Kirk A. Cullimore

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Explains that the House removed the definition of bona fide education purpose from the bill and now uses parent consent instead, citing concerns about parents consenting on behalf of students.

  Read what they said

  The House does what they do sometimes and in this one they took out the definition of bonafide education purpose and there were some concerns about parents consenting on behalf of their student and not understanding what that meant. So they just said parent consent and those were the major changes.

  ▶ Watch at 13:53

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Explains that the changes from the substitute he presented in the House committee better set out three routes for liability and recovery when autonomous vehicles are deployed.

  Read what they said

  Uh, yes. These were changes from a substitute I presented in the House committee and it's, it's just better to find the three different routes for, um, liability and recovery with the deployment of these autonomous vehicles.

  ▶ Watch at 28:58

• H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Explains that the fourth substitute deals with county of the first class highway fund, creating a loan program for affordable housing and a commission to make determinations and award grants from that fund.

  Read what they said

  The fourth substitute, um, deals with county of the first class highway fund. It creates a, in, uh, a loan program out of there to support affordable housing and creates a commission to make those affordable housing de determinations and award grants and award, uh, other monies from the county of the first class highway fund. That's the difference from the prior sub.

  ▶ Watch at 1:23:58

• H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Describes the bill as creating a state housing infrastructure partnership fund and a commission to review applications and award grants, modifying an affordable housing infrastructure grant board, allowing additional bonding on a local sales and use tax, reallocating transportation funds for a Salt Lake County downtown redevelopment gap, and allowing state agencies to sell surplus property.

  Read what they said

  This bill does a number of things. First, it sets up a state housing infrastructure partnership fund. It's using this from the PTIF in an effort to, uh, allow for more infrastructure to be built, which is one of the barriers to creating more housing in our state and particularly affordable housing. So in an effort to do that, it creates a commission that will review applications. This commission will be housed in the housing department of the Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity, or, or now goed. Uh, goed would staff support for that. They would authorize infrastructure loans, um, to qualifying political subdivisions to finance improvements to help with the construction of housing, as I mentioned. Um, it also, …

  ▶ Watch at 1:24:42

• H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Says the substitute makes minor changes to address private school compensation and keep scholarship funds going to private schools while preserving flexibility.

  Read what they said

  The changes in the sub are, are minor. It's just trying to address private school compensation and making sure that, uh, scholarships that are intended for private schools go there while, while leaving the flexibility for innovation.

  ▶ Watch at 2:23:05

• H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Presents H.B. 467 as a cleanup of the Utah Fits All Scholarship, covering tuition reimbursement, private school provider requirements, multiple applications from one household, program manager duties, and extracurricular access.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Thank you. This is, this is a cleanup for the Fitz All Scholarship program. It establishes new provisions for this program, um, with the enrolled K through 12 students with money for educational expenses. Um, the key changes it does here is it allows parents to seek tuition reimbursement, um, when they send a kid to private school that, um, may or may not be a UA provider. So that, that's part of the definitional change that we did. It updates requirements for private schools that are u of providers saying that they can't be, they can't use this money as a path pass through. It's gotta be for tuition purposes. Creates a new process for reviewing multiple applications …

  ▶ Watch at 2:23:31

• H.B. 510 Municipal Incorporation Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Says the bill requires 18 months of good-faith coordination with counties before an incorporation application, gives counties a role in feasibility studies, and strengthens bonding and infrastructure safeguards.

  Read what they said

  So this bill deals with, uh, municipal in corporations and it requires, first off, it does three key things. It requires earlier and meaningful coordination with county officials in a good faith and effort to resolve issues locally. So before you can even submit an application, uh, to the Lieutenant Governor to become municipality, uh, you're supposed to engage for 18 months of good faith negotiations. This was a compromise between the counties and the Property Rights Coalition Counties won 24 months, property rights won 12. And so 18 was, was this bill splitting the difference? Second, the bill ensures counties have a meaningful seat at the table. In feasibility process, feasibility consultants must consider county provided data and analysis …

  ▶ Watch at 2:24:11

• H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Explains that the existing private school definition remains, that some private schools choose not to become eligible providers, and that the program manager would have flexibility to determine legitimate private schools.

  Read what they said

  So this, this is part of the private school definition. There, there is a definition already in law and through that definition, private schools can become, uh, eligible providers under the program manager. But there are some schools that don't want to do that and, and want to. And so we're trying to find a path that would allow parents who get a scholarship for their kid that want to go there trying to, we're in the new substitute. We're trying to give the program manager some flexibility to make determinations that their legitimate private schools, even if they don't want to become quote unquote eligible providers.

  ▶ Watch at 2:25:06

• H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Confirms that the current private school definition stays in the bill and that the bill only excludes pass-through schools.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. That, that is the intent. Um, the definition is on 1 65 in the, in the sub. And it keeps the current definition of private school as it's already in the law. And all we really do is say that it doesn't include pass through schools. And so they can still, if it's not a pass through school, there's nothing in this new bill that would otherwise preclude a private school.

  ▶ Watch at 2:26:21

• H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Responds that the loophole Riebe cites was removed in the fifth substitute, which the Senate adopted.

  Read what they said

  Are, are you looking at the newest sub? 'cause I, that's, that's the loophole that I was trying to get rid of in the sub Sub four, Sub five. Now sub five Is what we adopted sub. Okay. Thank you.

  ▶ Watch at 2:27:27

• H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Moves that the Senate pass fifth substitute H.B. 467.

  Read what they said

  Uh, I'll, I'll move that we pass fifth substitute house bill 4 67. Thank you.

  ▶ Watch at 2:27:45

• H.B. 306 Reinvestment Fee Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Explains that H.B. 306 sets rules and a cap on HOA reinvestment fees based on amenities, limits use of the fees to long-term costs, requires at least 50% to go to reserves, and requires reporting to the Department of Commerce.

  Read what they said

  the HOA can sometimes charge a reinvestment fee. This puts clear rules around that reinvestment fee. It limits how much an HOA can charge. And the limit depends on how many amenities are in that particular HOA. It creates different classifications of HOAs low HOA, which would cap it at 0.25 of the cost of the house. And then, uh, if, if it's a higher amenity, HOA, then it, then it scales that up and then it prescribes that the money from these fees can only be used for long-term costs. So these are like roads and shared utilities, drainage systems, stuff like that. A minimum of 50% of the fee must go into reserve saving. This helps the HOAs …

  ▶ Watch at 2:31:32

• H.B. 197 School Materials Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Thanks colleagues for their comments and moves to pass third substitute H.B. 179.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, I appreciate the comments. And, uh, based on those comments, my motion is that we pass third substitute house bill 1 79.

  ▶ Watch at 2:34:02

• H.B. 260 Unauthorized Practice of Law Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Explains that giving basic factual help differs from giving advice on what the law means and how it applies.

  Read what they said

  Um, so it would depend exactly on what you're doing if you were just helping them with, here is your birth certificate information. Here is the factual information that typically wouldn't. However, when you get into here is the law, here is what the law says and what it means and what the impact of that law would be, based upon your actions in filling this out and giving them advice on what to do, eventually that crosses into the unauthorized practice of law.

  ▶ Watch at 2:41:41

• H.B. 510 Municipal Incorporation Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026

  Presents H.B. 510, saying it requires coordination with county officials, gives counties a seat in the feasibility process, and strengthens financial and infrastructure safeguards for failed municipal incorporations.

  Read what they said

  Uncircled. Senator Comore, This is the bill we discussed not too long ago. The fiscal note has caught up, but just to refresh, it deals with, uh, municipal incorporation. It does three things. Requires meaningful coordination with county officials, ensures counties have a seat at the table for feasibility process and strengthens financial and infrastructure safeguards to ensure that counties or taxpayers are not left carrying the burden in the event of a failed, uh, initial initiation of a municipality.

  ▶ Watch at 3:23:14

• H.B. 259 Parental Access to Children's Medical Records Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Raises concerns that hospital and healthcare systems' vendor software may make compliance difficult and asks how liability and enforcement apply.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. Thank you President. And so, I, I apologize, I missed part of the presentation on the sub six, but some concerns I heard about this bill earlier in the session are that it poses liability, which I, I think we all agree that the intent of this bill is, is worthy a worthy goal of the bill. The concern is that sometimes the, uh, the operating systems that, that, uh, hospital systems or healthcare systems are using, uh, makes it difficult to do this. And wondering how that liability applies. I think, I think the intent of many hospital systems that I'm hearing from and, and healthcare systems that they, that they would like to, to provide these services, …

  ▶ Watch at 15:41

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Explains that a provision was added to the court nominating process so that nominating commissions can send more names to the governor when multiple court positions are open.

