S.B. 163 Municipal Prosecutor Amendments

What this bill does

This bill would explicitly allow Utah cities to contract with outside attorneys to handle criminal prosecution, matching the authority counties already have. Cities that already use this arrangement would have clear legal authority for it.

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 approve it · Jan 28, 2026Who voted how
• 15 yes, 7 no, 7 absentFirst of two Senate votes · Feb 13, 2026Who voted how
• 24 yes, 0 no, 5 absentFinal Senate vote · Feb 17, 2026Who voted how
• 8 yes, 1 no, 3 absentHouse Political Subdivisions Committee: vote to approve it · Mar 2, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Jan 28, 2026 Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (29 turns)

  1. Committee chair32:09

     Senate Bill 1 63 Municipal Prosecutor Amendment. Senator Pitcher picture the time is yours.

  2. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher32:18

     Thank you. Oops. Bear with me while I pull up some talking points. Okay. So, Senate Bill 1 63 addresses a city's ability to contract with a private, uh, with a private attorney to provide prosecuting services to the city. Now, there's already a statute in the, the provisions that address county prosecution, but, um, it doesn't exist in, in provisions involving cities. And so I'll provide a little context as to why this bill is in front of you today. So, cities invol, uh, cities and towns don't, who don't have the same volume of criminal prosecution work necessary to justify adding a prosecutor as an employee, instead obtain prosecution services from private firms via a contract. This approach is fiscally and practically efficient for all of the contracting cities, avoiding overstaffing and better addressing the needs of the city. The approach has, however, led to at least one recent lawsuit that sought certification as a class action and award of punitive damage, punitive damages based on allegations that a city contracting with private attorneys to handle that prosecution breached the plaintiff's right to be prosecuted by a public prosecutor. That case was dismissed by the third district court on the merits, but then appealed to the Utah Supreme Court. Eventually the appeal was withdrawn, but the plaintiff's lawyer warned, uh, that they still believed the merits of the allegations and may pursue them in the future. So this proposed statutory change simply authorizes cities to engage independent prosecutors just as counties can under similar provisions in, uh, the Utah Code. I think this approach is efficient and conserves public monies and therefore would be a valuable change to the current statute. I'm happy to answer any questions

  3. Committee chair34:12

     Question. Okay. Senator

  4. Sen. Evan J. Vickers34:13

     Vickers? Yeah, thanks. So, Senator, I'm assuming as I read this, that means that the individual, they might deputize wouldn't be a city attorney or a city employee, could be someone just in practice that that city attorney chose to deputize or,

  5. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher34:31

     Yeah, that's exactly right. So some private attorneys that will take on city contracts. Um, in my district, I know that there's a, a private entity that contracts for both Cottonwood Heights as well as Millcreek. Both of those municipalities just aren't big enough or don't see the volume to justify hiring their own, and so that that individual is deputized to work on behalf of the city.

  6. Sen. Evan J. Vickers34:54

     Okay. Does the council have to approve an action like that, or,

  7. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher34:59

     I'm not entirely sure how the process works. I would imagine, at least in terms of the hiring there is, uh, they're involved in the hiring. Um, I'm sure there's some type of formal deputization that occurs similar to how county attorneys are hired.

  8. Sen. Evan J. Vickers35:13

     Yeah. So tell me if I'm wrong. The way I was reading this is like, you have one case and a case that, you know, the, the current city attorney just is tied up with other things, so they then they essentially hire a deputize uh, an individual to come in for that one case. Would it be kind of a, would that be the situation?

  9. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher35:32

     Would it be coming in on, on more of a full-time basis, or how does that work? My understanding, at least from the context that I have in my own area, is that there is no formal city attorney, or at least city prosecutor, they, they fully contract that out.

  10. Sen. Evan J. Vickers35:48

      Okay. I know in our, in, you know, in southern Utah, a lot of small towns, you know, they'll contract with the, you know, a public attorney that mm-hmm. You know, sometimes, sometimes public attorneys will be city attorneys for multiple cities. Right. But are, are, and I guess maybe I'm, maybe I'm misunderstanding what you're trying to do. So let's say, and that's the case, you know, you've got a, a contracted attorney that's multi working in multiple different cities, you get a case that they actually aren't able to handle, so they'd have to go outside of their already contracted attorney and then then they deputize somebody else or hire somebody else. Is that what we're getting doing? Or is that something different? Am I missing the both?

