient, I hope you haven't been sitting here while yours committee works. Oh, okay. Yep. Alright. And staff just reminded me, we do have a substitute. Which one are you speaking to?

  2. Sen. Daniel McCay2:46:51

     Yeah, so I was gonna ask if you'd moved the sub.

  3. Chair Winterton2:46:53

     All right. Do you wanna speak to the sub bill?

  4. Sen. Daniel McCay2:46:57

     Yeah, we, I'll speak to the sub.

  5. Chair Winterton2:46:59

     Okay. Uh, I'd entertain a motion then from from the com committee to,

  6. Sen. Scott D. Sandall2:47:06

     uh, move Senator Sandall. Thank You. I move that we delete and title embody sub or Senate Bill 1 48 and replace it with first substitute Senate bill 1 48.

  7. Chair Winterton2:47:17

     Okay. Discussion. Seeing none. All those in favor of adopting substitute, uh, it'd be first, uh, substitute Senate Bill 1 48. Say, aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Uh, Evan Vickers. Senator Vickers is not on camera, and we didn't get a Thumbs up. Uh, Senator Vickers, are you a place where you can either give us a thumbs up or speak on the vote? Aye. Thank you. All right. The substitute's before us.

  8. Sen. Daniel McCay2:47:50

     Thanks. I'm surprised everybody's not here for my bill. This was, you know, jam packed. There's still enough to, uh, Uh, that's great. Well, okay. Uh, Senate Bill 1 48 is a pretty, um, simple bill that has, you know, an acknowledgement of the evolution of the Admin rules and General Government Oversight Committee. Um, it started out as admin rules, and then they added general government oversight, and then it became, you know, this, uh, this iteration. So the first thing that the bill does is it acknowledges this evolving role and changes the name of the committee to just General Oversight Committee. It was a mouthful before that. It's less of a mouthful now. Um, we're expanding the membership, uh, to, from 10 members to 13 members, adding two members on the house side. One member on the Senate side. We, we've been having problems, um, meeting our quorum requirements, um, for this committee. And so this gives the house a couple of options to add some people to the committee. And I figured, hey, if the house was adding one, we might as well add one on the Senate side also. Um, so that's, uh, that's the, uh, the breakdown of that part of it. This committee also operates very differently, um, in the, in most interim committees, we have to have it have a bill that passes in the house and it passes in the Senate instead, admin rules when it takes a vote, it is just the majority of those present. So it's kind of an interesting, uh, interesting issue where it's totally different kind of vote. It's actually taken me some time to get used to that. Um, and so that, that helps quite a bit. Um, let's see. It removes the requirement for monthly meetings. We have a statutory requirement for monthly meetings. If we don't need a monthly meeting, we won't have one. Um, let's see. Expanded. Okay. So one of the things that has been an issue with this committee is what happens, um, or I'll talk about that here in a second. This gives the committee, uh, any legislative issues. So any issue that the legislature can touch, uh, this committee can now go in and review. Um, it's been a long time understanding anyway, and now we're just capturing, uh, capturing that. Um, we've, uh, we're also adding, what we had this last year was we had some that came forward that were whistleblowers that wanted to talk about issues that they had. But the problem was that to participate in a public meeting for them meant that they would, um, you know, they'd lose their anonymous whistleblower status. And so the idea is, uh, add the committee's ability for the purpose of whistleblowers to close the meeting, to hear witness to, to hear whistleblower testimony. Um, it is limited though. It has to be abuse of authority, gross mismanagement or unethical conduct. Um, other issues are matters that are subject to litigation. We've wanted to look at things that are subject to litigation, but we've been limited by the fact that if someone is to, uh, testify on the public record about something that is up for litigation, it's how would that testimony be weighed than in a court of law, uh, where it's not sworn testimony. Uh, most of the time it's just a different way of looking at it. Um, let's see. Uh, the meeting, uh, let's see, administrative rule changes. So one thing that we've struggled with is if a rule isn't, uh, if a rule isn't enjoyed by the committee and the committee says, we don't like that, and an agency says, well, we do, now we're stuck in a situation where the, it requires a, uh, the legislative body that is granted this authority for rulemaking. It allows that, it requires that body has no, uh, change to the rule other than in the next general session we could run a bill to, uh, to require that change. Um, you know, either in rule or, or sorry, in law to then codify what we thought should have been in the rule. But where we've delegated this authority for legislative prerogative, the idea of being able to pause a rule when the vote, when the committee votes, um, by majority vote, the, uh, the, the committee can then delay the implementation or the effective date of a rule for 60 days. And in that situation, um, they, you know, it gives the committee and the division to then the opportunity to negotiate, try and find a better place maybe for the rule to land. Um, let's see, then there are some exceptions to that. Um, but there are, you know, federally mandated rules, constitutionally vested authority in the executive branch, or even emergency rules. 'cause we already have a process as a legislature for re for reviewing administrative rules. Um, this does change a little bit from the Office of Administrative Rules. It removes the, require, the provisions for paper publications we're no longer, um, a paper-based society. And so having the need to distribute rules by paper doesn't make sense. Um, and then, uh, let's see. And there's some other general provisions related to the publication of rules. The other thing I will add that is added in the substitute is this gives the committee access to an auditor. Um, what we've had, uh, problem with is we get, we identify issues, but the committee doesn't have the depth, and we're still part-time employees, uh, doing this job. But this gives the committee the opportunity to have an auditor that then can review, uh, this issue and see, you know, do some issue spotting and find out if there's not more that needs to be discovered, at which point we would then go to legislative management and get a full audit, audit ordered. Um, so those are, those are the key provisions of the bill. And I'm, I'm happy with that, uh, to answer any questions that the committee may have.

  9. Chair Winterton2:53:31

     Thank you. Any questions? Senator Bloom?

  10. Sen. Nate Blouin2:53:37

      Thank you. I, looking through the bill, I noticed with the changes in membership on the committees, it does reduce the proportion, potentially of minority party representation from about 70, I think I, uh, it would essentially raise the floor for the majority party from 60% to 70%. Mm-hmm. Um, yeah. Is that, is that intentional or? I, I always get concerned when we talk about boards and commissions, and I totally understand. The majority party you. Yeah. You know what I'm saying? Yeah.