  Read what they said

  Uh, we, when we added a little bit into courts about the nominating process, when there are multiple openings in a court that would allow the nominating commissions to send more names to the governor for consideration when there are multiple, uh, open positions.

  ▶ Watch at 21:18

• H.B. 549 Energy Efficiency Rebate Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Explains the bill's purpose: requiring reporting on energy efficiency programs, including by municipalities and co-ops, so the rebate program aligns with state energy policy.

  Read what they said

  OED is tasked with creating a state energy policy plan. Uh, large, large scale public utility companies need to report annually to OED on their energy efficiency programs. But this current, and this currently does not apply to small towns, uh, municipalities or co-ops. So large public utility companies currently charge a small fee for their energy efficient efficiency programs. And this bill is just an effort to bring some transparency to the table to ensure that the energy rebate program aligns with the state's energy policy.

  ▶ Watch at 1:01:18

• H.B. 549 Energy Efficiency Rebate Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Moves under suspension of the rules that the first substitute of H.B. 549 pass.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Under suspension of the rules, I move that we pass. First substitute house Bill 5 49.

  ▶ Watch at 1:02:00

• H.B. 401 Geothermal Study Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Introduces Fourth Substitute H.B. 71 as returning after second reading and says it expands a definition, referring to a legislative auditor general study.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. We, we read this on second, second reading already once and, and so it's come back. But this bill expands the definition of Recit. Oh no, lemme look at the right bill. Okay. So Utah's office of the legislative auditor general conduct conducted an

  ▶ Watch at 1:12:02

• H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Cullimore made a motion regarding House Bill 48, third substitute.

  Read what they said

  Motion to Uncer house bill 48 third substitute house bill 48. We have a motion to Uncer third substitute house Bill 48.

  ▶ Watch at 1:22:51

• H.B. 48 Criminal and Juvenile Justice Changes · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Describes the fourth substitute for HB 48, which keeps the prior law allowing some 17-year-old murder defendants to stay in juvenile custody until age 25 and adds factors a court may consider before moving a minor to adult prison for security risks.

  Read what they said

  their fellow teenagers sometimes, but also, or young, um, adults, but also to the, uh, to the security guards. And so this bill will create a mechanism where some of these people can be transferred to adult courts if they're posing a security risk. I have a sub four, which I think is a friendly amendment, um, which would just put some factors in that the court can consider if they're trying to move someone. Because we, we passed a bill years ago, which I support still, that allows some of these like 17-year-old, um, murder defendants to stay in, uh, juvenile custody up to the age of 25. And that works fine for some of them but not for …

  ▶ Watch at 1:23:48

• H.B. 48 Criminal and Juvenile Justice Changes · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Summarizes the discussion and moves to pass HB 48 as amended under suspension of the rules.

  Read what they said

  Okay, we've had good discussion on the bill. My motion is that we under suspension of the rules pass for substitute house bill 48 as amended. Thank You. And the

  ▶ Watch at 1:29:02

• H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Moves to delete and replace the title and body of second substitute H.B. 438 with fifth substitute H.B. 438. · speaker not certain

  Read what they said

  Motion to delete title and body of second substitute house bill 4 38. And replace it with fifth substitute house bill. 4 38. We have a motion to substitute.

  ▶ Watch at 1:42:40

• H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Explains the substitute bill, which narrows the definition of AI chatbots, delays rulemaking authority, and clarifies requirements for businesses.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. This, this has been response to a bunch of input where we've tried to narrow the definition of an artificial or an AI chat bot. Um, we delayed some of the rulemaking authority. We've clarified or, um, clarified some of the requirements that would be imposed on businesses deploying AI chatbots, uh, for better compliance. That's, that's the Substitute. Thank you. So we have a motion to substitute.

  ▶ Watch at 1:42:52

• H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Describes the bill's purpose: privacy requirements, disclosure of advertising and paid relationships by chatbots, and safeguards for minors.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. This bill sets guardrails around the, a new development of AI that we're seeing called AI companion chatbots. These chatbots are specifically designed to replace relationships and in some cases, to mimic romance or even intimacy. Uh, early studies have shown that 72% of teens have used an AI companion chatbot at least once, and about half of them are regularly using it. So this bill accomplishes three things. It establishes privacy requirements. U users can request that their conversations and companies must get permission before using sensitive data. Uh, there's transparency chatbots. Chatbots must dis disclose advertising and paid relationships. And it, we try to impose safeguards for minor minors. Bots must remind minors that they're …

  ▶ Watch at 1:43:34

• H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Says he cannot represent that industry supports the bill, though many industry recommendations were included in the latest substitute and he is still seeking more input.

  Read what they said

  Um, at this point, I, I probably can't represent that they are supportive of the bill. However, we've taken a lot of their recommendations and tried to incorporate them into the bill. Um, I, I've tried to shop the latest sub with the, with industry, um, and continue to get some, some further recommendations. Obviously, we're late in the session and, and trying to take those into consideration. But this latest sub is a recommendation. It has a lot of their recommendations, but I'm not sure I, I can't represent that they support the bill at this point.

  ▶ Watch at 1:45:32

• H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Says the new definitions distinguish companion chatbots, designed primarily for ongoing companionship or emotional relationships, from general AI applications.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. And that, and that's part of what we've tried to address. Um, I'm trying to go down to the, uh, definition part. The new definitions do, have, do make that distinction between general application, uh, AI and companion chatbots. And in this one we try to say that the design for the chat bot had to be primarily for the purpose of, you know, developing that, that sort of companionship or ongoing social or emotional relationship. So that, that, that is how I believe we're making that distinction in this particular bill.

  ▶ Watch at 1:46:45

• H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Confirms the bill was a recommendation from the AI policy lab.

  Read what they said

  This, uh, yes. This was a recommendation from the AI policy lab and that that was the, that that's how the bill was initiated, as I'm okay. Aware.

  ▶ Watch at 1:47:38

• H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Says the bill narrowly targets ongoing social or emotional relationships and may not apply to chatbots primarily held out as mental health services.

  Read what they said

  Um, I, I don't think that's the intent and that's, that's some of what we're trying to, to clarify here, that by defining companion chatbot, um, it's more narrowly tailored to just deal with ongoing social or emotional relationships and that it's primarily being held out as a companion chatbot. So I guess the question is whether a chatbot is being held out primarily as that, or if it's more for mental health, health services and, and so that, um, I guess if it's being held out primarily as mental health services, then potentially this is not applicable. But

  ▶ Watch at 1:48:40

• H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Describes the amendment, which brings public infrastructure districts (PIDs) into the bill and sets rules for exchanging records with private entities to increase transparency. · speaker not certain

  Read what they said

  The the amendment deals. It, it brought in PIDs to the, to the conversation. And PIDs are, uh, inherently, uh, a private, a private function or a private entity. And so the third substitute, or this substitute deals with how records can be exchanged with that private entity and government to entities to ensure that, uh, there's as much transparency as possible.

  ▶ Watch at 1:49:47

• H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Explains H.B. 507, which sunsets existing economic development zones and creates regionally significant development zones authorized by counties or municipalities, with a cap on tax increment, a board to negotiate it, and oversight and reporting requirements.

  Read what they said

  Okay. So this bill, uh, deals with certain economic development tools that we have in the state. It's Sunset existing specialized zones, including the, uh, uh, municipal and county home ownership promotion zones, uh, uh, colloquial called hops, HTRZ zones, fizz, the first home investment zones and major sporting event venue zones. In place of that, we are creating regionally significant development zones. These things are authorized by the county or municipality, which is important, so they have to be invited in. And then a proposal would be sent to, uh, goed. Uh, it requires the proposal to demonstrate, uh, boundaries and, and everything that you'd expect out of these economic development zones. And it changes things in that it …

  ▶ Watch at 1:50:29

• H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Moves to suspend the rules and pass third substitute H.B. 507.

  Read what they said

  I'll move that under suspension of the rules we pass. Third substitute house bill 5 0 7.

