S.B. 154 Protection and Advocacy Agency Reporting

What this bill does

The bill would formally define the state's protection and advocacy agency, the Disability Law Center, in state law and direct it to represent the interests of disabled people. It would require an annual written report to interim legislative committees by August 31, at least three public meetings a year, and mental health reporting added by the House.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 5 yes, 0 no, 4 absentSenate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee: vote to change the bill · Feb 9, 2026Who voted how
• 6 yes, 0 no, 3 absentSenate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 9, 2026Who voted how
• 26 yes, 1 no, 2 absentFirst of two Senate votes · Feb 23, 2026Who voted how
• 24 yes, 1 no, 4 absentFinal Senate vote · Feb 24, 2026Who voted how
• 12 yes, 0 no, 2 absentHouse Health and Human Services Committee: Amendment Recommendation · Feb 27, 2026Who voted how
• 10 yes, 2 no, 2 absentHouse Health and Human Services Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 27, 2026Who voted how
• 66 yes, 1 no, 8 absentFinal House vote · Mar 6, 2026
• 26 yes, 2 no, 1 absentSenate vote to accept the other chamber's changes · Mar 6, 2026

Hearings and debates

• Jan 30, 2026 Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee
• Feb 4, 2026 Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee
• Feb 9, 2026 Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (28 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)1:48:51

     everyone, so you can comment whenever you want and we're gonna just open the rules up. However, I'm, I'm just joking. Um, Senator Weiler, go ahead.

  2. Sen. Todd Weiler1:49:01

     Thank you. Um, sorry. This, this Bill wa was ized on the last two agendas and we didn't get to it. Um, I think it's, it's somewhat related to SJR seven, which we heard last, uh, Wednesday. But it's, um, uh, it's based on a North Carolina, um, law, um, that basically asks or, um, requires their, uh, protection and advocacy agency to make some reports to the legislature and to hold some, um, statewide, um, public, uh, hearings throughout the state. I do have a second sub. Um, I was brought some language by, uh, the Cicero or Cicero Institute out of Texas, um, with some improvements. Um, so I would, um, like to, uh, present that second sub. Um, And that is an order, and I assume that's a motion. Yes. I'd like to delete, uh, first substitute Senate bill 1 54 entitled and body and replace it with second substitute Senate bill 1 54.

  3. Committee chair (presiding)1:50:07

     Okay. So this, so we didn't adopt sub one, so it's, we're gonna be, okay, I'm gonna reframe your motion. Okay. Thank you. As adoption of the second sub and deleting, uh, the original bill. Uh, any discussion of that motion? Seeing none, I'll place that for a vote. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? I rule that motion passes unanimously. Oh, wait, yeah, sorry. Five. Okay. Five to zero. Um, and, uh, the, we are to the sub, the second substitute.

  4. Sen. Todd Weiler1:50:32

     Okay. Uh, thank you. Let me go through the second sub pretty quickly. And, um, uh, I've kind of given the, um, um, genesis of the bill. Uh, so it has, it has some definitions to, uh, to define appropriate for the need of the individual. And it defines disabled individual to comply with the Americans with Disability Act and it comply. It defines state protection and a and advocacy agency, which in Utah, uh, has been and is the Disability Law Center. Um, so it, it does, um, say that the State Protection Advocacy Agency should represent and advocate for the interest of all disabled individuals in the state annually. Hold at least three meetings with the public throughout the state to understand the needs in the local community, and provide education, advocacy, and resources to disabled individuals in the local community. And provide a written report annually to the Judiciary Interim Committee and the Health and Human Services interim committee on or before August 31st of each year. And it, it gives some specifications, um, of that report. And, um, and that is the bill. Uh, the bill would take effect, uh, May 6th of this year. And, uh, that concludes my presentation.

  5. Committee chair (presiding)1:51:53

     Alright. Excellent. Uh, any questions to the bill? Seeing none, we'll open it up to public comment. Are there any that would like to speak to this bill? Okay, we've got two commenters. We're gonna stick with the chairs or three. Okay. So we're gonna, and then we have one online. So you three are going to be able to speak to the bill, uh, and the one online, and that will be all. So, just so that we're all clear. And then, uh, why don't we do the three that are in the room. Uh, please speak first. Uh, the first person, and right after the next people, please fill up the chairs at, at the, uh, at the, uh, center table. Okay, go ahead.