  11. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher36:27

      No, no, these are really good questions, and it sounds like there's folks in the audience who know more than I do. Um, and yeah. So if that's okay, can um, your phone friend get some help on this question, friend? Yeah, I'm gonna phone a friend. My understanding, and I'll let, I'll let you, uh, step in, Dave, is that, uh, they're just contracting. They don't have a formal city attorney. They're, they're solely contracting these individuals to do the work of the city. Is that right? Or can you provide more context?

  12. David Spatafore, resident36:52

      Thank you, Senator, uh, David Spa for representing, uh, the City of Holiday on this issue. And let me be perfectly clear, I don't know any more than Senator Pitcher does. I don't know any more than any of you know, but I will try to answer whatcha up here For, Um, with so many you walked into that Senator Ipson, uh, Senator Vickers was so many years up here. I need to remar I need to remind you guys that I'm still functional after, you know, during my, in my, in my 52nd session. So that's why I'm here. Um, what, what, what Senator Pitcher iss trying to do, and, and we appreciate this greatly, cities of Cottonwood Heights and Holiday, for example, they have city attorneys, but they don't have a city prosecutor that's full-time. Mm-hmm. And they, and they have justice courts, and the goal that they want to do is they want to keep their justice courts operating for the benefit of their constituents and those in the surrounding area. If they had to hire a full-time city prosecutor y for the ca number of cases that they have, which is not, which isn't great, they wouldn't be able to keep the Justice Court going. And so what we want to do here is just to contract out to a private attorney, uh, to become the city prosecutor, handle the justice court cases, and that's their responsibility.

  13. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher38:05speaker not certain

      Okay. Yeah. Does that answer your question? Yeah.

  14. Sen. Evan J. Vickers38:08

      Would, I guess, would, would it be more on like a, a permanent con retainer basis then, or

  15. David Spatafore, resident38:13

      It's, you know, I don't know that I could be One onesie off, you know, just one case per Well, it could be, it could be be one day, it could be one or two days a week, and it could be five or six cases a day. You know, your traffic violations, you're infractions. Okay. You know, the cases that, the cases that aren't big enough for, for district court.

  16. Sen. Evan J. Vickers38:30

      Okay. I think I get it. Now. My minimum, my minimum legal mind is Grasping this now, But it's, it's still better than mine, Senator.

  17. David Spatafore, resident38:38

      But the goal here is, for example, Salt Lake County has eliminated their Justice courts. Millcreek has eliminated theirs because the, the, the caseload just isn't there. And so the goal is, is to not, if Justice courts are all eliminated, all these cases go to the district court, and I don't think you guys wanna pay for that. And so the goal is, is to make sure that these justice courts are still operating, um, in a break even mode for the city. And that's why they need to have the, the, the prosecutor be a, uh, a, a a part-time on contract attorney to do the prosecution.

  18. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher39:14

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. And if I could add one last point of clarification, this wouldn't be creating a new process. These cities are already contracting with attorneys to provide these services. What we are doing is ensuring that, uh, that clarity exists in the code.

  19. Sen. Evan J. Vickers39:29speaker not certain

      Okay. Alright. I get it. All right.

  20. Committee chair39:32

      Anyone from the public that would like to comment on? We've got one, two in the room, so we'll invite you to come up and, uh, we'll give you a minute or two.

  21. Cristy Henshaw, resident39:57

      Hi. Thank you chair. Um, I actually just have some questions that have come to my mind. My name's Kristy Henshaw. I am from Utah County. And just a couple of things that have come up as I'm looking at this. This seems to be following the framework of public-private partnerships. And, and maybe you guys can address that if I'm incorrect, but I just wanted to bring some of the concerns that popped into my mind. Protections, if there's any conflicts of interest, government responsibility, um, as a, uh, acting as a private employee, but they're not. What if they violate rights or processes? Who is to, where do you go for recourse? Is this government action? And there's usually training that's done. Um, and so merging those two, uh, fields, both public and private, it brings up the same concerns that those do. Uh, so I don't have those answers. Those are just some of the concerns that popped into my mind. Um, I hope that's already been discussed and thought through. So some things for consideration. Thank you. Well,