  ▶ Watch at 1:52:12

• H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Summarizes that the bill was a policy lab recommendation revised with industry input, and moves to pass the fifth substitute of the bill.

  Read what they said

  I don't see any further comments I'm gonna give you for summation of motion. So again, this was a recommendation of the AI policy lab. It, it was, it was crafted over, over some time with input from industry with input from advocates. It's, it's been subbed a lot just in the last couple days in an effort to, to i, I guess, uh, address a lot of the concerns that have been raised by, by industry. Um, I think it's narrowly tailored at this point. I appreciate the concerns and believe it's something that we can continue to work on. But I think that, uh, you know, chatbots are out there, our kids are using them, and I think …

  ▶ Watch at 1:55:10

• H.B. 76 Data Center Water Transparency Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Says his concern was not the bill itself but the perception that Utah is unfriendly to data centers, and that industry views the bill as requested and helpful on that perception.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. Uh, well, I'll just say in, in learning more about this bill, my concern was not necessarily the bill itself because I think the, the bill does good things, but that the perception that Utah is unfriendly to data centers. And I think in, in learning more about this and, and, uh, getting, gauging the temperature out from some of the industry that in fact this is, this is a requested bill and would actually help with that perception and help people feel like data centers are good players and good stewards of the water.

  ▶ Watch at 2:07:15

• H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Moves under suspension of the rules to pass substitute H.B. 71.

  Read what they said

  I will move under suspension of the rules that we pass forth. Substitute house bill 71.

  ▶ Watch at 2:18:13

• H.B. 195 Precious Metals Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Supports the bill, saying the state's gold investments have benefited it and the bill gives options without mandating anything.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. Thank you Mr. President Pro Tim. We all know the state of the dollar right now and we have made reasonable investments into gold and, and, and having gold actually be a usable currency. And it's worked to our benefit. The, the state has benefited greatly from those modest investments. This is a small step in the right, in, in that direction and it just hedges that bet. It, um, it, it doesn't mandate anything. It just gives us opportunities for when, when people may move this direction to be able to function in a society where we have, have the ability to transact with, with precious metals and things other than the dollars. So I'm supportive of this …

  ▶ Watch at 2:23:11

• H.B. 474 Uniform Commercial Code Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026

  Presents HB 474 as updating Utah's commercial code to recognize digital assets such as cryptocurrency as a distinct type of monetary asset for commercial transactions, waives summation, and moves that the first substitute bill pass.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. This, this bill updates Utah's commercial code to recognize digital assets such as cryptocurrency as a distinct type of monetary asset for commercial transactions. Currently cryptocurrency is not recognized as money under existing law. And because of that it does not fit cleanly within traditional asset categories. This bill creates that new legal category. So digital assets can be clearly recognized, transferred, secured, and used in commerce with consistent rules. Uh, the key provisions here is that it establishes a new asset category for digital assets. It clarifies ownership and control. It governs secure transactions involving digital assets and aligns with Utah's, uh, aligns Utah with modern commercial practices. So we have clear rules for ownership and transfer. …

  ▶ Watch at 2:26:08

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Thanked the chair and committee and noted a substitute is available to adopt before or after he speaks to it.

  Read what they said

  Okay, thank you. Chair and committee. Um, I might ask, there's a sub online if, if you want to adopt it before or after, but I can speak to that.

  ▶ Watch at 34:19

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Presented the bill, which sets up three liability paths for driverless vehicles: a statutory path capped at $100,000, a negligence path with a $1 million cap on non-economic damages, and a product liability path with a reasonable alternative design requirement and a rebuttable presumption for systems meeting federal standards, plus a July 1, 2030 sunset.

  Read what they said

  So what the bill does, um, it creates a new simplified driver driverless liability framework. So we can expect autonomous vehicles, the technology's already here, we can expect them to start coming into our state more and more. And what we're trying to do is establish what that liability framework looks like. So what, what we've done here is created three potential causes of action, uh, to encourage the implementation of driverless vehicles, but still give, uh, uh, victims a potential path of recovery. Because if it's truly autonomous, the thought is like you don't have a driver, and negligence might be difficult to prove. And so you might have to go product liability route, which requires a, a pretty …

  ▶ Watch at 34:34

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Explained that the first path is capped at $100,000, the second path does not cap special damages, the $1 million cap applies only to non-economic damages, and wrongful death claims follow a different route.

  Read what they said

  So, so what what can be kind of confusing here is really, there's three paths to the recovery. On the first path, you're capped at a hundred thousand dollars, but that's, if you decide to go that path and, and, and, and it's easier, it's, it's still judicial, but it's more administrative in nature. It was the intent. The second path is just your usual typical tort type claim. And so we're not capping special damages at all. So if you have exorbitant medical damages, if you've, uh, you know, job loss and all that, those are special damages that would not be encumbered by a cap. And so the non-economic damages is just where you'd have the $1 million …

  ▶ Watch at 39:18

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Explained the state-of-the-art defense, its use for emerging technologies, and that it is meant to hold companies to demanding federal standards.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, so, so to the state of the art defense, you know, when, when new emerging technology comes out, uh, it's, it's not uncommon that we offer this rebuttable presumption because the idea is in the aggregate. Hopefully these things become more safe, or, or we want to see the adoption and the exposure for new technology can be, can be huge because, you know, people are unsure what it is. And if you get injured by it, a lot of these companies are really big business. And so sometimes juries and others might say, Hey, they, they can afford this. And so a state of the art defense, um, it is, like I said, just usual and emerging technologies. …

  ▶ Watch at 41:16

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said the $100,000 figure was set partly by estimate after talks with trial attorneys, that the path is optional, and that claims above that amount can still be pursued under the regular negligence route.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, so that, that was determined and, and frankly it was, it was a number, a little bit pulled outta the air. Okay. But, and, and it was negotiated some, it started smaller, but the thought was, um, and, and actually it came from talking to some trial attorneys that there are other types of claims, and I I don't recall them right now, but where it's, if you just demonstrate this, you have a path to recovery. And that's what the thought was on this many car accident. And this is bo bodily injury stuff, not necessarily vehicle replacement. So if you have a path, I mean, if you were injured by an autonomous vehicle, most car accidents that …

  ▶ Watch at 44:00

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said product liability remains available and the state-of-the-art defense was added because the technology is new.

  Read what they said

  Um, we were, so, so product liability is usually, per se, uh, per se negligence if you meet the certain standards, right? And so you can still go product liability. So we didn't eliminate it, but we just added that state of the art defense because it is, it is a new and new and emerging technology. And so it is, it is a little bit different standard than your strict product liability cases. But that's, that's in consideration of the new technology. That's that, that this represents.

  ▶ Watch at 45:50

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said the amendment makes smaller technical changes and creates exceptions allowing software providers to self-certify.

  Read what they said

  Okay. I apologize. Lemme pull that. So the, let's see where the amendment is mostly smaller technical changes just to ensure that, uh, lass in the state office can more easily, easily implement the intents here. Uh, it looks like it does create some certain exceptions, um, for software providers to self-certify. And that's, uh, potentially a point of contention, but something to, something to note in the, in the sub, in the, uh, substitute. And so with that, I can speak to, speak to the bill at large.

  ▶ Watch at 1:28:12

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Presented the bill, which creates a statewide digital privacy agreement with stricter requirements for educational software, independent verification of academic effectiveness, and parent transparency and state oversight.

  Read what they said

  So the impetus for this bill came from parents in my school district and senate district. And it was people who had concerns about what their children are able to access on school issued devices and during school related activities, uh, particularly those activities online and through software programs. And since that time and, and in running this bill, I've heard from parents across the state that share these concerns. And it's not that anybody is necessarily anti-technology, um, that's necessarily gonna be a part of our lives and a part of our school. But if schools are assigning, requiring or recommending software programs, we just want to ensure that it's safe, that it's privacy, protective, and actually educational. And …

  ▶ Watch at 1:29:02

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said the bill includes compliance requirements enforced through periodic audits.

  Read what they said

  Yes, probably. Um, Honest answer, yes. Yeah, so there is compliance requirements that is enforced through periodic audits. So, and I'm trying to find the line number, but that that is in there.

  ▶ Watch at 1:33:22

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said he will waive summing up and that the committee's concerns are being addressed in the right direction.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, I, I'll wa as well. I mean, um, you've heard the concerns and we're just trying to take steps in the right direction,

  ▶ Watch at 1:40:30

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Presented S.B. 296 as affirming students' rights to access and direct the sharing of their educational data, with informed consent requirements and third-party limits.