  6. Nate Cripes, Disability Law Center1:52:31

     Uh, good afternoon, committee. My name is Nate Cripes. I'm the Public Affairs supervising attorney at the Disability Law Center, the State's Protection Advocacy Agency. Um, just real quick, I just wanna say we don't oppose this bill. Um, we're happy to provide reports to the state. Um, we've not traditionally been asked to do that, so we're, we're not opposed to doing so. Um, I think, um, you know, we have nine federal reports we, we submit to the state. I think our preference would be to share those. Um, I'm not sure that we feel this needs to be in legislation. I think you could just ask us, um, and we'd provide them. But you're the policymaking body. If you wanna put it in code, put it in code. Um, but you could just send a text message to me or, or Andrew. Um, ultimately, I, I would say you'll probably go to Andrew as the attorney, half of the team. I know everyone likes him more. Um, with respect to the, the meeting requirements, I would just say, as I said in the last meeting, my belief is that we did at least a hundred that would qualify as this last year. So I'm not sure that there's a need to say we need to do three, but we're, we're happy to, to do, as you know, many as we can to get information from the public. Um, and then with respect to, um, I think it says we need to represent and advocate for the interest of all, uh, people with disabilities in the state. I just wanna be clear that we do everything we can to serve every person, but we are a nonprofit. We can't represent every person who comes with a disability. We have to have criteria and, um, priorities that we set based on what we can or can't do. So ultimately, we can't represent everyone. We do our best to serve everyone we can. Um, our federal grants kind of dictate the work that we can do, um, and we have to comply with federal law. So, I just wanna be clear that we, you know, I think that language is a little bit tricky for us to say that we need to represent everyone, but ultimately, I just wanna be clear. We, we can't necessarily do that. Um, but I don't think any law firm could represent every person that comes through their door. Um, but we try to represent the interest of every person with disabilities we can. And with that, I, you know, I, I think we're, we're okay with the bill. Um, I, again, not sure it's necessary, but, um, happy to have it out there.

  7. Unknown speaker1:54:18speaker not certain

     You've gone from we're in favor or we don't have a problem to the bill to, we're okay to please just send us a text?

  8. Nate Cripes, Disability Law Center1:54:26

     No, I, I, what I'm saying is, ultimately we don't think it's necessary to be in code, but if y'all wanna put it in code, I wanna be clear like that's, that's not our decision to make. We are not opposed to that.

  9. Committee chair (presiding)1:54:33

     Alright, sounds good. Thank you. Next up.

  10. Keaton Larson1:54:37

      Alright, um, I'm Keaton Larson and I'm representing myself. I just wanted to share some thoughts I had on the bill. Um, I'm speaking today in support of, um, Senate Bill 1 54, the protection and advocacy Advocacy Agent C reporting bill. At its core, the Protection and Advocacy Agency exists to serve individuals who often lack power, access, or the ability to advocate for themselves. The mission is critical when this agency works well. It protects civil rights, improves accountability in state systems, and ensures that people with disabilities are treated with dignity and fairness. SB 1 54 focuses on reporting and transparency, which when done correctly, can strengthen that mission. Lawmakers and the public should understand how this agency is operating, what issues it's addressing, and when gaps remain in service or protections, transferability build transparency builds trust. And trust is essential when an agency is tasked with defending vulnerable communities. However, I want to emphasize it's an, it's an important principle as this bill moves forward. Reporting requirements should strengthen advocacy, not weaken it. Oversight is appropriate, but it's, but it must not become a tool that limits the agency's Independence, discouraged it from challenging state systems or diver diverts resources away from direct advocacy work and towards unnecessary bureaucracy. From a public interest perspective, the success of SB 1 54 should be measured by, measured by whether it improves outcomes for the people or the agency it serves. Reporting should be meaningful information about systemic problems, barriers to access, and civil rights concerns, not just service level metrics. It should empower the legislature to fix problems, not silence or constraints the agency tasked with identifying them. In other words, transparency should work with advocacy not against it. If SB 1 54 is implemented in a way that preserves the agency's Independence, protects his ability to speak honestly about failures within the state systems and ensures the reporting leads to better protections for people with disabilities, then this bill can be a positive step forward. I urge the committee to keep that balance front and center as you consider this legislation. And to vote yes, protecting vulnerable populations requires both accountability and Independence. And Utah's Lodge should, should reflect both. Thank you. Thank

  11. Committee chair (presiding)1:57:03

      You, Mr. Larson. Great suit, by the way. Thank you. All right. Uh, next up and then let's queue up the one online to come on after this commenter.

  12. Devon Kurtz, Policy Director, Cicero Institute1:57:11

      Go ahead, sir. In person. I'm Devin Kurtz, representing the Cicero Institute a Think Tank in Austin, Texas. But I, I live here in Salt Lake and I'm the policy director of that organization interviewing this bill. I worked closely with Dr. Eleanor McCann Katz, who led the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration as assistant secretary. That organization oversees the protection advocacy program federally, we feel strongly that these reporting requirements will fill a crucial gap in federal oversight. There was a government and accountability, there was a government accountability office report on the protection and advocacy program nationally that found, uh, federal oversight was severely lacking. They were not setting performance metrics. There was mentioned, uh, earlier of, of the many federal reports, uh, in depth reviews by SAMHSA of the Protection and Advocacy Program. Despite all that reporting have not been conducted. So we feel strongly that states need to step up and, and, uh, further review these organizations in a way that this bill, uh, I think sets, sets some groundwork for, uh, I think it's, it's worth noting that that same Government Accountability Office report found that, uh, nationally these organizations were filing twice as many cases involving, uh, um, uh, contesting the level of treatment that clinicians recommended for individuals with mental illness. Uh, twice as many of those cases were filed as cases of abuse or neglect. That is, uh, not the original intention of the Protection Advocacy Program. Um, so these reporting requirements, especially, uh, the, the, uh, second substitute really focus in on, on some key metrics around whether or not, uh, the Protection advocacy program is advocating for more or less treatment, um, related to clinical recommendations. So, uh, again, we'd like to voice our strong support. Thank you.