  11. Sen. Daniel McCay2:54:10

      So, um, all of our, so this committee specifically right, uh, is one of the lowest repre representations of the mor, uh, majority party. It's a four to three, if I remember right on this committee. Um, but most of the rest of the committee are 70% or more, um, for all of our committees here on the legislature. And so that was the thinking. Uh, if you'll notice, after talking with, you know, the minority leader here in the Senate, uh, and the minority members on, uh, on them, they, they all voted for the bill. And so I think everybody gets what we're trying to accomplish. I will say it is very rare for this committee to be about partisan issues. It is more likely that we are digging into, you know, just rules or problems that are happening at the state, or things that have been reported. They're, they aren't necessarily partisan in nature. Um, and anyway, the, and the problem was if I had, I had some lobbying me on the house side that wanted to add four members and, you know, do the other, the, the benefit of this committee is it is still small. Uh, and so we're trying to wean our way or, you know, grow in a, in a, um, measured way that doesn't make the committee unwieldy. Um, because this committee does, uh, generally what happens just for everybody's knowledge, you, we have, sometimes we have appropriations meetings on Tuesdays for interim, and then we have policy committees on Wednesday, and this committee then meets on Thursday. So for those like Neil Walter, for example, who comes up from St. George, it becomes a long week, uh, for that. And so we're, we're trying to minimize that. And so this was the balance we struck. Um, and I'm still happy to continue that conversation. I, I think that conversation is gonna continue. I don't mind more minority major. Like that didn't make as much a difference to me as much as getting some more people for quorum.

  12. Sen. Nate Blouin2:55:59

      Thank you. I, yeah, I, I checked in with members of my caucus. They said, oh yeah, we think it's fine. I'm probably gonna vote no because I don't like the optics of reducing our representation. I see where you're coming from and I'm happy to be out on my own on that one. So thank you.

  13. Sen. Daniel McCay2:56:15speaker not certain

      I won't hold it against you. So many other things. No, I'm just kidding. Okay,

  14. Chair Winterton2:56:21

      moving on. Any others? Seeing none, let's go to the public. Is there any public input on that? Yes, we have one. Come on up.

  15. Alan Wessman, Utah Forward Party2:56:43

      Alan Westman, uh, forward Party of Utah. Um, I approve of the name change and of several of the other provisions in here. I am concerned about, um, the, the partisan balance. I think that an oversight committee is well served by having a more even, uh, partisan balance. Um, uh, I'm also concerned, uh, a couple of the other provisions, um, that one is that any member can be removed at the pleasure of the appointing officer and the appointing officers being the speaker of the house or the Senate president. Um, I feel like a lot of, a, a lot of power is already vested in those individuals, and they feel like they've already got the appointing power. At least allow those members to the autonomy to serve out their term unless there's a disability or or other reason that they must be removed. Um, And then my other concern was, um, the MA making explicit that it can, uh, deal with any legislative issue, which is defined as anything dealing, anything impacting or dealing with current or potential litigation, or, sorry, legislation. Legislation. And that encompasses just about anything in the universe. I think that, at least as far as the state of Utah is concerned, um, and I'm a little bit concerned about that being a potential expansion of power. What can the committee not do? And if, if it can halt any rule for 60 days. Um, in the executive branch, I view that also is an, uh, a trespass on separation of powers. So I have concerns if the sponsor is willing to, um, uh, yield on some of those points, then I'd be in favor of Thank you.

  16. Chair Winterton2:58:37

      Okay. Thank you. Nobody online. Right. All right, we'll close public comment and come back to, uh, the committee for further clarification or, or action.

  17. Chair Winterton2:58:49

      I did have, he brought up something. Mm-hmm. And, uh, he's talked about terms mm-hmm. Aren't these appointments at will? So yes and no. It's, it's actually a little bit weird, and that's why this is actually being fixed, is people, uh, the speaker and the president have at times removed people. Believe it or not, I've been the chair of this committee now for a year and a half, and in the process of being the chair of this committee, I've had four house chairs and their terms, you know, they were removed from the committee except for Representative Walter who decided to stay on the committee. But with turnover in the house, they needed to draft and pull other people from committees to go, you know, leave this committee to go the other, this just, this language just clarifies that everybody serves in an at wheel position. It isn't a, uh, a new acknowledgement, but the statute has been a little bit weirdly worded or oddly worded.

  18. Chair Winterton2:59:48

      Okay. Alright. Any consideration or actions? Oh, Senator Sandall.

  19. Sen. Scott D. Sandall2:59:57

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, we do have the sub before us, right? Yep. Yep. Okay. So I'm gonna make a motion that we favorably recommend Senate Bill 1 48, first substitute. Um, and, uh, just one comment, uh, and I think it bears well on the public for this committee to be able to hold a, a proposed rule for 60 days is, uh, to me a very good check because the authority given to make that rule comes from the legislative body. And if there's something that needs to be held, I think the legislative body in a, in a committee should be able to do that. I don't know if that makes sense or not, but it's not a, it's, it's guarding the legislatives legislative body's prerogative and, and holding that dear and close. Right. So, anyway, thank you.

  20. Chair Winterton3:00:56

      Okay. Any other discussion to that? Let's go back to Senator Mcca summation. Yeah.

  21. Sen. Daniel McCay3:01:02

      Um, the other thing that was brought up, uh, I apologize, what was the name again, brother? We, Mr. Westman. Brother Westman. Sorry. Yeah, it's a different job. Um, so, uh, what I'd say is, uh, Mr. Westman's point is, is well served. Um, this committee has not had bounds before. And so really, we're you just formalizing what happens now? Um, I understand the partisan mix, and I'm happy to keep thinking about it. Our primary objective was give the house two additional seats. And I don't have a lot of Senator Vickers that are begging to be on this committee. Um, but, you know, felt wrong to just do one. Um, anyway, that, that's, I I'm open to ideas. The, the problem is how do we keep it small? Um, and, you know, that kind of thing. So that's, that's the thing we're trying to balance. But I'm not ruling anything out if, if everybody has another idea, so,

  22. Chair Winterton3:01:54

      Okay. Back to Senator

  23. Sen. Scott D. Sandall3:01:55

      Sandall. I'll waive. All right.

  24. Chair Winterton3:01:57

      All those in favor of recommending first substitute Senate bill 1 48 out favorably say Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? No, we've got one. No. Senator Bloom. All right. Thank you. Thank you. That I rule that that passes. I see Senator Johnson, is he just in here visiting? Mm-hmm. Okay. All right. One final motion. Motion adjourn. Yeah. Motion to adjourn by Senator McHale. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. That is unanimous. And we are adjourned.