  Read what they said

  Okay, thank you. So this bill affirms that students, including former students, have the right to access their own educational data and decide who can receive it. So it's puts, it puts students in control, and I'm, I'm mostly talking, I'm talking higher ed students in control of their transcript data, enrollment information, course history, and credentials. It requires true informed consent. So students must be told what data is being shared with whom for what purpose, how long, and they can revoke that. And it prohibits institutions from bundling unrelated terms or force students to waive other rights just to give that consent. Uh, so schools cannot deny delay or restrict a student's ability to authorize disclosure. If the …

  ▶ Watch at 1:41:04

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said the bill requires parents to provide informed consent on behalf of a minor.

  Read what they said

  Yes. That, that that's what was in the bill, is it requires the parents to provide that in informed consent on behalf of a minor.

  ▶ Watch at 1:43:07

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said he does not believe that is current law but that some institutions create barriers to transcripts, and the bill aims to shift the presumption toward students.

  Read what they said

  I, I don't, I don't know if that's correct for every institution, but I think what this problem is trying to address is that every institution sometimes creates different barriers or, or creates different roadblocks or hoops you have to jump to get those transcripts. And that maybe if you haven't completed your coursework, that those, there's questions sometimes with some institutions of whether those transcripts are even yours or if you have to complete it before you can demonstrate that. And so I, I don't think that's the current state of the law, but I do think that sometimes admission officer or or those offices that control these records put up unnecessary barriers. And that's, that's what we're trying …

  ▶ Watch at 1:43:44

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said the bill applies to public education and state institutions of higher education, and that higher education has been more of an issue.

  Read what they said

  That is, yeah. So that, that was My back in the Presentation. This All, all public, all public education in the state of Utah, and it would apply to institutions of higher education, state institutions of higher education. That, that is correct. I I, I think, and there's a stakeholder here that could probably help, but I think it's been more of an issue in higher ed. And so that's where a lot of, lot of my presentation is where, um, where, where the public ed schools, you know, we have different districts, but there, there's less, I don't know, there's less guarding of the transcripts, if you will.

  ▶ Watch at 1:45:44

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said the bill already requires parental consent for students under 18 and that FERPA would still apply to students 18 and older who are in school.

  Read what they said

  I, I think it's, I think it's already in here what you're asking. It, it already requires that if they're under 18, that they get the parents' consent. And then if they're over 18, I mean, if they're 18 but still in school, then FERPA would apply still. So I, I I think it's all in here.

  ▶ Watch at 1:51:16

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · House Education Committee · Mar 4, 2026

  Said he is willing to look into the concerns, believes the current language strengthens the goal, and waived further summation.

  Read what they said

  Um, I, I appreciate the concerns. I, I think I'm a little confused still, but hap happy to look into it. I think six actually strengthens what the representative is looking for, so I don't, I don't know that we want Strike that. 'cause I think, I think you specifically want that in there. But, but in any event, um, appreciate the discussion and I'll waive further summation.

  ▶ Watch at 1:52:23

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Explains that the second substitute, requested by the Department of Public Safety, clarifies that the state-endorsed digital identity may be used for age verification and sunsets the mobile driver license program once the new program is in place.

  Read what they said

  This was in consultation at the, and at the request of the Department of Public Safety. Uh, the second sub clarifies that Seti, the state endorse digital identity may be used for age verification. It also looks at the MDL program, the mobile Driver's License program and Sunset. It sunsets that program after the SETI program is in place.

  ▶ Watch at 33:10

• H.B. 34 Victim Rights Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Moves to suspend the constitutional three-reading requirement for the remainder of the day.

  Read what they said

  Uh, motion to, Let's just suspend the rules. Take just one after the purpose of, uh, moving the third reading requirement for third reading require, okay, go ahead. Yes, let's do that. Motion to suspend the Constitutional three reading requirement for the remainder of the day. We have that a motion to suspend the constitutional three reading requirement. It's allowed under the Constitution for the remaining of the day.

  ▶ Watch at 33:45

• H.B. 447 Tobacco Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Presents H.B. 447 to regulate remote sales of cigars and pipe tobacco, including licensing, bonding, taxes, age verification, adult signature on delivery, and Tax Commission oversight.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. This bill aims to regulate the remote retail sale of cigar cigars and pipe tobacco. Uh, particularly those sales done on the internet and mail or telephone. Uh, there's a licensing and compliance piece. It creates a regulatory framework requiring remote retailers to obtain a specific license, post a bond, and pay applicable taxes to the state. Uh, it mandates age verification that remote remote sellers must use robust age verification to ensure purchasers are over 21 years old. Uh, it requires that an individual 21 or older must sign for and take physical possession of the products upon delivery. It grants the state tax Commission the authority to oversee these transactions, collect the necessary data, and …

  ▶ Watch at 38:09

• H.B. 276 Artificial Intelligence Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Explains that the substitute clarifies that generation services without the ability to create counterfeit images are not subject to the consent requirements or safe harbor conditions, and clarifies that platforms allowing users to download provenance data are not required to provide the full content file.

  Read what they said

  The substitute does two things. First, it clarifies that if a generation service does not offer the ability to create counterfeit images at all, regardless of whether consent is obtained, then that service is not subject to the consent requirements or, uh, in order to qualify for the safe harbor. And then second and clarifies the requirements related to provenance data. A platform that allows users to download provenance.data is not required to provide the entire content file or separate version of the content itself.

  ▶ Watch at 52:30

• H.B. 249 Federal Funds Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Moves to circle the bill while a substitute is expected to be available shortly.

  Read what they said

  Senator Cullimore. Motion to circle, I've got a sub that should be out in a little bit.

  ▶ Watch at 52:32

• H.B. 276 Artificial Intelligence Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Presents the bill, which addresses non-consensual AI-generated intimate images with civil recourse for victims, requires platforms to remove reported counterfeit images, and requires provenance metadata for recording devices, generative AI systems, and state government websites.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. So this bill has been dubbed the Digital Voyeurism Prevention Act. Um, it addresses the rising threat of DeepFakes and the erosion of digital authenticity. The act provides civil and legal recourse for victims of non-consensual AI generated intimate imagery and mandates a technical framework for digital content provenance to identify whether digital media was human captured or AI generated. So it prohibits, uh, AI systems from creating counterfeit, intimate images of identifiable individuals without the individual's expressed consent. It requires large platforms to remove reported non-consensual counterfeit images consistent with the federal Take it Down act. It provides a right of action to an individual whose counterfeit image was distributed. Uh, or if a platform fails to …

  ▶ Watch at 53:31

• H.B. 290 Child Tax Credit Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Introduces Substitute H.B. 390 on veterans' PTSD clinical research and says Utah is uniquely positioned to address the issue.

  Read what they said

  Thank you Mr. President Pro Tem, uh, three 90 uh, relates to the veterans here in Utah. And Utah is uniquely positioned

  ▶ Watch at 1:25:41

• H.B. 390 Veterans PTSD Clinical Research Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Moves that the Senate pass the bill as a first substitute.

  Read what they said

  I'll move that we pass. First substitute house bill three 90 And the question is under suspension of the rule.

  ▶ Watch at 1:27:47

• H.B. 276 Artificial Intelligence Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Presents H.B. 276, which addresses counterfeit intimate images made with AI, platform removal duties, a right of action, metadata labeling requirements, and provenance information on state government websites.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. The fiscal note has caught up to this now. So this bill deals with deepfake liability, prohibits AI systems from creating counterfeit, intimate images of identifiable individuals. Uh, it requires large platforms to remove those consistent with the federal Take it Down Act. It provides a right of action for counterfeit intimate images distribution. If, uh, if, uh, if reported, if, um, it mandates that recording devices and generative AI systems embed metadata to distinguish between actual, um, photos and synthetic media. And then it requires digital content on state government websites to contain provenance information. If there is a risk that fraudulent or misleading media could cause harm to a Utah resident engaging with the website.

  ▶ Watch at 1:37:45

• H.B. 276 Artificial Intelligence Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Moves to pass second substitute H.B. 276 under suspension of the rules.