  13. Committee chair (presiding)1:59:06

      Alright. Thank you. Uh, we do have one question. Senator Escamilla.

  14. Sen. Luz Escamilla1:59:09

      Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, is it your recommendation for, I mean, I just wanna be clear, um, in your position, um, how much, I mean, maybe if you know, how much funding does this organization receive from the state?

  15. Devon Kurtz, Policy Director, Cicero Institute1:59:27

      Um, from the state? I'm actually not sure. I'm only really familiar with, with the federal funding stream through protection and Advocacy. Um, I, I imagine there's a state appropriation, but I don't have that information. No. Okay.

  16. Sen. Luz Escamilla1:59:37

      So just I wanna follow up 'cause there's no funding, uh, uh, from the state to this organization. Okay. I recognize the role that you're mentioning from at the federal level Yes. And as a protect. So I'm now gonna follow Mr. Terry if that's appropriate with a, uh, just a follow up question.

  17. Sen. Luz Escamilla1:59:52

      Um, so is it your understanding, and I'm, by the way, I'm gonna support the bill. I think that reporting reporting always helps. I'm just, you know, it seems to me we're, what we're, it's a little bit concerning is when there's no state funds attached, but there is a very specific responsibility that this organization has Sure. For this community. But I, I feel like they, the accountability side seems to be like it's an accountability based also on funds from the state. So just recognizing, do you think there's a role for the state on oversight when there's no state funds attached to it?

  18. Devon Kurtz, Policy Director, Cicero Institute2:00:25

      I, I do specifically because the protection and advocacy program as outlined in federal statute, uh, requires the governor to designate the organization. And that designation can change this, uh, the resolution that was considered last week, uh, touched upon this more directly. But, uh, yes, because because governors have, uh, design power over it, I, I do believe this reporting requirement, uh, would, would inform that, uh, you know, periodic review of designation, those periodic reviews don't really happen, but they ought to.

  19. Committee chair (presiding)2:00:56

      Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Alright. I don't see any other questions from the committee. Let's go online. Uh, I believe Mr. Stewart is online. If you can unmute, go ahead.

  20. Seth Stewart2:01:07

      Yeah. So I'm Seth Stewart, uh, representing myself from American Fork. Um, just a few observations about this bill. Um, I'm noticing the reporting is not symmetric with respect to harms, et cetera. Uh, it doesn't, doesn't require, uh, disclosure of, of, uh, possible harms or mis assessments and so on. It seems to be encouraging reporting metrics that would be used to normalize forced medication and presumptions of the correctness of competency assessments. I did mention previously on SG seven, that Utah's constitution in Article one, section seven declares that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of the law. This applies to individuals who are being assessed for mental competency. It does not only apply to criminal law and defendants, and furthermore, uh, due process does not merely refer to the existence of a process that has been specified by law. But the qualifier due process means that it's actually pursuant to constitutional duties and responsibilities and does not exceed the enumeration of powers delegated and granted to the government. And so, so part of my concern here is, is that, uh, excess of scope, uh, that doesn't fall within our constitutional parameters, but also by establishing mandatory reporting requirements, the citizen oversight, this process is redirected and is conditioned and prompted by agency reporting, which creates a circular feedback loop. And so, if the model of state management of advocacy were so effective, uh, why did the DLC need to be revamped in the first place? I think we really need to, uh, recognize and pay attention to which direction these laws are pushing and the principles behind the, the, the management of it that are, uh, making it either more or less effective at accomplishing its stated purposes. And so with that, I would, uh, urge you to oppose this bill. Thank you.

  21. Committee chair (presiding)2:03:02

      Alright. That concludes our online or our public comment. We'll go back to the bill sponsor. And are there any committee questions at this point before we go into voting? I don't see any from the committee. And so, uh, we will wait for, uh, Senator Weiler to get there, and then he can move the, move the second substitute if you'd like.

  22. Unknown speaker2:03:27speaker not certain

      I think we already did that. I, I am pretty sure we moved the second seven. I mean, move to, I recommend favorably second substitute.