• Feb 6, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (14 turns)

  1. Sen. Daniel McCay40:40

     Sorry. Alright. Um, we, this is a, uh, extension of evolution in the, uh, administrative Rules Committee. The primary focus of the bill, uh, is trying to add a little bit of, um, strength to the committee. And at the same time, uh, give some bounds for, uh, in previous provisions that were adopted. The first thing, the reason why the bill is so long is because we're changing the name from Rules Review and General Government Oversight, which is a mouthful if you're trying to say it frequently. Uh, and we're changing it to just the General Government Oversight Committee. It will still have purview over administrative rules. It will still have, uh, you know, those requirements to review. Hopefully committee chairs here have appreciated that. Over the last year, we've implemented a program that when new rules are distributed, that we're, um, or when, when agencies circulate new rules that are within areas that you chair a committee, you're receiving an email, and that email has a list of the rules that are being published along with, you know, cross reference to the bill that it was passed in. And so, um, that practice will continue. And what we'll do is continue to re, uh, solicit feedback from those that, uh, that chair committees as it relates to rules that are in the purview of their committee. What we found in this, this last year, we found a lot of opportunities, um, from committees that, um, highlighted a rule. And in that, in that they highlighted a place where they felt like the, um, the rule exceeded, uh, the intent of what the, of what was, uh, proposed in the bill. And so we Uintah negotiating, we could not get a, you know, happy medium. And so we, they just put their rule in place, and that's where it was. So we're asking for the ability, uh, to, um, we added last year for school districts. We're adding the ability so that when, uh, uh, another executive branch, um, uh, department adds, uh, a rule, then they will have 60. The, the, the committee will, during the review process, we have the rule will review the rule. And if they find a problem with the rule, the committee can call itself together. We meet, uh, almost once a month, or, you know, almost once a month throughout the year. And that committee reviews the rule. And if we take a majority opinion by the rule, then we can suspend the rule by 60 days currently for rules related to the state school board, those rules can be suspended infinitely. Uh, and so we're dialing that back for the school board so that those are only 60 day pauses as well, which gives us an opportunity to review the rule with the agency and try to come to a, um, a happy, I guess, uh, compromise on the bill or on the, uh, proposed rule. Second of all, um, another part of the bill is to add members to the, uh, to the committee. We're, we've been struggling over the last year to get quorum for the committee. And so adding a couple of members to, uh, to help get Quorum has been very helpful. Um, we are, right now, there's three members of the majority and two members of the minority. And that ratio has been fine. And honestly, this committee is not one that gets mired into Pol Partisan politics. We have been very productive and been focused on, you know, reviewing rules and those kinds of things. And so, um, the, uh, the idea here is to add one member of the Senate from the majority party and two members of the house, uh, to try and help us get quorum. And hopefully, uh, we'll be able to, uh, maintain quorum more frequently. Uh, fortunately our minority members have been fantastic about attending the meeting, so I appreciate them. It is more the majority members that struggle. Um, the other part, uh, other parts of this com, uh, of this bill, um, allows the committee to close hearings, uh, for whistleblower complaints and issues related to children, as well as sensitive other, other sensitive areas as it's outlined there. Um, the bill currently has what's called what allows, uh, an order of an audit from the committee. And you'll notice there's an amendment that we have online, I think it's Senate Amendment two, that I'm gonna move here in a minute that will change that language, that instead of it being able to order an audit, it'll be able to have a priority consideration, uh, when the entire committee takes a, uh, takes a position on the audit. So I'll move that amendment here in a minute. Um, and last but not least, um, this makes, uh, you know, general provision changes for, uh, for administrative rules and also amends some responsibilities as it relates to the Office of Administrative Rules. Um, with that, I'd like to move Senate Amendment two.

  2. President (presiding)45:28

     Thank you. Uh, that is an order. Uh, I believe you did explain Senate Amendment two. Yes. Are there questions to the motion to amend? Seeing none, I'll place the amendment. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No, I'll rule that motion passes further explanation to the bill. Senator McKay,

  3. Sen. Daniel McCay45:50

     Thank you. Um, with that, I'm happy to yield to questions on the bill.

  4. President (presiding)45:54

     Thank you to the amended bill questions. Seeing none. Back to you, Senator, for summation or motion? Thank you.

  5. Sen. Daniel McCay46:04

     If any questions come up, I'm happy to take any questions, uh, that come up, um, as you know, as you're reviewing the bill, if you have a, a chance. Um, but with that, I'll move the first substitute Senate bill 1 48 General Government oversight amendments as amended. Be read for a third time.

  6. President (presiding)46:20

     So the motion is first substitute Senate bill 1 48 as amended. Roll call. Vote Oh. We'll be read a third time. Thank you. Roll call vote. Senator Vickers. Baldy. Yes. Lewin. Oh, Senator Blouin. Just, there we go. Senator.

  7. Sen. Nate Blouin46:43

     Thank you, Mr. President Pro. Uh, I just wanna make sure it's on the record that this bill will further decrease the representation of, uh, minority parties on, on this committee. And it also, uh, puts more of the work that will be done behind closed doors and away from the view of the public. So I'm a no.

  8. President (presiding)46:59

     Senator Vickers, Bremmer Bus. Palmore Illa. Sorry. Senator Escamilla.

  9. Sen. Luz Escamilla47:13

     Thank you Mr. President Pro Temp. I just wanna, um, maybe explain my vote and, and, um, talk about this bill because it was in committee and I voted yes on this bill. And by the way, this was a conversation we had in our, um, committee, not in the gen General Oversight Committee prior to the session starting. And I, I just wanna be clear, maybe a, a question to, um, not a question, sorry. As we're moving forward on, on the voting, then my understanding is the bill only says that it will add two members, which presiding officers Choose who those members are. And I, again, I know what the chances are that a, a member of the minority will end up on that list, but I am hopeful that maybe the Senate puts a member of the minority in that group. So I, I, I think the conversation is that we needed more. This is a very heavy, um, very intense committee with a, we're the oversight of all the rules and rulemaking is very intense. So I do think there needs more membership. And I, like I said, it, the way was structured is that it will be up to the presiding officers. And I have to admit, I I am still hopeful that it will be, you know, a member of the Minority Caucus and one of those two new members. Um, it doesn't delineate that on the bill. So I just wanna explain that and I will be voting Yes. Thank you.

  10. President (presiding)48:40

      Senator Vickers Fillmore. Senator Fillmore.