  22. Unknown speaker40:55speaker not certain

      I appreciate that. And I can say from my formal experience that there are counties, small counties that contract and do the same thing because they can't afford a full-time attorney. So they do hire it out, but they get a contract so that they know that they're covered if they have these cases. So that, That's good to hear. If I can just respond to that. Some of the things, um, that we have, uh, protections in the, in the marketplace that we wanna make sure that are protected when they're working in the private industry. And then public, make sure that the public hasn't lost anything there. I'm sympathetic to, you know, the workload being too little or too much, so appreciate that. Yeah. Yeah. I, I represent Dagger County. They contract out within a private firm to take care of their needs, both civilly and prosecution.

  23. Committee chair41:39

      So, thank you, chair. It is done. Okay. Come on up, Jared.

  24. Jared Tingey, Legal Director, Utah League of Cities and Towns41:49

      Thank you. Uh, Jared Tingy with League of Cities and Towns, and, uh, obviously we fully support this bill and thank Senator Pitcher for, uh, bringing it forward. Um, as has been said before, it's a practice that currently exists, and there's many, uh, firms that, uh, do prosecutorial work for particularly smaller cities, or those cities that have a immense amount of prosecution, uh, where it makes better sense with public dollars, uh, instead of a hiring an, uh, a full-time employee, um, to contract those cases out. So we, uh, fully support that and, um, urge the committee to pass it out. Thank you. Thank you.

  25. Committee chair42:42

      Anybody online? Okay. We'll close, uh, public comment, then come back to the committee for further consideration. Senator Vickers.

  26. Sen. Evan J. Vickers43:05

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would make a, a motion that we favorably recommend Senate Bill 1 63.

  27. Committee chair43:10

      Okay. Discussion. Let's go back to the sponsor for summation.

  28. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher43:16

      I'll waive Senator Vickers. I'll waive as well.

  29. Committee chair43:19

      All right. All those in favor of favorably recommended Senate Bill 1 63 to the Senate floor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. Okay. That is unanimous.

• Feb 13, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (1 turns)

  1. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding), roll call1:35:59

     be read for a third time? Roll call vote. Senator Vickers Baldry Lewin Aye. Brammer bus comore es escamilla Aye. Fillmore Grover Harper Aye. Unto Kins Aye. Ipson Aye. Johnson Quan McKay Macl Milner Musman Owens Fillmore No Pitcher. Plum Rebe Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton Vickers Aye. Wilson Winterton, president Adams Harper changes to No one two Senate bill 1 63 Having received 15 na votes, seven na votes, seven being absent will be read for a third time.

• Feb 17, 2026 Senate floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (7 turns)

  1. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher1:13:48

     I know a number of municipalities are already doing this. Um, this just ensures that they are, uh, within their legal means to do so. I'm happy to answer any questions.

  2. Senate President (presiding)1:13:56

     Thank you for that presentation. It's their discussion to the bill. Seeing none. Senator Pitcher back to you for summation or a motion.

  3. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher1:14:03

     Thank you. I move that Senate Bill 1 63 pass.

  4. Senate President (presiding)1:14:06

     And the question is, shall Senate bill one sixty three Pass Roll call vote.

  5. Senate clerk (roll call)1:14:10

     Senator Vickers Baldy a Lewin b Bramer Bus Colmore Esia Aye. Fillmore Aye. Grover Harper Aye. Hankins Aye. Ipson Johnson k Juab McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Aye. Owens pitcher Plum Rebi Sandal Stevenson Stratton Bickers Weiler Aye.

  6. Sen. J. Stuart Adams (presiding)1:14:49

     Wilson Aye. Winterton Aye. President Adams Senate Bill 1 63 Having received 23 yay votes, zero na votes. Six being, let me recall that. Senate Bill one sixty three having received 24 yay votes, zero na votes, five being absent passes the Senate be sent to the house for further consideration.

  7. Senate President (presiding)1:15:25

     Senator Owens

• Mar 2, 2026 House Political Subdivisions Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (21 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)33:18

     Okay, we'll go to item number three on the agenda. Senate bill 1 63 Municipal Prosecutor Amendments.