  23. Sen. Todd Weiler2:03:35

      Okay. Thank you. Um, yeah, I just wanna, I just wanna say if, if you read the, the plain language of the bill, it doesn't require, um, the p and a agency to represent every individual. It says the interests of all disabled people. So I think there's a difference between representing everyone who asked for an attorney and representing the interests of, uh, the disabled community or all of the disabled community. Um, and, um, so I want to point that out with, with, uh, with respect to, um, the, the last public comment. I, I, I don't, I don't, I didn't, I didn't track how that had anything to do, to do it all with my bill. Um, um, and then the other, um, comment I just wanted to make Mr. Chair is that the, I I do want to thank the DLC. They, they provided me about a three inch stack of their federal reports, but they, they're not easy to decipher. And so I'm hoping that, um, they don't just cut and paste those reports to us because I, I, I've given some specific, um, uh, questions or, or topics that I'm hoping that they would cover. I guess if they just do, uh, give us the federal reports, we can just call them in, um, in the interim committee and ask 'em those questions. But the, the federal reports, I think are, are tailored to, you know, a specific, uh, um, computer program or whatever, but they, they are difficult to decipher and it's hard to glean out that information that's, um, identified in the bill. So, um, that is my summation and I'll move that. We favorably recommend third substitute, uh, house bill.

  24. Committee chair (presiding)2:05:09

      Second substitute. Second substitute Senate bill, sorry, Senate bill 1 54. 1 54 to the body of the, of the Senate. That motion is in order.

  25. Committee chair (presiding)2:05:17

      Uh, we'll place that for a vote and I think we'll do a roll call. Vote, uh, go ahead.

  26. Unknown speaker2:05:38speaker not certain

      Represent or Senator Ipson. Baldry aye. Brammer aye. Escamilla Aye. Fillmore Mikel Musselman pitcher and chair. Oh, Senate and Chair Weiler Aye. Right.

  27. Committee chair (presiding)2:05:57

      I rule that passes unanimously six to zero. Thank you. Thanks.

  28. Chair Todd Weiler (presiding)2:06:23

      All right. The next item on our agenda is, um,

• Feb 23, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (9 turns)

  1. Sen. Todd Weiler1:36:50

     would, um, require the Disability Law Center, which is the State's Designated Protection and Advocacy Agency to report to the legislature annually and also to hold three public meetings, uh, throughout the state each year. And, um, that that's all it does.

  2. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:37:08

     Thank you for that presentation. Is there discussion to the bill? Saying none. Senator Cullimore back to you for summation or a motion.

  3. Sen. Kirk A. Cullimore1:37:17

     Thank you. I would move. I'll waive summation. Move that second substitute Senate bill 1 54. Be read for a third time.

  4. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:37:23

     Question is, shall second substitute Senate bill 1 54. Be read for a third time Rule co vote.

  5. Unknown speaker (roll call)1:37:28

     Senator Vickers Baldry Lewin Brammer bus comore as Camilla Aye. Fillmore Aye. Grr roper Harper Aye. Kins Aye. Ipson Aye. Johnson Quan McKay. Mikel Milner Aye. Musman Owens Aye. Pitcher. Lum Rebe Danal Aye. Stevenson Stratton. Bickers weer Aye. Wilson Aye. Winterton Aye. Rebe Aye.

  6. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:38:36

     President Adams Second substitute Senate Bill 1 54. Having received 26 yay votes, one nay vote two being absent will be read for a third time. Senator Millner,

  7. Sen. Ann Millner1:38:52

     Thank you very much. I'd like to encircle, um, Senate Bill 2 41. Motion is to encircle Senate bill 2 41 Early literacy discussion.

  8. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:39:04

     That motion seeing none. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed over rule that passes. The bill is Uncircled. Senator Millner.

  9. Sen. Ann Millner1:39:13

     Okay. Uh, then I would like to delete and title and Body Senate bill 2 41

• Feb 24, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (4 turns)

  1. Sen. Todd Weiler1:04:21

     responsibilities of the state, uh, protection Advocacy Agency and requires it to, uh, report to the legislature. Um, I do have an amendment to the bill. I met with the disability law center yesterday and, uh, I'd like to move amendment one, which will strike lines 59 through 66. Um, this is some language I added in committee at a stakeholder request, but the, uh, DLC is telling me that they don't have this information and they wouldn't be able to comply with that. So I'd like to move amendment one, which strikes, um, subsection E lines 59 through 66. It's not showing. I Trying to look, I'm gonna circle if I, I thought that was on. I'm trying to get, I'm trying to see if I'm not seeing amendment one on the, I'm Sorry. I was told it was, it was ready. But I'll, I'll circle Motion to circle. We have a i'll with withdraw the motion to amend and accept the motion to circle.

  2. Presiding officer1:05:19

     Motion to circle. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule that motion passes. The bill is circled. Senator Cullimore,

  3. Sen. Kirk A. Cullimore1:05:31

     Motion to encircle SB 2 75. Motion to circle which bill Un Uncer 2 75 SB 2 75. Motion Uncer Senate bill 2 75. State endorsed Digital Identity program Amendments.

  4. Presiding officer1:05:46

     All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Or that motion passes. The bill is Uncircled Senator,

• Feb 24, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (10 turns)

  1. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:09:17

     Assume there's an, an amendment ready?