  11. Sen. Lincoln Fillmore48:45

      Thank you, Mr. President ProAm. Uh, this committee is just one of the, one of our citizens' greatest tools against, um, just the power of the state ever growing. I wish they had this in Washington. Um, you know, the, uh, government grows fastest through the promulgation of administrative rules by people who are not elected and accountable. And so this committee provides an avenue by which the elected population, through their representatives, can hold those unelected accountables with vast power, uh, to create rule that also have the force of law accountable through regular review and oversight. And I, I love this committee and love this process. I wish I were on it. I,

  12. President (presiding)49:28

      Senator Vickers. Grover Harper, Hankinson Johnson, Juab McKay. Mikel Milner. Musselman Owens. Owens Pitcher. Plum Rebe. Sandal Aye. Stevenson Stratton. Senator Stratton,

  13. Sen. Keven J. Stratton50:17

      Thank you. I may, I'd like to just rise and explain my vote. As we look at a legislative body constitutionally, we have three central focuses, constitutional duties you could call 'em as well. One is to care for the fiscal health. One is set the policy, one is oversight. And it's important in this space that we get it right, that we use, use, caution and care as as a good, uh, minority leader said, this is a weighty, weighty, very weighty, uh, responsibility. Uh, but I command the work and, uh, want to again, extend appreciation. All those are involved and I will be voting. Aye.

  14. President (presiding)51:03

      Senator Vickers Weiler Wilson Winterton, president Adams First substitute Senate Bill 1 48, having received 23 yay votes, five na votes, one being absent will be read A third time

• Feb 20, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (12 turns)

  1. Unknown speaker5:53speaker not certain

     That's Uncer Senator. Okay.

  2. Sen. Daniel McCay5:56

     Thank you President. Uh, this is Bill hasn't changed much since the last time we, uh, talked about it. Um, left it on the board. We're still working on some, uh, um, some negotiations with the executive branch. Uh, but we're getting to that time of the session where we need to move it and if we need to make changes over in the house, we'll do that and bring it back on concurrence. So, um, basically the long and short of this committee, uh, long and short of this me, uh, this, uh, bill is, it now, um, changes the Rules Review and General Government Oversight Committee to General Oversight Committee. Uh, it adds three members to the, uh, to the committee, one from the Senate, two from the House. It does not say which party they need to be from. Uh, it amends provisions to what ACT actions the committee may take regarding hearings and administrative rules. Uh, it amends when the, uh, committee may close the committee hearings. It also amends provisions related to the process and procedure for making administrative rules and amends the responsibilities of the Office of Administrative Rules. With that Mr. President, I am happy to yield for questions.

  3. Unknown speaker7:08speaker not certain

     Thank you for the presentation. Uh, you're

  4. Sen. Daniel McCay7:10

     Welcome.

  5. President Adams (presiding)7:11

     Looking for discussion to the bill.

  6. Unknown speaker7:16speaker not certain

     It's been a while since we heard that bill toward the beginning of the session.

  7. President Adams (presiding)7:20

     Say no discussion. I'm gonna go back to you.

  8. Sen. Daniel McCay7:23

     Okay. I'll move that First substitute Senate bill 1 48 General, general Oversight Amendments Pass.

  9. President Adams (presiding)7:29

     Thank you. The question is, shall first substitute Senate Bill one forty eight pass roll call vote.

  10. Clerk (roll call)7:33

      Senator Vickers Baldy Aye. Lein Bramer Bus Cullimore Escamia Fillmore Fillmore Grover, All the Senate. Grover Harper Kins Ipson Johnson Aye. Juab Aye. McKay Aye. Mikel Aye. Milner Musselman Owens picture Slum Rebi Aye. Sandal Aye. Stevenson Stratton Bickers Weiler Aye. Wilson Aye. Winterton Picture? Aye.

  11. President Adams (presiding)8:56

      President Adams Aye. First substitute Senate Bill 1 48, having received 18 yay votes five nay votes, six being absent, passes this body and will be sent to the house for their consideration.

  12. Unknown speaker9:12speaker not certain

      I've got more President. Senator McKay.

• Feb 25, 2026 House Rules Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (34 turns)

  1. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)42:30

     to the second item on our agenda house. Uh, excuse me. We'll move to the third item on our agenda. Senate bill 1 48. First substitute General Oversight amendments. Senator McKay, time is yours.

  2. Sen. Daniel McCay42:43

     Thank you very much. Uh, purposes. Bill is pretty, uh, is pretty general for the most part, or a few things to, uh, that we can discuss as a committee. Um, uh, clearly we've been on this path of, you know, trying to, you know, figure out best way to manage this committee. And what we found is it's difficult to keep quorum, believe it or not. And so, uh, we asked, uh, we've dealt with this over the interim. We got unanimous support from the committee on a bipartisan approach, uh, to adding two members of the house and one member of the Senate to the committee to help with quorum. There is not a partisan designation, so it can be of any, you know, uh, it could be of any party, uh, appointed by the speaker or the president. Uh, and, uh, the other part is, um, currently everybody serves at the will of the speaker and the president. This bill acknowledges that, uh, in the past we had it set up so that people would serve for a TA time period. So there was a, a term of service. And what ended up happening is, and this is what happened this last year, is we unnecessarily had to, you know, write letters for the purpose of, uh, form and statute, because we replaced three chairs during the time period over the interim this last year. And so getting away from that requirement, uh, was an issue. Um, we're also removing the requirement. And it's interesting, it's been interpreted differently to me. Uh, I hadn't thought about it that way, but, um, we're removing the requirement for the committee to meet every month, um, right now that at least that's how we thought we were doing it. As we were saying, we're not meeting, we don't need to meet every month. Uh, right now, it requires us to say that we're not meeting every month if we don't meet a certain month or whatever. But statute requires us to meet monthly and then notify if we don't, don't. So this changes that. Someone said, well, does that make it so you guys can meet multiple times a month? That isn't the intention. Uh, the intention is to make it so that we really, you know, meet once a month, but only if it's needed. And if it's not needed, then we can, then we can remove it. Um, let's see. There is provisions in here for how, uh, the committee may close meetings. What we had this last year, uh, in dealing with, uh, some issues in the, with the, uh, school district, uh, was we had whistleblower complaints, but people that were concerned about testifying at public meeting due to concerns about retribution or, you know, fear of jobs, et cetera. And so, uh, the idea of being able to close a meeting to receive whistleblower complaints, uh, also the ability to deal with sensitive matters, uh, including, you know, child, uh, abuse or child, uh, you know, even child testimony. So the ability to close, uh, the committee for, for those purposes, um, uh, was there. And we, we took that language from other committees that have, uh, that have that ability already. Um, let's see. There are some other components. There is a second sub online that we can, that we can talk about. Uh, my preference before this meeting was to move the second sub. Uh, I, I'm trying to formulate my own opinion on the second sub here, uh, in a minute. So, uh, but with that, I am, I'm happy to yield to the committee and ask any questions that they may have.