  2. Committee chair (presiding)33:26

     Senator Pitcher. Welcome, Senator.

  3. Committee chair (presiding)33:29

     You Go ahead whenever you're ready.

  4. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher33:35

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's nice to be here today. Um, so this bill deals with, um, municipality's abilities to contract with, uh, contract attorneys for, um, the provision of prosecution services. And, uh, I'll share that many cities already do this. Counties do this as well. Um, usually you'll see a city do this when they don't have the type of criminal caseload that warrants a full-time employee. And so they'll contract with attorneys that oftentimes will pick up multiple contracts and various municipalities to provide these types of prosecution services. Now, there's a provision in the code that specifically allows counties to do this. Um, but the code is silent with regards to municipalities. And so I'll share that. One of the cities, um, in my senate district, Cottonwood Heights, um, had a, a defendant going through the system, uh, who was charged with the criminal criminal charge. This individual sued the city stating that the city didn't have the authority to prosecute them by way of a contract attorney, that they needed to be a, a full-time employee of the city. Um, case made its way through the system. Ultimately, it was, uh, dismissed on procedural grounds. Um, but it sort of shed some light on the fact that there is a gap in the code in terms of not having, uh, these provisions specifically authorizing the cities to do the same things that the counties are doing. And again, cities are doing this already. Um, and so the purpose of this bill is to provide that specific authorization. The language in this bill mirrors what's already in place for counties. Um, and I think it just, uh, protects our cities from exposure to liability. I do think it's good policy to continue to allow cities to contract with, uh, contract attorneys for a number of reasons. But with that, that concludes my presentation.

  5. Committee chair (presiding)35:17

     Thank you, Senator Pitcher, to the committee for clarifying questions.

  6. Committee chair (presiding)35:21

     Representative Hansen.

  7. Rep. Angela Hansen35:23

     Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am just wondering if this would expand the authority of city attorneys.

  8. Sen. Stephanie Pitcher35:30

     It doesn't, no. Okay. Thank you.

  9. Committee chair (presiding)35:33

     Let's go to the public. Who would like to speak to this? Raise your hand. How please. How many do you want to speak to speak to this? I see none. Do we have any online? We have one online. Tom, go ahead. Welcome. Tom, are you there?

  10. Tom Steiner36:00

      Yes, I am.

  11. Committee chair (presiding)36:03

      Now we see you. Thank you for joining us. Go ahead.

  12. Tom Steiner, Millcreek City Council36:06

      Yes. Uh, I am Tom Steiner and I'm on the Millcreek City Council. Um, the city of Millcreek. Uh, just like Cottonwood Heights, uh, we currently do this, uh, by passing, uh, this, it would just chill us from liability and codify what has already been happening. Uh, I'd just like to speak in favor and, uh, ask you to do this. Many cities, uh, are currently doing this, uh, especially a lot of smaller ones, and it just allows us to run lean and mean and not have as many, uh, city employees.

  13. Committee chair (presiding)36:41

      Thank you. We appreciate your testimony. Okay. We're gonna close the public comment period and come back to the Committee for action. Representative Walter.

  14. Rep. R. Neil Walter36:57

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that we recommend favorably Senate Bill 1 63 Municipal Prosecutor Amendments.

  15. Committee chair (presiding)37:02

      Thank you. The motion is to recommend favorably Senate Bill 1 63.

  16. Rep. R. Neil Walter37:06

      Would you like to speak to your motion? I'll waive to the committee to the motion Discussion.

  17. Committee chair (presiding)37:17

      To the motion. Seeing none. Senator Pitcher for summation, I'll waive. Thank you Representative Walter for summation.

  18. Rep. R. Neil Walter37:23speaker not certain

      I'll waive summation is waived.

  19. Committee chair (presiding)37:26

      Motion is recommend favorably Senate Bill 1 63 Municipal Prosecutor amendments. All in favor say aye.

  20. Unknown speaker37:32speaker not certain

      Aye. Aye. Opposed? Say no.

  21. Committee chair (presiding)37:36

      Motion carries with Representative Hansen. A nay vote. Thank you, Senator. Okay, we're gonna go