  2. Sen. Todd Weiler1:09:18

     Yes. I'd like to move amendment one which deletes section E, which is lines 59 through 66. Because, uh, the DLC is telling me they, they don't have that information to report.

  3. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:09:28

     Okay. We have motion to amend, uh, say no discussion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule The motion passes. The bill is amended explanation of the bill. Senator?

  4. Sen. Todd Weiler1:09:40

     Yeah. So this bill requires the DLC to report to the legislature annually and hold three public meetings throughout the state. Uh, with that, I, uh, call the question and move that second substitute. Simple.

  5. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:09:52

     Hold on a second. Let's open it up for some

  6. Sen. Todd Weiler1:09:53

     Discussion. That's, yeah, that concludes my presentation.

  7. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:09:56

     Thank you. Saying no discussion on the bill. Now I'll go to you for action. Alright, I'll call the question. Thank you. And the question is, shall second substitute Senate bill one fifty four pass roll call vote.

  8. Senate clerk (roll call)1:10:05

     Senator Vickers. Baldry Lewin Brammer? Yes. Plus call Gilmore a Escamilla Aye. Fillmore Aye. Grover Harper Kins Ipson Johnson. Juab McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Owens pitcher Plum Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton Vicars Weiler Wilson Aye. Winterton Rebe President Adams Aye. Second substitute Senate Bill 1 54.

  9. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:10:58

     Having received 24 yay votes, one nay votes four being absent passes this body and will be sent to the house for their consideration. Senator Plumb.

  10. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:11:24

      All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Will the motion pass as the bill is encircle? Senator?

• Feb 27, 2026 House Health and Human Services Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (36 turns)

  1. Committee chair1:23:43

     Bill 1 54. Okay. Senate bill 1 54 sub two.

  2. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:23:49

     Yeah. Thank you. Members of the committee? Uh, this is a fairly straightforward bill, but it's meaningful. This bill formally defines Utah's State Protection Advocacy Agency, and it clarifies the, that agency's responsibility to advocate, to represent and advocate for all disabled individuals statewide, which is a cleanup of existing state language. It improves transparency and legislative oversight by requiring them to submit an annual written report to specific legislative interim committees, which describes the meetings they held, the services that provided the populations that serve and agencies they worked with. This bill will strengthen public engagement and accountability. They must hold at least three public meetings each year across the state to gather input, provide education, and share resources. Just a quick note that although there is a required report, um, all of the language here is permissive, not req, not prescriptive. So they may include specific things in their report, but they don't have to. So it leaves some discretion to them as to what to include in that report. But the statute gives them some ideas of things we might be interested in. With that, I will conclude my presentation. Thank you. Uh, bring it back to the committee

  3. Committee chair1:24:59

     for clarifying questions. Representative Abbott.

  4. Rep. Abbott1:25:02

     Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have a question. It's my understanding that we provide absolutely no funding to this organization. So what gives us the right as a state to either suggest or require them to perform certain actions? I mean, 'cause we could do that to any advocacy agency out there. Mm-hmm. And so where do we derive the, whether it's legal or just the moral authority to require an, uh, a completely independent age, uh, organization to do this?

  5. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:25:35

     Yeah. So under Federal code, the governor is required to choose one agency and designate them as the state's official representative for these activities. And so, since they have been chosen and been basically granted, uh, uh, a charter to be the state's representative agency, uh, it's reasonable for us to expect certain performance metrics from them. Uh, and so that's, that's where that comes from. 'cause we, we could change that at any time, but it was sort of nice to know that you're, that the agency is doing what you want it to do.

  6. Rep. Abbott1:26:04

     Uh, when you're gonna designate them as the state's official designated agency, do we actually provide any funding to them?

  7. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:26:10

     I don't, I believe it's all federally funded. If there is federally funded, I don't actually know. Okay. Like, I should probably not say that. 'cause I just don't know. Okay.

  8. Committee chair1:26:18

     Thank you. I'm not seeing any other lights. So we'll take it to the public for comment. Anyone wanna comment on this? All right. Come on up. There's somebody who knows the answer to that question. All Right. I'm sure.