  3. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)45:51

     Thank you for that presentation. We'll go to the committee for clarifying questions. Representative Peterson,

  4. Rep. Peterson45:57

     Thank you. Thank you for coming to our committee. Um, so I, I have two kind of key questions. Um, and I guess I did read the second sub last night. Um, so I know there's some differences between the first and the second. So my first question, I think is in both versions, um, which is the part about the meetings, um, more than once a month. I understand, um, what you're saying as far as if you're not, if you don't need a meeting, why do we have to notify people? Yeah. So I, I would prefer some language that said, you know, maybe no more than once a month. Yeah. And then if you did need more meetings, I mean, we have a process for that with a legislative management committee or something like that. Right. Um, are you comfortable with that changing whatever sub goes?

  5. Sen. Daniel McCay46:37

     Yeah. Um, what, what I've, uh, what I've tended to steer away from in my legislative career is the mother may I aspect that we constantly come up here, right? We don't trust our chairs. And so what we end up doing is we ask the chairs to mother, may I to ledge management all the time. So if you think that the committee needs a babysitter, by all means, uh, I'm happy to consider a babysitter if you feel like that's necessary. Uh, I've explained what the intent of the language is, but that is, you know, we, we don't feel like we need to meet every month, but there may be a situation that is so sensitive and so tenuous that we need to meet more than once a month. And if that situation, I'd hate to be limited and have to do another may I, and whether or not there's politics involved and whether or not we should continue on our oversight responsibilities as to whether or not we have the blessing of our grand PBAs of leadership. So my preference is not to, but at the same time, it is the will of the body.

  6. Rep. Peterson47:26

     Yeah. I appreciate, I appreciate that. And, you know, I, I chair a committee and, you know, you don't always love when people tell you how to do things. Um, so I can appreciate that. I guess my, my thought is, you know, um, that it's also a, um, an onus on our staff, right? It's not just us making decisions about how often we meet. There are other people that are impacted by decisions on how often a committee meets. And, um, and so saying like, we're gonna meet, I, I, I definitely think, you know, having to not notice people that you're not meeting makes a lot of sense to me that we don't need to have, create extra work on that regard. But I do think that we do just need to be mindful about how often our committees meet, how much we become a full-time legislature. I mean, that's just a general concern of mine. So

  7. Sen. Daniel McCay48:10

     It would be a new prohibition. We don't have that restriction now. So you'd be adding a new restriction on the committee that they cannot meet more than once a month. Again, we're not doing it. Um, I would say at that point, if the president speaker disagree with what the chairs can do, they can certainly change the chairs, right? So that's, I I would say there's a lot of checks and balances already built into our process. Adding another mother may I, is again, not my favorite. I'm Juab, I'm elected just like the president is. Right? Same number of constituents ish, right? Depending on growth. I don't know why they have a, I don't know why they're a better legislator than I am on whether or not I need their permission. So there you go.

  8. Rep. Peterson48:51

     Right. Yeah, I can appreciate that comment. Okay. So my second one is about your second sub. So, um, if, if you're not planning to entertain the second sub, I don't want waste people's time, but if, if you would like to have a discussion about it, I'm happy to ask my question about the second

  9. Sen. Daniel McCay49:04

     Sub. Go ahead and ask it. It will help me think through what my preference is, if that's

  10. Rep. Peterson49:09

      All right. Okay. Thank you. Um, so in, in the second sub, I know that last year, um, we passed legislation around, um, state school board rules and the opportunity for the commission to pause those rules. This, this extends that to all of our executive branch agencies as I read it in the second sub. Um, and then creates a trigger, um, that if, um, if, if the pause that we have constituted in statute, um, is found to be unconstitutional, then we have this new process with the governor himself, uh, having emergency hearings. So my question is, um, there's, once we delegate rulemaking authority, which I think we should be a lot more cautious about than we are. Mm-hmm. But once we delegate rulemaking authority, we are asking our, um, executive branch folks to write those rules. I appreciate the portion in the bill where if it's an emergency rule, you're now notified about that and can maybe act quicker. I think that's a really great provision in this bill. I, I think that's good. But, um, but then we do have the opportunity through the process and the session to poll rules for you to hold hearings on rules. All of that exists. I'm worried we're gonna run into some constitutional concerns and that there's some case law specifically about this, um, that this is going to create a vulnerability and risk for our state, um, in that. And, um, so any questions or thoughts about second that question?

  11. Sen. Daniel McCay50:33

      Yes. Um, here's the, uh, so here was the impetus for the second sub and the rationale for it. Uh, there is not binding constitutional law on, in the state of Utah, uh, or at the federal level on this issue. Uh, there is a case in Minnesota, and they're dealing with, you know, that part of it, their rule was much more expansive, uh, and much more restrictive. It basically struck the rule as opposed to pause the rule. And so the question is, can this be part of, you know, can the administrative rules committee insert itself in the middle of the approvals process of a rule to say, Hey, while you're implementing this rule, if there's a problem, and let me explain how problems are discovered, just 'cause it was new to me, right? Um, you're, you're on it, but I think others don't. Uh, the, uh, what ends up happening is, uh, an agency will propose a rule A, um, when that rule is proposed as part of the public notice, uh, process, our staff gets a schedule of all the rules that are being changed. Mm-hmm. Our staff then divides up those rules into committee area focuses. Those committee area focuses are based on usually subject matter, right? Business and labor, health and human services, those types of things. And they notify and they propagate those rules to the chair so that the chairs have a chance to review, maybe work with their committee, review it over interim, which is the purpose of the 60 days is to give them an opportunity over interim to review that potential rule and see did the executive branch potentially go on or off the rails when, when coming up with this. Mm-hmm. Um, and so that, that's the purpose of inserting us in the middle of it. Again, the pause is so that the legislature could, during an interim meeting, we have six of them throughout the year, and potentially have the opportunity to review during that 60 day period, that rule. So a chair may get it in addition to the chair may get it, the sponsors that sponsored a bill, that the, the rule is related to the sponsors. Then get a copy of that rule as well. This is all new process that we created this last year. Sponsors can then review the rules that are implementing policy that they passed in their bill. Okay. What, what happens, uh, what has happened is a sponsor that has implemented, uh, you know, given, uh, they've turned over legislative prerogative to the executive branch, said, come up with a rule, okay. To administer whatever it may be. If there is a problem with that rule, IEA stakeholder has an issue, uh, maybe industry may have an issue. Um, or, you know, a, a citizen may have an issue of whatever it is a legislator is, you know, can be notified about that issue. Right? But if they don't like it, and let's say that it's, you know, our first meeting in April, okay? And it's our first meeting in April, and they don't like it, and the agency says, well, you know, good luck. You got a session coming up next year, let us know. Right? So now you've def you've given this legislative prerogative to an administrative body. The administrative body is now reviewing the rule. They, they go a potentially different way than what, what the legislature or the legislature potentially intended and march down the path. And they say, sorry, legislature or legislature we're not interested. You know, and this isn't really, I mean, most of our agencies are amazing. I mean, 99.9% of interactions are, we reach out to them, we say, Hey, can we have a conversation about this rule? They'll pull the rule themselves, but there are situations where they won't. Okay. And in that situation, is it healthy in that legislative approval? And this is what the argument that I would make to the courts when they're arguing is, is it appropriate for the legislature to have an interim committee then review that rule, and in that process of reviewing that rule, improve the public feedback and improve that process? In some ways, the agency, because they're all year long, right? And we're part-time, they get to take advantage of the fact that we're only part-time. And I just say it would be why I feel like it would be wise to provide an option. Right? Now, if that's the case, the only place for them to have a hearing that could actually be impactful, okay, is then if it's not the legislature and it doesn't have the ability to pause or whatever it may be with a rule, then it comes to the governor's office. Okay? Now the governor's office, they will sign it behind closed doors or whatever. You know, they don't really even sign things. They just kind of end up going into effect. And what this does is it puts an elected official in front of the agency and says, hold a public hearing and let there be public comment about the concerns that may be about this policy before you even enact it. That's the same policy or the same process we have before we institute law. And I feel like in some ways it is a healthy response to, if the governor's office feels like it's too much legislative oversight, by all means then just mimic our process when you're creating administrative rule. That's all I'm asking.