  Read what they said

  I'll move that under suspension of the rules we pass. Second substitute house bill 2 76. Thank

  ▶ Watch at 1:38:41

• H.B. 276 Artificial Intelligence Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Moves to recess for 15 to 20 minutes. · speaker not certain

  Read what they said

  Motion to Santer for 15, maybe 20 minutes. So Moved. Motion to Saunter for 15 to 20 minutes.

  ▶ Watch at 1:40:25

• H.B. 372 Child Welfare Changes · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Moves to circle a bill while waiting for a substitute to be available, and the motion passes.

  Read what they said

  Uh, motion to circle. Just waiting on a little sub. That should be out Quickly. Motion to circle. All in favor say Aye. Aye. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Rule. That motion passes the bill of Circle

  ▶ Watch at 3:20:09

• H.B. 437 Environmental Permitting Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Says he has a substitute bill online and moves to delete the title and body of third substitute H.B. 475.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. I've got a four sub online. So motion to delete title and body of third substitute House Bill

  ▶ Watch at 4:11:32

• H.B. 475 Development Planning and Coordination Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Presents H.B. 475 as reorganizing and clarifying state economic development planning, including renaming the department back to GOED, creating a coordinating council, a process for Opportunity Zone 2.0 selections, and expanded NDA applicability for economic development agreements.

  Read what they said

  This, this bill focuses largely on reorganizing and clarifying how, uh, economic development planning functions at the state level. Uh, including creating new coordinating structures and reporting processes. It does four primary things. So a few years ago we changed the name of this department to Goyo. We are changing it back to Goed. And so this creates the bill is super long because Goyo is referenced a lot in code and so it has to go through and change all of that back to Goed. It creates a new coordinating council. It creates a clear process for opportunity zone 2.0 selections. And then it creates some broader NDA applicability when goad enters into uh, economic development agreements.

  ▶ Watch at 4:12:14

• H.B. 502 School Attendance Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Moves to amend the bill by replacing the fifth substitute with a version that adds privacy amendments.

  Read what they said

  I do. Motion to UNC fifth substitute house Bill four 50. We have a motion to Uncer fifth. Substitute to house Bill four 50 to add privacy amendments.

  ▶ Watch at 4:25:28

• H.B. 450 Data Privacy Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026

  Explains H.B. 450 as an annual update to the Government Data Privacy Act that clarifies the roles of the Office of Data Privacy and the State Auditor, moves privacy audit duties to the privacy auditor, and requires departments and political subdivisions to submit privacy program reports.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, so that's a small portion of the bill. The, the big bill is this is an annual update bill for the Government Data Privacy Act In previous years, uh, I've run this bill with, uh, Representative Moss and it continues the legislature's efforts to refine and strengthen our statewide PRI privacy framework. It clarifies the roles of the Office of Data Privacy and the Office of the State auditor. The Office of Data Privacy will focus on statewide privacy strategy, policy, standards, guidance, and training. While the office of the state auditor will focus on auditing governmental entities, uh, against those standards, uh, it to support that the bill moves the duties currently assigned to the privacy audit, uh, …

  ▶ Watch at 4:26:30

• H.B. 370 Sex Offender Oversight Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Mar 3, 2026

  Asks whether the monitoring costs fall on homeless registrants, who would decide the hardship clause, and whether the money would do more for housing, jobs and reentry.

  Read what they said

  Uh, it seems, it seems like they've got a lot of data driving this. Um, but one of the things is like, one, are we putting this on the homeless? And why are we making them pay for it? And I understand there's a hardship clause, you know, but who's gonna decide that? And the people who aren't complying with AP and P, they're already going to prison. You know, and this monitor's not gonna solve the underlying issue that homelessness is the problem. Finding housing is the problem. And we could, we could better spend our money providing homes, getting the homeless off the street, giving them stability, getting them into jobs, and they could pay taxes. Which in …

  ▶ Watch at 1:23:54

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Explains the substitute, which sets up a process for vendors to certify educational software, separates administrative and educational privacy agreements, and allows provisional offers to schools.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. It clarifies, uh, some of the digital privacy agreements where there might be some that are more administrative and some that are more for educational software and provides for different, uh, privacy agreements. Uh, it creates a process for vendors. The substitute creates a process for vendors to certify that their software is academically effective. Um, it require, it still requires the digital private agreements for administrative soft software with, with less robust provisions than the educationally effective software. And then it more explicitly allows a vendor to offer educational software to, uh, LEA on a provisional basis.

  ▶ Watch at 1:25:01

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Presents the bill, saying schools use many digital tools that may collect student data or prioritize engagement over learning, and that it adds independent verification and transparency so software is academically effective.

  Read what they said

  To the bill. So we discussed this on second reading calendar, but, but to remind, to remind everybody, schools use a lot of digital tools and applications and many are free and low cost and, and can get quickly adopted into the classroom. So a lot of times parents don't even know what their kids are using at school. And some software collects extensive student data. Uh, some of it's designed to maximize engagement and screen time and not necessarily learning. And then there's not really a consistent statewide standard to ensure that this software is academically effective. So this bill seeks to address that by creating a more robust digital privacy agreement to ensure that the software being used …

  ▶ Watch at 1:25:59

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Says the bill defines clickstream data and requires vendors to agree to a privacy agreement with consent, and bars its use for targeted advertising or diverting students from educational purpose.

  Read what they said

  Senator Cullimore? I think the, the idea is that some of the clickstream, it defines clickstream data and then it simply states that, um, if well, well, you just simply have to agree to the data privacy agreement that, that, uh, there is consent and that the data is not being used for targeted advertising or to take kids away from the academically effective educational purpose of the software

  ▶ Watch at 1:28:13

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Says the obligations take effect immediately but do not undo existing contracts, and that a transition period of at least 18 months is built in.

  Read what they said

  No. The intent is that these obligations be, become effective immediately, but it's not to undo any existing contracts. There's a runway built into this that allows for any existing contracts to get up to speed over the course of, I think it was at least 18 months, but maybe even two years. Lemme find the date.

  ▶ Watch at 1:29:11

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Says the bill is not meant to override existing laws and aims to keep software from leading students to sexual exploitation or abuse material outside its instructional purpose.

  Read what they said

  No. The intent for this bill is to not to step on any other laws that we already have passed, whether that deals with sensitive materials or, uh, other sexual abuse harm, rather, the intent is that the, the software that's being provided should not lead kids to sexual exploitation or abuse materials that are not part of the instructional intent of the, of the software program.

  ▶ Watch at 1:30:27

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Gives closing remarks that the bill is not anti-technology but adds guardrails so classroom technology serves learning, does not harvest data, and limits student risk, and moves to pass the second substitute.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. I appreciate the last comment. And I'll just say that, uh, I'll ditto that, that we have software in, obviously in our schools. The intent of this is not to be anti-technology, but this, this bill, the impetus of this was from real conversations with parents who have concerns about what is happening in the classroom and making sure that technology is using appropriately. So we're not looking to turn back the clock. Uh, we're just asking for some guardrails and making sure that our children should learn how to appropriately, appropriately use technology. And that when technology is introduced in the classroom, it should serve learning and not distract from it. It shouldn't be harvesting data and shouldn't …

  ▶ Watch at 1:32:04

• S.B. 324 Outcome-based Investment Grant Pilot Framework · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Sponsor says the bill affirms that students, including former students, have the right to access their own educational data and decide who receives it.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. This bill affirms that students, including former students, have the right to access their own educational data and decide who can receive it. It puts students in control of their transcript, data,

  ▶ Watch at 1:50:03

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Presents S.B. 296, saying it gives students control over their transcripts, data, enrollment information, course history, and credentials, requires informed consent, limits bundling of terms, and sets enforcement including a private right of action against third parties.

  Read what they said

  and decide who can receive it. It puts students in control of their transcript, data, enrollment information, course history, and credentials. Uh, it requires true informed consent. So the students must be told what data is being shared with whom for what purpose, how long, and that they can revoke it. And that institutions cannot bundle unrelated terms or force students to waive other rights just to grant that consent. Uh, we're asking that the institutions cannot deny to delay or restrict a student's ability to authorize disclosure if the consent complies with the law and that they should implement reasonable tech technical safeguards, but not undermined a student's underlying right to access this stuff. Uh, This bill expressly, uh, …

  ▶ Watch at 1:50:10

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026

  Makes a motion to pass first substitute S.B. 296.

  Read what they said

  With that, I'll just make the motion that we pass first substitute Senate Bill 2 96.