  9. Nate Crippes, Public Affairs Supervising Attorney, Disability Law Center1:26:39

     Sorry. Alright. Good afternoon committee members. My name is Nate Cripes. I'm the Public Affairs supervising attorney at the Disability Law Center. We are the State's Protection and Advocacy Agency. Um, I, I would just first say, um, you know, we're, we're happy to provide this information. Um, so not opposed to this in any way. Um, we're actually glad somebody's taken an interest in our work and wants to hear more about what we do. So we're happy to share that. Um, with respect to, uh, the, the meetings being held, I will just say that, um, we are federally required to hold one public hearing, which we do every year. Um, and, um, when we looked at our, our federal reporting and our grants, we actually looked at, we, based on the definition of these meetings, we think we did close to a hundred, um, last year, um, by just actually going around the state and talking to folks, tabling at events, um, and doing presentations. So ultimately, I think we're, we're meeting that already. Um, I think also the, the language that suggests we should represent all, um, individuals with disabilities. I, I do just wanna point out we are a nonprofit with a limited budget, and we, we would love to serve every person. Um, but we do not take state money. Um, we do receive, uh, most of our funding is federal. Um, and, um, we get some private donations as well. And then the other thing I would add is, um, I, I would not characterize the ability to, um, change the design designated p and a as we could do that at any time as a state, there actually has to be good. Cause there is a process for that that is detailed in federal law. Um, and, um, ultimately I think we would've to go through that process and have to be good cause, but otherwise we're like, truly we're happy to provide this. I know the legislature loves to get more reports. Um, so we'll, we'll be sure to do that, uh, for, for you all in the interim. Um, and I hope you look forward to you all reading it and asking questions. So thank you.

  10. Committee chair1:28:11

      Thank you. All right. I'm not seeing any questions for you, so we'll take the next person and feel free to take that paper, paper back with you. Oh, there you go. Okay.

  11. Jacey Skinner, board member, And Justice for All1:28:27

      And, and I'll be quick. My name is JC Skinner. Um, I am here in my personal capacity. I have the pleasure of serving in the honor of serving on the board of and Justice Foral. Um, and Justice Foral is a partner organization with the Disability Law Center, as well as, uh, Utah Legal Services in Salt Lake Legal Aid. Um, we, um, we help raise private money and donations for this organization that is greatly overstretched in trying to, to meet the needs of this population. And I'll just say we're, I am, I am happy for folks to pay attention to the work that they do. I know how hard they work, I know how difficult their work is. Um, and so we are very happy that folks are taking an interest, um, in the work that they do. But I do wanna to representative Abbott's point. Um, this is a private organization that does not receive any state support or any state funding. Um, and so I think you notice that in the language of the bill, it's all very permissive because there isn't actually the authority to require that. But, um, very happy to support and very happy for you all to pay, um, to, to see better the great work that they do.

  12. Committee chair1:29:33

      All right. Thank you. Do you have any online comments? Not seeing any comments online. And no one else in the room will bring it back to the committee for discussion or action. Representative gracious.

  13. Rep. Gricius1:29:47

      Thank you. Lisa. Did we get that or, okay. Then I would like to, uh, move that we verbally amend the bill to reinstate lines 59 through 66. That motion is in order. Do you wanna speak to that? Yeah, I think that if we're looking at data, this, these are some important data points. The number of individuals who exited homelessness, the number who were referred to are received voluntary treatment, who were ordered into involuntary treatment. I feel like these are relevant facts for what we're looking at. And so I would just like to keep those in the bill.

  14. Committee chair1:30:30

      All right. We'll bring it to the committee for any discussion to that. Not seeing any, we'll bring it to the, oh, It's the Amendment on the amendment. Okay. That's all right. Um, all right.

  15. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:30:44

      We'll bring it back to the sponsor. Yeah, so that's, that's a, that's a great thought. So on, uh, line 42, it's clear that the report may include, so it's nothing below is required. This just signals interest that these are things that, that they might include that we might be interested in as a legislature. And so if you are interested in these sorts of things and they have the data on those and want to report on those, I have no problem with those being reinstated. So, um, I, you know, there's of course the question, since they may, they may, may not, and they, they may or may not have data, but it just signals an intent and an interest.

  16. Unknown speaker1:31:20speaker not certain

      Uh, I have a quick question. Do we know why those were taken out? I don't. Okay. Okay. Well then, we'll, we're putting 'em back in. Well, we'll see if we're putting 'em back in. All right.

  17. Committee chair1:31:33

      Any discussion to the motion to amend? Okay. All right. So the motion is to, do I need to say reinstate? The motion is to reinstate lines 59 through 66. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. That motion passes. Underlying bill is before US Representative Abbott.

  18. Rep. Abbott1:32:03

      I'll make a motion that we move to the next item on the agenda.

  19. Committee chair1:32:06

      That motion is in order. Do you wanna speak to it?

  20. Rep. Abbott1:32:09

      Yes. So, you know, we have an interesting relationship with the Disability law center. We see them up here a lot. They advocate for positions. Sometimes we agree with their position, sometimes we don't. Sometimes, um, we think that they're making the right decisions in regards to which cha cases they choose to proceed. And sometimes we don't. Sometimes they actually sue the state and maybe we don't like that, but they serve a function, right? And we don't give them any funding. They're not a state agency. They don't have, the only connection they have with the state is that the governor has designated them as, and I don't, can't remember the exact language, but the governor's designated them as the disability advocacy group that he recognizes if the governor wanted to change that, that's up to the governor. The governor could ask for this situation, for this information, and they could choose to provide it, or they could choose not to. I think putting a statute in place like this is really just us harassing an organization because sometimes we don't agree with them, and I don't think it's appropriate legislative action. It's beneath us, and we ought to just respect that. Sometimes they don't agree with us and, and go on and just deal with them in a professional way. So that's why I'm making that motion.