  12. Rep. Peterson55:31

      Thank You. It sounds almost reasonable. I know. It, It's, it, it sounds like that until you think about that, there's lots of checks along the way with administrative rules that you didn't cover in your presentation.

  13. Sen. Daniel McCay55:44

      Well, I'm covering them from the legislator's process. Right,

  14. Rep. Peterson55:46

      Right. But I, I mean, from the public's perspective though, there are some checks along the way, and I really appreciate the new process. I passed a, a bill last year that, yeah, you know, um, authorized role. They loved that they sent it to me. Um, I, I've also had experience of rafting legislation and seeing a role in thinking that's not quite right. And calling the agency and them, and them, I, I've always had them be very responsive when I've called them to say, when we talked about it, this was, you know, and so, so creating this thing that could create, um, uh, a challenge for our state if, if this goes to court, um, it, it doesn't feel like, it feels like we can solve this problem in a way that doesn't run into some constitutional issues. So that's my comment. Thank you.

  15. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)56:27

      Thank you, Representative Peterson. Further discussion of clarifying questions from the committee. Seeing none will go to public comment. Is there any member of the public that wishes to speak to this bill? Anyone in the room? Anyone line? No. Okay. We'll go ahead and close public comment and go back to the committee for committee Action. Representative Burton, thanks.

  16. Rep. Burton56:53

      First chair. Do we, uh, need to pass out a substitute? I'm still unclear on which one you want to,

  17. Sen. Daniel McCay56:57

      Why don't we do this? Why don't we adopt the second sub and continue my conversation with Representative Peterson? We have a good relationship and we are great at working things out, and so I'm confident the two of us can figure that out and then come back with a third sub if that's needed.

  18. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)57:19

      Are you, you making a motion representative?

  19. Rep. Burton57:20

      Yes, Mr. Chair? I am. Now, if that's appropriate, a motion is to, uh, adopt a second sub to Senate bill 1 48.

  20. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)57:30

      Okay. That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to it?

  21. Rep. Burton57:33

      I, I personally like to say sub better than the first sub, but that's, that's what I'll say.

  22. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)57:40

      Um, discussion to the motion of moving the first sub, excuse me, the second substitute of Senate Bill 1 48.

  23. Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher57:50

      Let's see. Any I, I'll just, uh, add, and we've, we've had a little bit of conversation about this. I think that, um, I think you've identified an issue that we need to figure out a good solution to. Yeah, and I think you've been very clever and, and creative in, in trying to, um, incentivize the governor to follow the way that the, you know, the approach that we would rather and not have the courts have to step in and, and maybe, um, uh, you know, change the legislation that's in front of us. That being said, I'm not sure it's the perfect solution, so I, I would hope that you'd work through that solution in the future. But I'm, I'm happy to vote for the sub today.

  24. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)58:29

      So with that, I will move, or I'll place the motion. The motion again, is to move the second substitute of Senate Bill 1 48. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? No. Okay. That passes with Representative Peterson, uh, in the negative. Go back to the Committee for action Representative Lee.

  25. Rep. Trevor Lee58:49

      Yes. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that you pass out favorably SB 1 48, the second substitute favorably.

  26. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)58:56

      Okay. That motion is in order. Would you like to speak to it?

  27. Rep. Trevor Lee58:58

      Yeah, no. Um, we had a lot of time to look at the underlying part of, and the beef of this bill, and I think we'll still have some time to continue to look at the second substitute that we just adopted as we move to the house floor. And if we have any issues, then I believe it's something we could change once we get to that point.

  28. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)59:16

      Alright, so the motion before us is to pass favorably second substitute Senate bill 1 48, uh, to the motion Representative Peterson.

  29. Rep. Peterson59:24

      Thank you. And I appreciate the senator taking my call last night and, and, um, talking to me a little bit more this morning. Um, I, I do have concerns with where this bill is at, and there's no way I can vote for it in good conscience in this moment, in this, in this form. And, um, so I'll definitely be a unknown today, but, you know, I'll come to the table with you and we'll keep talking about it. But, but, um, these, both, both the, um, the, the number of meetings in, in relation to our staff and, and thinking about how, how we stay part-time as a legislature, I think, I think is important. Um, I also think, you know, while, while this committee plays a unique role, it's not so unique that it needs, um, super special rules. Um, and then, and then the second thing is, um, I do think that this whole part about the rules is going to put our state at risk. And I think we need to be very mindful of that. So thank you. Okay.