  ▶ Watch at 1:52:29

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Mar 2, 2026

  Explains that the bill lets the courts create a district court division with commissioners to centralize high-volume civil cases such as evictions and debt collections, with trials remaining in local districts.

  Read what they said

  Alright, thank you. Chair and committee. So the Utah Bar Foundation has been doing a study on, uh, high volume type civil cases, meaning eviction and collection cases. And have, have, uh, been working with practitioners, have been working with, uh, advocates for, uh, a lot of the pro se litigants, which is often who, who is in these types of court hearings and has made recommendations or, or at least based on their study, has recommended that what we could do is consolidate a lot of these cases. And a lot of this is made possible due to COVID. And now that a lot of these cases are online, uh, we could, we could consolidate all these cases, which …

  ▶ Watch at 1:16:51

• H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Explains that H.B. 519 updates the unclaimed property law to cover digital assets such as cryptocurrency, including when they are presumed abandoned after three years, the notice required before liquidation, and some practical exceptions.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. Utah's Existing unclaimed property law, uh, requires that when property is abandoned for a certain number of years, it must be turned over to the state so that the rightful owner can claim it. Utah's current law covers items like forgotten bank accounts on cash checks, life insurance payouts, safe deposit box contents. What this bill does is it, it updates that to clearly address digital assets like cryptocurrency and other digital only financial assets. So it sets when digital assets are considered abandoned, A di a digital asset is presumed abandoned after three years with no contact or indication of interest from the owner. Uh, this is similar to other financial property. It explains how the state's …

  ▶ Watch at 23:28

• H.B. 103 Underage Marriage Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Waives summation and moves that first substitute H.B. 103 pass.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. I'll waive summation and move that first substitute house bill 1 0 3. Pass

  ▶ Watch at 23:42

• H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Moves that the Senate pass the first substitute of H.B. 519.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. Need the need a motion? I'll move that we pass. First substitute house Bill five 19.

  ▶ Watch at 24:30

• S.B. 324 Outcome-based Investment Grant Pilot Framework · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Spoke on the bill.

  Read what they said

  Senator Cullimore, There was a seat now on President Prom. We we're on the second reading calendar. We Are on the second reading calendar.

  ▶ Watch at 43:42

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Moves to delete the bill's title and body and replace them with the first substitute.

  Read what they said

  I have a, I have a sub, um, motion to delete title and body of 2 96 and replace with the first substitute Senate bill 2 96.

  ▶ Watch at 44:13

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Describes the substitute as a compromise aimed at giving students more control over their data and transcripts through a digital platform.

  Read what they said

  The sub is based on, uh, this is this, the intent of this bill is to allow students to have more control over their, their data and their transcripts. And the sub is, is a compromise between stakeholders and Yi to allow for the digi to allow for a digital platform for that, uh, ownership, if you will.

  ▶ Watch at 44:32

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Explains that the bill would let students control when and where their transcripts are sent and would create a secure digital mechanism for informed consent.

  Read what they said

  Thank you Mr. President Tim. Um, crap. So this, this bill enacts, um, the availability and the, the ability of students to access their own transcripts and have a little bit more control over that to bring us up to 2026. So, so students are really the ones dictating when and where their transcripts are sent, as opposed to having to jump through hoops of higher institution to get these things transferred. Um, it, the intent of the bill is that there will be a secure digital mechanism for obtaining informed consent from students to do this and for allowing for that, uh, uh, transfer of transcripts.

  ▶ Watch at 45:18

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Responds that under FERPA the institution's liability ends once a student consents to sharing the transcript.

  Read what they said

  My understanding is that under ferpa, no. If, if a student gives consent for, for their transcripts or whatever to be shared, then the, the liability then ends for the, the institution of higher education.

  ▶ Watch at 47:07

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Moves that the first substitute be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  I'll move that we read first substitute Senate bill 2 96 for a third time,

  ▶ Watch at 47:31

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026

  Presents S.B. 292, which creates a simplified driverless liability framework with three causes of action, retains product liability protections, and includes a July 1, 2030 sunset review.

  Read what they said

  we're moving into an age where autonomous vehicles are gonna be on our roads. They provide a lot of potential benefits. Uh, I've heard from associations that deal with, uh, uh, blind people, elderly people who are looking for this. But to introduce this type of new technology, we need to look at some of the liability frameworks. So this, this, uh, does a few things. It creates a new simplified driverless liability framework. It substitutes, uh, it creates three different causes of action. There's an exclusive statutory cause of action for incidents involving these driverless dedicated vehicles and a plaintiff. It, it lowers the requirement that a plaintiff has to prove to get recovery, but it caps that recovery, …

  ▶ Watch at 49:41

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Presents SB 275 as building on last year's SB 260 by creating an operational state-endorsed digital identity program with privacy protections, rulemaking, annual reporting, and regulation of digital identity participants.

  Read what they said

  Thank you Chair. Chair Committee. As you might recall, last year you guys voted for freedom when you voted for SB two 60. Uh, and this bill builds on that foundation. The bill did three critical things last year. It declared that identity belongs to the in individual, not the state. It embedded strong privacy and anti surveillance guardrails and statute and required study and stakeholder consultation before implement implementation. So it was intentionally co cautious and just lay, uh, laying the groundwork. It didn't create a live program. It didn't deploy infrastructure, it didn't mandate participation. It just set the philosophical structure and Civil, civil Liberty Foundation. And so now we're back with 2 75. And it takes the …

  ▶ Watch at 1:12:11

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Gives closing remarks that digital identity is coming regardless, the bill builds on last year's foundation, and it protects individual autonomy, privacy, and freedom from government overreach.

  Read what they said

  Uh, no. I, I, I, uh, appreciate representative Cutler's, uh, motion and his explanation. I think he's exactly right. Digital ID is coming regardless of what we do. Last year, we laid the foundation. This year we're responsibly building upon that foundation, and we're doing it the Utah way that protects individual autonomy, privacy, and freedom from government overreach. And so I would appreciate your support.

  ▶ Watch at 1:27:27

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Presented SB 256 to address non-commercial deepfakes that cause reputational harm or personal distress, with a notice-and-takedown requirement and exemptions for news, parody, satire, and other protected speech.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. So, artificial intelligence and deepfake technology have fundamentally changed how identif identity can be misused. And Utah already addresses this on two ends of the spectrum. One, if somebody, uh, uses your name, image, or likeness for commercial misuse, we passed a bill, I think just last year that allows for an action against that by, by the person whose identity is being misused. And then you can go to the common law claim of defamation. And we, we actually have statutory language on defamation two, which would include libel and slander. And you can use that. What this bill does is it, it says defamation type actions are available even if it's the use of ai. But …

  ▶ Watch at 1:28:41

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Responded that the bill targets content posted with intent to make people believe it is the real person without a parody label, so the scenario described would go beyond the bill's intent.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, but I, even that, I think you're taking it to the extreme because the intent is that somebody has to post something with the intent that they're actually, that people would believe it was actually them, and leaving it there without noting before or after that it's actually parody or something like that. And so if you put that out there with the intent of, of painting somebody in a bad light without noting that it's not actually them or parody, then, then that's, you wouldn't even get to that cause of action without overcoming that first part. But yes, otherwise, you're correct.

  ▶ Watch at 1:40:22

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Thanked the committee for the motion and said this is a new area of law that may be revised this session or later as the issue develops.

  Read what they said

  And appreciate the motion. And some of the, uh, comments are, are noted that this is kind of a new area of law, like, like a lot of things we do up here. It, it may not, this isn't etching it in stone. There may, there may be opportunity to revise it this session, but certainly over time as we see this develop, then I'm sure we'll be back here. Great.

  ▶ Watch at 1:41:33

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Explained that the bill moves constable licensure to the Division of Professional Licensing, sets criteria to become a constable, adds regulation and oversight, and creates deputy and apprentice constable levels, because counties like Salt Lake were moving away from appointing constables.