  21. Committee chair1:33:30

      All right. That motion is in order. Discussion to the motion representative Gracious.

  22. Rep. Gricius1:33:37

      Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd make a substitute motion that we recommend favorably as amended.

  23. Committee chair1:33:42

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

  24. Rep. Gricius1:33:45

      Yeah. We're, the governor has designated them at the advocacy agency that he recognizes in the state. I do think that we should be able to have these sorts of conversations, and if we've had issues getting the data, I, I don't know. But I do believe that where that designation has been made, we are entitled to that information. And again, these things that we're listing are not requirements, but we are asking them to come back and report. There aren't any other agencies that I know of that are designated by the governor as the advocacy group that we don't talk to in a formal reporting manner. And I just think that we should make that clear.

  25. Committee chair1:34:23

      All right. Okay. We'll take it to the committee for any discussion on the substitute motion. I'm not seeing any, was I supposed to go to the sponsor on the, you say the substitute, the substitute motion is to recommend favorably. We'll go to the sponsor on the substitute motion. Yeah.

  26. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:34:48

      So Representative Abbott is not wrong. Um, pre, previous to this bill, there has been no formal relationship with the legislature. And this bill corrects that issue that establishes what is that formal relationship. And the formal relationship is that we recognize that they have been, uh, designated that they are the State's Protection Agency, and that we would like to hear from them on a regular basis. And that is the full extent of the, of the relationship. There is no more, there is no less, but the legislature, if this bill passes, would in fact have a relationship with them. And it, and I think as was mentioned, it's probably a good thing that this not be off our radar, that it'd be on our radar so that we can see what they're doing and the good things that they're doing, so that we can incorporate that into other policy and budgetary decisions.

  27. Committee chair1:35:33

      All right. I Get to speak to it. Yes. And we'll go to the speaker of the, or the sponsor of the underlying motion.

  28. Rep. Abbott1:35:41

      Okay. Thank you. I think we need to step back and say, what precedent are we setting here? If the governor chooses to recognize an organization but gives absolutely no funding, no support, nothing does that give us the right as a state to regulate them and to either require or encourage them to report to us and to do this and that, et cetera, et cetera. It's a terrible precedent. It's not a conservative principle. It's not the way we should be acting as a legislature. We need to let outside groups that don't take State Money act independently of us. If the governor says, you know what, I'm, maybe I wanna change my designation. He can ask and they can either provide or not. But for us to step in and say, we are going to impose cost on a private organization is absolutely wrong, and we should not be doing it.

  29. Committee chair1:36:37

      Alright, we'll go back to the maker of the substitute motion for a final

  30. Rep. Gricius1:36:43

      Madam Chair or, thank you. Yes. Do I go back to you? Thank you.

  31. Committee chair1:36:48

      We'll go back to the sponsor and

  32. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:36:50

      I appreciate that. I appreciate that. This is a private organization, but they're not really a private organization. They are a public organization. They're funded by the federal government. They're allowed to be funded by the federal government, by our state government. So our state government action allows them to be received millions of dollars from the federal government. Um, and so as the people's representatives here on Capitol Hill, I think we do have some interest and, and at least having some relationship with them and, and reading the bill, the relationship that we're asking for in this bill is minimal. We're just, we're recognizing them. We're saying, we know who you are and we would like to hear from you on a regular basis. And that's the extent of the relationship. So I think it is not an unreasonable thing to do that. Um, as, as they mentioned, they are pretty much doing everything anyway, but there has been no formal recognition of the legislature that they are doing those things on, on our citizens' behalf, our voters' behalf. So I think it's good for us to establish that clarity of what the relationship really is.

  33. Committee chair1:37:47

      Thank you. We'll go to the maker of the substitute motion for final sum. Thank you, Madam Chair.

  34. Rep. Gricius1:37:54

      Um, in my opinion, we are the only branch of government that doesn't clearly have a formalized relationship, um, with the organization. The governor has obviously recognized them as the advocacy group for the state. The attorney general's office in our judiciary hears from them regularly as they work through legal issues, um, which is obvious by their names, right? And they respond to those lawsuits. Um, it's a different type of relationship, but it's still a relationship. And all we are asking for is for them to also create a relationship with us as the legislature, share the information that they get throughout the year, and really have those conversations because we're not having those conversations, conversations right now. And I do think that they're important.

  35. Committee chair1:38:36

      Okay. All right. We will have a roll call vote on the motion to pass forward SB 1 54 substitute to as amended. Did I get that right? Okay. There we go.

  36. Committee chair1:39:02

      Okay. Representative Ward. Representative Hollins? Yes. Representative gracious. Yes. Representative Fitz? Yes. Representative Eliason? Yes. Representative Shelley? Yes. Representative Bolinder? Yes. Representative Barlow? Yes. Representative Acton? Yes. Representative Abbott? No. Representative Monson? Yes. Chair Hall? Yes. That motion passes 10 to two with Representative Ward and Representative Abbott as the no votes. Thank you. Thank you. Why did you vote?