  30. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)1:00:16

      Further discussion to the motion to favorably recommend SP 1 48, we'll go to the sponsor of the legislation

  31. Sen. Daniel McCay1:00:25

      Center. Yes, thank you. I appreciate that. Um, and I promise you Representative Peterson, we have not had our last conversation, so we'll, we'll keep working on it. I, I am fully, um, a believer that March 6th at 1159 feels like it's a year away. So we have plenty of time between now and then to get it worked out. Um, the, the one, the one part I will, the one part I'll say is that, uh, you know, we've also been talking to the governor's office and they've expressed, you know, some concerns. The novel approach here that is different is that, and it's, it's substantially different, is we aren't eliminating a rule. We aren't taking it out. We're just giving it time to season. And in order for there to be litigation, realize, in order for there to be litigation over the issue on constitutionality, the chairs and the committee have to vote. You know, by a majority vote, they have to, they have to vote to pause that rule. And so otherwise it just sits there dormant. And at the end of the day, I think at that point it becomes a great negotiating tool for the legislature to balance this legislative prerogative. I'm hopeful that there never is a situation where the legislature needs that 68 pause. I just don't think it's that important. But at the same time, having a, having, having a legislature that adjourns the first week of March and has to have an emergency to call itself into special session to deal with an issue or wait for a special session and then el elevate it up, the list of issues that gets hard. I'll just tell you, as someone who is, you know, we've given administrative rule authority to executive agencies, you know, I do watch those things and I think it's super important that we continue that process. And I'm hopeful that we will continue that Overwatch. And, and, um, I'll tell you this is, this committee has been very, uh, has been very interesting thus far, but it is teethless when, when it says, you know, could we talk about this and figure it out, it's, it's really just teethless in a lot of ways. So this is the first time this committee would actually have any teeth or leverage to negotiate those differences of opinion. And you have to know when we've gone in and we've talked about this thing, and this is totally different, this committee is very different, uh, to, to representative Peterson's point, I think it's very rare. I'm just trying to think of one vote that came down on partisan lines and I can't think of one in the year and a half that I've been chair. It just doesn't work that way. We genuinely work in a bipartisan manner on this committee. Um, and we've dealt with some very tough issues and I've been very impressed with the balanced way that the committee, everybody seems to chuck partisan ness out the window. And really it's about, you know, making sure we're keeping an eye on what the government does. And I've really been, I've really appreciated being part of that. 'cause honestly, this last year and a half of being on this committee has been one of the most rewarding parts of being in the legislature. So I would encourage you to ask the speaker to be on it 'cause it is has been a good committee. So with that, I, I, I finish summation. Thank you.

  32. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)1:03:24

      Thank you Senator Representative Lee.

  33. Rep. Trevor Lee1:03:26

      Oh, uh, thank you and thank you for that discussion. I would also echo that, you know, chairing this committee with the good senator, I've seen what happens when we do look at things with the nonpartisan side and it's been very effective and, um, I, I've seen a lot of good work done because of the nature of the committee and the way that we're doing things. And so I, I would think that this is gonna help with the good that we're doing and keep moving it forward. So thank you.

  34. Committee chair (Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher)1:03:50

      Alright, so the motion before, uh, the committee is to favorably recommend Senate Bill 1 48, second substitute general oversight amendments. We'll do a roll call vote. Representative Peterson, no. Representative Burton? Yes. Representative Hollins? Yes. Representative Lee? Yes. Representative Matthews? Yes. Representative Roberts? Yes. Representative Wilcox? Yes. Chair Tuscher? No. Thank You. All right. Congratulations Senator.

• Mar 4, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (25 turns)

  1. Unknown speaker33:44speaker not certain

     Second substitute Senate bill 1 48 General Oversight Amendments by Senator McKay. This bill was heard in the rules Committee with a vote of 6 2 0. The house sponsor is Representative Lee, Representative Trevor Lee.

  2. Sen. Daniel McCay33:59

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, this is a bill that we had worked on over the interim, uh, to, uh, bring some clarification to some of the roles and responsibilities of this committee. We were also looking to, uh, expand some of the numbers on the committee to make it more in line with what the other committees we have within, uh, the legislature are. And so with that, I'll end the presentation on it.

  3. Speaker (presiding)34:25

     Thank you Representative Lee. Discussion to the bill. Representative Teuscher.

  4. Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher34:30

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move the third substitute.

  5. Speaker (presiding)34:34

     That motion is in order. We'd like to speak to it.

  6. Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher34:36

     Yeah. This is a, uh, substitute that we worked closely with the sponsored legislation on, um, to bring it in, uh, to, to address some of the concerns that, that we had in, in particular, the substitute, um, doesn't change, uh, the timing of when the committee can meet. It takes out the questions around, um, whether the governor has to appear before committees and it, there's a third thing. Oh, how many bills they can open. So it's just based on the general rules that we already have for committees opening bills.

  7. Speaker (presiding)35:20

     Thank you, Representative Teuscher, Representative Lee on the motion to adopt. Third substitute.

  8. Rep. Trevor Lee35:25

     Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, friendly substitution and highly welcome it.

  9. Speaker (presiding)35:29

     Thank you representative Discussion to the motion to adopt third substitute Representative Thurston. Thank.

  10. Rep. Norman K Thurston35:37

      Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of adopting the third substitute. Uh, you know, the other bill was great. I can't fault the sponsors for that. But, uh, since that came out, there were a couple of changes that were identified that were needed. And in particular just colleagues, this idea that, um, every committee is gonna be capped at the number of bills that they can open applies to this committee as well. There's no special treatment of one committee over another. I think that's a, a critical add. And I appreciate our rules chair for bringing this amendment forward. So thank you to the rules chair.

  11. Speaker (presiding)36:05

      Thank you Representative Thurston. Further discussion to the motion to adopt third substitute C then back to you Representative Teuscher for summation.

  12. Speaker (presiding)36:14

      On this motion, I'll waive, this motion has been waived. We'll go ahead and place the motion. The motion before is the House adopt third substitute on SB 1 48. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes?

  13. Speaker (presiding)36:26

      The bill's been substituted, uh, before the body, uh, for further consideration. Representative Shepherd?

  14. Rep. Lisa Shepherd36:35

      Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. I have attended some of these meetings and I think that, uh, the changes that they have listed are necessary and I really support this and ask the body to support as well. Thank you.

  15. Speaker (presiding)36:48

      Thank you, Representative Shepherd for the discussion to the bill. Representative Dunnigan,

  16. Rep. James A. Dunnigan36:53

      Mr. Speaker, I move to adopt amendment number one.

  17. Speaker (presiding)36:57

      Thank you, representative. That motion is an order. Would you like to, uh, speak to that amendment?

  18. Rep. James A. Dunnigan37:02

      Yes. In the prior, a prior version, I think it was the second sub of the bill, it allowed the committee chairs to open unlimited number of committee bills. As I understand it, the third sub has stricken those lines. What this does is it, it says it doesn't, instead of just leaving it silent, it says that this oversight committee may open the same number of bills as an interim committee, which currently is five. That's, that's what it does.

  19. Speaker (presiding)37:26

      Thank you, Representative Dunnigan, uh, Representative Lee on the motion to adopt amendment number one.