  Read what they said

  I can do this quick. So, constables have been a thing in Utah since, since the foundation of Utah. They're actually in the Constitution, but you know, there, there's purposes and s have changed over time. Uh, historically they've been appointed by counties and cities that meet a certain size, but about 20 years ago, we gave them statewide jurisdiction. And so that became problematic for some of these counties and cities who are appointing constables, where they were serving all over the state. And they didn't really have supervisory oversight. They didn't know what they were doing. The, the, the county councils, I should say, not the constables. And so it's possible that you could get a complaint from …

  ▶ Watch at 1:48:29

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Said constables mainly serve civil process and that he worked with UAC, Salt Lake County, constables, the licensing division, and Public Safety, none of whom oppose the bill.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. So, um, constables primarily at this point serve civil process. So they work with private attorneys and, and law groups and stuff like that. But they still do contract with cities or counties to do bailiff work and other, maybe other warrant work and stuff like that. So I've talked to, I've, I've worked with uac, Salt Lake County, um, I've worked with the constables, I worked with Doppel, worked with Department of Public Safety, and nobody has spoken against this bill. And in fact, they've all had input. And I believe, I believe it's a consensus Bill.

  ▶ Watch at 1:50:38

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Said the licensing division would have regulatory oversight, including over conflicts of interest.

  Read what they said

  Um, well, Doppel will have regulatory oversight as, as for conflict of interest. I'm not, I, I guess I don't know what the fact scenario would be, but yeah, Doppel would have re regulatory oversight of this side.

  ▶ Watch at 1:51:46

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Explained constables work by contract serving civil process and enforcing court orders, have partial police training, and ideally call local law enforcement when situations become criminal.

  Read what they said

  So constables are usually doing work by contract. Mm-hmm. And so they may be out serving civil process, they may be out executing writ of, uh, restitution or writ of execution, meaning they're taking property or enforcing court orders. And so usually that's gonna be done civilly. And so it, it's civil attorneys or civil parties that are gonna hire constables typically to go out and do this. Um, and they can find themselves in Harry situations for sure. And to be a constable, even under this bill, you have to have gone through at least, uh, I may say this wrong, but like half of post post training or police academy. And so they're, but oftentimes the constables are …

  ▶ Watch at 1:52:47

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Said no agency previously provided real oversight, so this goes from none to some, and noted private investigators and bail bonds are also moving to the licensing division under another bill.

  Read what they said

  Um, probably not as up to date, but I, I would say this, nobody else that was doing oversight did DDPS didn't have any oversight over this. The counties alleg are alleging they didn't really have any oversight or the cities post didn't have any oversight. So, no. So we're going from no oversight to some oversight. And in addition to constables moving over here, uh, uh, private investigators and bail bonds are also gonna be licensed under, that's not in this bill, but that was another bill that, that they're moving to Doppel As well. So it just makes sense to have that. All right there. Okay.

  ▶ Watch at 1:54:14

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Said constables remain important to the legal process and the bill gives them a place to be licensed as cities and counties pull back.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, I appreciate the motion. Um, I'll just say, Constable serve an important part of the, the legal process and legal, um, ecosystem still. And so it's important that we find a place where they can still get licensed, get housed, and many cities and counties for, for potentially good reason and liability reasons where constricting that and, and not wanting to maintain the oversight there. And so this, this creates a path that allows for the continued survival of constables.

  ▶ Watch at 1:58:57

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · House Health and Human Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Presents S.B. 217, which removes farmers' market signage requirements, allows producers to sell through designated representatives, clarifies a tax exemption for locally produced food, and does not address raw milk.

  Read what they said

  Rep Senator Comar. Alright, Thank you. Chair committee. Happy Friday afternoon. Yeah. The, uh, central purpose of this bill is simple. It's to make locally grown and homemade food more readily available to Utah, to Utah consumers, and to create a clear, easier path for local producers to sell what they grow and to make, and making their own communities. So we have all across Utah, we have small farmers, home producers and families that sell things like homemade bread jams, honey salsa, fruits, and other locally produced produced goods at farmers' markets and direct to sale locations. And these individuals aren't operating like large commercial businesses, they're just neighbors trying to provide for their families and contribute to their …

  ▶ Watch at 2:15:02

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · House Health and Human Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026

  Responds that labeling requirements remain unchanged and the original producer stays the ultimate owner, so products can still be traced back.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, good question. So it doesn't, it doesn't take away, um, labeling requirements. So the labeling will still, still be there. You still, the original producer is still the ultimate owner. So if there is outbreaks or anything like that, there's still the ability to track it back. And so that, that, that would be the key. The the idea is that you might, might be able to better, more easily develop a co-op or something like that, but when you purchase something, the labeling requirements are unchanged in this bill in law. So you would still know who the original producer is.

  ▶ Watch at 2:18:11

• H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Explains that H.B. 320 updates agency collaboration with the AI policy lab, lab agreements, office guidance on AI best practices, participant selection criteria, and the types of agreements the office can enter.

  Read what they said

  and renumbering of some of the definitions and sections. It updates guidelines on how agencies can collaborate with the AI policy lab and, and, and some of the agreements that the AI policy lab can can issue. It enables the office to develop and publish guidance for businesses and consumers about AI best practices. It defines more specific guidelines for selecting, uh, businesses and participants to work with, including focusing on an applicant's relevance and utility. It clarifies that the office's vetting and monitoring of participants innovative AI deployment constitutes an audit for grammar purposes. And then finally, it clarifies the types of agreements that the office can enter into.

  ▶ Watch at 14:07

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Explains that the substitute reflects input from the court and will help the housing collection court implement the changes more easily.

  Read what they said

  Uh, this is, this is input from the court. This is the Housing collection court. This will help them implement the, the court easier.

  ▶ Watch at 56:42

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Describes the bill as letting the Judicial Council set up a statewide division within district court to consolidate certain housing and debt collection cases, with trials sent back to the appropriate county if needed.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. This bill allows the courts, uh, through the Judicial Council to set up a division within the district court system to allow certain cases, housing and, and debt collection cases to be consolidated at a division at, in one division in statewide. And this helps them, uh, helps them and other parties including, uh, resources for debtors and pro se litigants, uh, to address those cases in a consolidated way Statewide. When and if it comes to the necessity of a trial, then it would get farmed back out to the appropriate county.

  ▶ Watch at 57:10

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Says the legislature is empowered by the constitution and statute to establish jurisdiction, venue, and specific courts, and that this bill does not create a new court but lets the Judicial Council set up a division within district court.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to explain that the legislature is empowered via the constitution and statute to establish jurisdiction and venue and, and specific courts. I will note however, though that this bill does not do, does not establish a new court that simply allows the court system through the Judicial Council to establish a division within the district court. It's, it's hard to keep the attorneys German main to the bill. So anyway, we'll try to keep that.

  ▶ Watch at 58:31

• H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Presents the bill, which aligns the state's Juneteenth holiday recognition with the federal observance on June 19th.

  Read what they said

  to amend Halloween? Yes. Okay. This simply align. A few years ago, the state recognized Juneteenth in our recognition, we decided that we would like a three day weekend. And so if the 19th happened to be on a Monday or Friday, we'd recognize it then. Otherwise we would recognize the closest Monday or Friday. The Feds have since come down and recognized Juneteenth as a federal holiday and as it's called Juneteenth. I think that means June 19th. So it is on June 19th. What we are doing is aligning our recognition of this with the federal recognition so we don't have multiple days off for certain organizations within the same week. Thank you for the presentation. Senator Fillmore,

  ▶ Watch at 1:04:47

• H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Responds that the state, post offices, and courts recognized the holiday on different days, and the bill is meant to eliminate confusion.

  Read what they said

  The reason, as I understand, is in a year, like this year, if I recall, we rec, we as the state recognized Juneteenth on Monday, but then the Feds recognized it on a Tuesday. And so we had state offices that were closed on Monday. Then we had post offices that were closed on Tuesday and the courts weren't sure if they were closed on Monday and Tuesday. And, and there's other institutions that want to recognize it, and they weren't sure whether they do it on Monday or Tuesday or both days. And so this is just trying to eliminate the confusion and sense the Feds decide to do what they're gonna do. It was, uh, just an attempt …

  ▶ Watch at 1:06:16

• H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Says the public has not contacted him on the bill, but some businesses that deal with the post office, courts, and federal agencies appreciate the alignment.

  Read what they said

  Senator Cullimore, The population has not spoke to me on this bill, but I will say certain businesses have that interact with the post office, that interact with the courts and interact with other state and federal agencies and have and appreciate the attempt to align, align these.

  ▶ Watch at 1:07:53

• H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Says the state courts website lists the holiday on its own date, and recounts visiting a closed post office and going the next day.