• Mar 6, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (8 turns)

  1. Sen. Todd Weiler3:20:03

     You Mr. President. I move to Concur. The House added some mental health reporting requirements and um, I'm kind of neutral on them. Um, but given the time, uh, I I move to Concur.

  2. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)3:20:14

     Motion to Concur. All in favor say aye. A Aye. Any opposed? I will let Motion passes. The question is shall second substitute Senate bill 1 54 pass quel vote.

  3. Senate clerk (roll call)3:20:24

     Senator Vickers Baldy Lewin Brammer Bus Comore Escamilla. Bill Moore Aye. Grover Aye. Harper Aye. Escamia Harper Hankins Ipson Johnson. Juab McKay Aye. Mikel Milner Aye. Musman Owens pitcher Plum Rebi Sandal Stevenson Stratton Vickers Weiler Wilson Winterton Thickers Bus President Adams

  4. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)3:21:27

     Aye. Second substitute Senate Bill 1 54. Having received 26 Shaa votes, two nay votes, one being absent, passes his body and will be returned to the house for the signature of the speaker.

  5. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)3:21:42

     Second substitute Senate bill, excuse me. First substitute Senate bill 1 93. First substitute Senate Bill 1 93 State Legal Holiday Amendments. Senator Stratton, Let me call that again. First substitute Senate bill 1 93. First substitute. First substitute Senate Bill 1 93. State Legal Holiday Amendments. Senator Stratton.

  6. Sen. Kevin J. Stratton3:22:04

     Senator Stratton. Thank you Mr. President. Uh, what the addition here is the House felt to change the designation of Washington and Lincoln Day to President's Day. Acknowledging the great president's since those good men that have built upon the tradition of the presidency. With that I move to Concur.

  7. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)3:22:30

     Motion to concur. All in favor of the motion to concur, say aye. Aye. Any opposed rule? Let Motion passes. The question is, shall first substitute Senate Bill one ninety three passed. Roll call vote.

  8. Senate clerk (roll call)3:22:42

     Senator Vickers Baldry Blue in B Bramer bus Colmore Escamia Fillmore

• Mar 6, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (12 turns)

  1. Reading Clerk1:11:58

     go to Madam Reading Clerk Second substitute Senate Bill 1 54 Protection and Advocacy Agency reporting by rep by Senator Weiler. This bill was heard in Health and Human Services with the vote of 10 22. The House sponsors Representative Thurston, Representative Thurston.

  2. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:12:14

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. So this bill formally defines Utah State Protection Advocacy Agency and clarifies the legislature's intent regarding its responsibility to represent advocate for all disabilities disabled, individual statewide. It also will in intends or attempts to improve transparency and legislative oversight by requesting that the agency provides certain information to legislative committees about meetings held, services provided, population served, et cetera, et cetera, throughout the year. So this will enga strengthen public engagement and accountability and also, um, be the first time that the legislature actually has some type of a formal relationship with the State's Protection Advocacy Agency.

  3. Speaker (presiding)1:13:00

     Thank you, Representative Thurston. Discussion to the bill. Representative Cutler

  4. Rep. Paul A. Cutler1:13:30

     Sponsor Yield to a question Representative Thurston, will you yield?

  5. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:13:33

     Yes. Yes. Representative Cutler.

  6. Rep. Paul A. Cutler1:13:35

     Thank you. I I've never heard of the state Protection advocacy a agency before and this appears to be a new section of code. Could you, could you pro, uh, help me understand why we need the State Protection Advocation agency and why we haven't had one in the past?

  7. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:13:50

     Yeah. So federal law requires the state to have a state protection advocacy agency. Federal law allows the governor to just designate that, whoever that is. So we need to have one. The governor designates one. Uh, so we've had one, I it's been over 40 years that the state has done this. The legislature has never really expressed an interest in this at all. It's just been something that the federal law requires and the governor does. So this now puts a marker in state statute recognizing that this thing does in fact exist.

  8. Rep. Paul A. Cutler1:14:19

     Thank you Mr. Speaker. It appears that it just doesn't necessarily change the governor's designation, but just has them report to the legislature.

  9. Rep. Norman K Thurston1:14:25

     Yeah, in fact, in fact, Mr. Speaker, it just requests that they report to the legislature. We we're not actually requiring them to do anything different than they're currently doing. We're just asking nicely.

  10. Unknown speaker1:14:35speaker not certain

      Thank you. I support your efforts.

  11. Speaker (presiding)1:14:37

      Thank you Representative Keller. See no more lights. Back to you. Representative Thurston for summation. L wave summation has been waved. Voting. Now be open on second substitute SB 1 54. If you have items on the house concurrence calendar, please be seeing all present. Having voted voting is now closed.

  12. Speaker (presiding)1:15:35

      Second substitute SB 1 54 passed us this body with 66 yes votes one no vote and will be sent to the Senate for further consideration.