  20. Rep. Trevor Lee37:35

      Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. Yes. Uh, looking over substitute three. For some reason, that was not put in there like it was supposed to. So this is a very friendly amendment to go in line with what we discussed that we thought was in substitute three. Representative Lee.

  21. Speaker (presiding)37:48

      Further discussion to the motion to adopt amendment number one under Representative Dunnigan name on third substitute SB 1 48. See none. Back to you. Representative Dunnigan for summation, I waive summation has been waived.

  22. Speaker (presiding)38:01

      We'll go ahead and place the motion. The motion before us is the house adopt amendment number one. Under Representative Bennigan's name on third substitute SB 1 48. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes. The bill has been amended before the body for further consideration.

  23. Speaker (presiding)38:17

      Seeing none. Back to you Representative Lee for summation, I'll waive summation has been waived. Voting will now be open on third substitute. Seeing all present and having voted voting is now. CL Representative Monson, would you like to vote? All present, having voted voting is now closed.

  24. Speaker (presiding)39:25

      Third substitute SB 1 48 passes this body with 74 yes votes, zero, no votes and will be sent to the Senate for further consideration. Let's go to Representative Stevie. Listen.

  25. Speaker (presiding)39:42

      Thank you representative. That motion is in order. We'll go ahead and place the motion. The motion before is the House UNC Encircle third

• Mar 4, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (15 turns)

  1. Rep. Lee (floor sponsor)34:30speaker not certain

     Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move the third substitute.

  2. Speaker (presiding)34:34

     That motion is in order. We'd like to speak to it.

  3. Rep. Teuscher34:36

     Yeah. This is a, uh, substitute that we worked closely with the sponsored legislation on, um, to bring it in, uh, to, to address some of the concerns that, that we had in, in particular, the substitute, um, doesn't change, uh, the timing of when the committee can meet. It takes out the questions around, um, whether the governor has to appear before committees and it, there's a third thing. Oh, how many bills they can open. So it's just based on the general rules that we already have for committees opening bills.

  4. Speaker (presiding)35:20

     Thank you, Representative Teuscher, Representative Lee on the motion to adopt. Third substitute.

  5. Rep. Lee35:25

     Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, friendly substitution and highly welcome it.

  6. Speaker (presiding)35:29

     Thank you representative Discussion to the motion to adopt third substitute Representative Thurston. Thank.

  7. Rep. Thurston35:37

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of adopting the third substitute. Uh, you know, the other bill was great. I can't fault the sponsors for that. But, uh, since that came out, there were a couple of changes that were identified that were needed. And in particular just colleagues, this idea that, um, every committee is gonna be capped at the number of bills that they can open applies to this committee as well. There's no special treatment of one committee over another. I think that's a, a critical add. And I appreciate our rules chair for bringing this amendment forward. So thank you to the rules chair.

  8. Speaker (presiding)36:05

     Thank you Representative Thurston. Further discussion to the motion to adopt third substitute C then back to you Representative Teuscher for summation. On this motion, I'll waive, this motion has been waived. We'll go ahead and place the motion. The motion before is the House adopt third substitute on SB 1 48. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes? The bill's been substituted, uh, before the body, uh, for further consideration. Representative Shepherd? Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. I have attended some of these meetings and I think that, uh, the changes that they have listed are necessary and I really support this and ask the body to support as well. Thank you. Thank you, Representative Shepherd for the discussion to the bill. Representative Dunnigan,

  9. Rep. Shepherd36:35

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. I have attended some of these meetings and I think that, uh, the changes that they have listed are necessary and I really support this and ask the body to support as well. Thank you.

  10. Rep. Dunnigan36:53

      Mr. Speaker, I move to adopt amendment number one.

  11. Speaker (presiding)36:57

      Thank you, representative. That motion is an order. Would you like to, uh, speak to that amendment?

  12. Rep. Dunnigan37:02

      Yes. In the prior, a prior version, I think it was the second sub of the bill, it allowed the committee chairs to open unlimited number of committee bills. As I understand it, the third sub has stricken those lines. What this does is it, it says it doesn't, instead of just leaving it silent, it says that this oversight committee may open the same number of bills as an interim committee, which currently is five. That's, that's what it does.

  13. Speaker (presiding)37:26

      Thank you, Representative Dunnigan, uh, Representative Lee on the motion to adopt amendment number one.

  14. Rep. Lee37:35

      Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker. Yes. Uh, looking over substitute three. For some reason, that was not put in there like it was supposed to. So this is a very friendly amendment to go in line with what we discussed that we thought was in substitute three.

  15. Speaker (presiding)37:46

      Representative Lee. Further discussion to the motion to adopt amendment number one under Representative Dunnigan name on third substitute SB 1 48. See none. Back to you. Representative Dunnigan for summation, I waive summation has been waived. We'll go ahead and place the motion. The motion before us is the house adopt amendment number one. Under Representative Bennigan's name on third substitute SB 1 48. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will that motion passes. The bill has been amended before the body for further consideration. Seeing none. Back to you Representative Lee for summation, I'll waive summation has been waived. Voting will now be open on third substitute. Seeing all present and having voted voting is now. CL Representative Monson, would you like to vote? All present, having voted voting is now closed. Third substitute SB 1 48 passes this body with 74 yes votes, zero, no votes and will be sent to the Senate for further consideration. Let's go to Representative Stevie. Listen. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Motion to encircle SB one 90. Thank you representative. That motion is in order. We'll go ahead and place the motion. The motion before is the House UNC Encircle third

• Mar 5, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (4 turns)

  1. Sen. Daniel McCay30:55

     Thank you President. We made, uh, over in the House, uh, rules Committee. Um, we identified a couple of issues, uh, after and after talking with, uh, the governor staff. Uh, we worked out the issues of the language, uh, related to the administrative rules. Um, you know, changes feel like these changes, uh, make the executive branch happier and I'm okay with them.

  2. Senate President (presiding)31:20

     A great explanation. We have any discussion on the motion to Concur saying none. I'll place the motion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule that motion passes. Third substitute Senate Bill 1 48 has been read three times. The question is, shall it pass? Roll call vote.

  3. Senate clerk (roll call)31:38

     Senator Vickers. Baldy Aye. Blu in Brammer. Afus Colmore Escamia Fillmore Grover Harper Kinins Ipson Johnson k Juab McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Aye. Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers. Byler And no. Aye. Wilson. Aye. Winterton Pitch President Adams Aye. Third

  4. Senate President (presiding)32:30

     substitute Senate Bill 1 48. Having received 26 a votes, one nay vote two being absent passes this body and will be returned to the house For the signature