  Read what they said

  I was gonna say on the state court website, it does have a specific day of when Juneteenth is celebrated not on, you know, the traditional day. So it doesn't seem like the courts are that confused. The post office, I mean, the last time I Uintah a post office, it's, it's been a while. Um, but I haven't been to a post office, but one time I did go and it was closed. I, I just went the next day. It, it, it was not that stressful to me to go the next day.

  ▶ Watch at 1:09:41

• H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Gives summation, noting that future holidays should be scheduled on a Friday.

  Read what they said

  If, if you're up here on the hill long enough in whatever capacity, uh, activist, lobbyist, legislator, you'll be here long enough to find yourself a hypocrite in some fashion. I would encourage your vote on this, but, but we'll remind you that in the future it is important to have another holiday on Friday. Yes.

  ▶ Watch at 1:17:25

• H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Moves that the Senate pass First Substitute H.B. 309.

  Read what they said

  Even in your summation, I'll move that we pass. First substitute house bill 3 0 9.

  ▶ Watch at 1:17:55

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Moves to substitute the bill with a version limited to Level four and five driverless vehicles and creating a new liability framework.

  Read what they said

  and replace it with first substitute Senate bill 2 92. And to that motion, this simplifies things. This, this is dealing with autonomous vehicles. The substitute limits it to Class four and class five vehicles, which are fully autonomous and driverless. Um, it creates a new liability framework, which I'll discuss with the bill and, uh, yeah, creates, creates new liability structure for autonomous for level four and five autonomous vehicles. So that's to this motion to substitute.

  ▶ Watch at 1:32:37

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Presents the substitute bill's three parts: a rule that the automated system is the operator for traffic compliance, a statutory cause of action with limits for driverless crashes, and preserved product liability claims with a 2030 sunset.

  Read what they said

  Thank you president. So, autonomous vehicles are, are no longer theoretical. They're actually operating today in many states and, uh, potentially could be coming to Utah. And these are not just autonomous, these are autonomous and driverless. So the question before us is, will we define the rules thoughtfully now or wait until they're here and potentially cause accidents? So the substitute bill does three important things. First, it recognizes reality when a level four, a level five autonomous system is engaged, and that means it's fully autonomous with no driver in there. The bill makes clear that the automated driving system is the operator for the purposes of traffic compliance. Second, it creates a balance simplified path for recovery …

  ▶ Watch at 1:33:28

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Answers that the affirmative defense is not a full shield, that it applies only if the design meets federal standards, and that it creates a presumption of meeting the duty of care.

  Read what they said

  No. No. And in fact, this is just an affirmative defense. It's not, it doesn't get you out completely, it's just if your design actually meets these high standards and there's federal standards to hit a DS autonomous driverless safety four and five, then it could be, it can be something that you can use as a defense, but it's, it's still, it, it just means it's a presumption that you met your duty. But if there's a defect still, then it, it doesn't necessarily, it, it doesn't automatically mean you met your, your duty of care.

  ▶ Watch at 1:36:28

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Says the bill caps non-economic damages as other state laws do, with exceptions such as wrongful death, does not cap medical damages, and sets a cap higher than most existing caps.

  Read what they said

  So we, we cap stuff like that all the time in, in statute. I mean, one example is in med mal, another others in government immunity. I mean, um, so this, this is in line with other policies that, that we have out there. There's still the ability to recover and there are exceptions here like wrongful death and stuff like that. And again, it doesn't cap your actual medi medical damages or anything like that, just the non-economic. And it's, and it's, and it's a fairly, it's reasonably high cap. It's higher than most of the other caps that we have in the statute right now.

  ▶ Watch at 1:38:08

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Says the scenario is not specifically addressed in the bill and he cannot answer based on the limited facts.

  Read what they said

  That that's a, yeah, that's an interesting fact pattern that I'm not sure is contemplated specifically in this bill because I, I guess the question is, did they get hurt because of an accident or did they get hurt because they got out of the car? I'm, I'm not, I'm not sure. I, I don't know that I can answer based on the limited facts.

  ▶ Watch at 1:41:18

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026

  Summarizes that product liability is one of three paths to recovery alongside negligence and an expedited path, and moves that the bill be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  Uh, to some, to some of the comments. I would just note that product liability is just one avenue of recovery. You could still, you could still, if you're injured, you could still go the the negligence route. Um, and then there all, there's also, as a good senator up here mentioned a, a more expedited path to, to recovery. So we're trying to create three different potential paths to recovery, recognizing that this is a new technology and that some certainty in the legal landscape would encourage and incentivize, uh, investment into our community with this, which can be super life-changing for a lot of people I've heard from the blind community, the elderly community, uh, kids that, that …

  ▶ Watch at 1:41:54

• H.B. 105 Child Welfare Revisions · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Moves to lift third substitute H.B. 71 from tabled to the top of the third reading calendar so it can be substituted, with a new fiscal note expected later.

  Read what they said

  Oh, thank you Mr. President Pro. Tim, I have a motion to lift from tabled on third to the third reading calendar. Third substitute house bill 71. The intent of this is, I'm sorry, to the top of the third reading calendar, the intent of this motion is to substitute the bill. Once we do the substitute, that'll trigger hopefully a new fiscal note at some point. And so after we lift it to the top of third, I'll substitute, then I will circle it, wait for the fiscal note to catch up and then we'll address it at some future point. So the first motion is to lift the what's name the bill to Lift sub third substitute house …

  ▶ Watch at 18:58

• H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Explains that the fourth substitute narrows the insurance commissioner's required rulemaking to reduce the fiscal note.

  Read what they said

  and body of third substitute house bill 71. Replace it with four substitute house bill 71. The intent of this substitute is to substantially reduce or eliminate the fiscal note by, rather than directing the Utah Insurance Commissioner to make rules to authorize the Utah's insurance commissioner certain pro authorizes Utah's insurance commissioner to make rules to implement certain provisions of this bill. So I think we're narrowing what, what has to be done for the insurance commission on this, which will reduce the fiscal note.

  ▶ Watch at 20:24

• H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Moves to circle H.B. 71 for the fourth substitute.

  Read what they said

  Motion to circle for substitute house bill 71. We have a motion to circle fourth substitute house bill 71.

  ▶ Watch at 21:14

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Explains that the bill came from parent concerns about the safety, privacy, and educational value of software used in schools, and that it strengthens the statewide digital privacy agreement with independent verification and transparency requirements.

  Read what they said

  All right. Thank you, president. The impetus for this bill came from conversations with parents in my neighborhood. Uh, they began approaching me with concerns about what their children are able to access on school issued devices and during school related online activities. Uh, since that time, I've heard from many other parents as well who have similar concerns and, and these parents are not necessarily anti-technology. They understand that that's a part of our lives. Now, the concern is simple, though, that if schools are assigning, requiring, or recommending software, it should be safe, privacy, protective, and actually educational. So to be clear too, I've got a substitute that I'm working on right now with some stakeholders, but in …

  ▶ Watch at 23:29

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Says a substitute in progress would let local education agencies vet their own software and would provide a provisional-use path, and moves that the first substitute for S.B. 267 be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Just to sum a couple things, again, working on a sub, but, but a couple things to address that. One, it does have the state office vet a lot of software, but it does provide a path for local LEAs to vet their own software and come up with their DPAs as well. So there is a path for local LEAs to do their own thing. Uh, three there. Or the other issue is, um, there's a path for provisional use so you don't have to jump through all the hoops to get in there and, and start using it, but eventually you gotta come and work to come into compliance. So those, those will remain in the, in …

  ▶ Watch at 29:41

• H.B. 293 Public Education Student Athlete Protections · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Moves to uncircle H.B. 293 on the Senate floor.

  Read what they said

  Thank you Mr. President Pro 10. Motion to UNC Ccle. HB 3 0 9. Motion to encircle HB 3 0 9. That's on. Second.

  ▶ Watch at 54:01

• H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Moves that the bill be read for a third time.

  Read what they said

  With that, my motion is that we read for a third time. First, first substitute house bill 3 0 9.

  ▶ Watch at 57:51

• H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Presents H.B. 320, which reorganizes definitions and sections, updates how agencies collaborate on AI policy, lets the office publish guidance, sets participant selection and vetting rules for the AI policy lab, and clarifies the types of agreements the office can enter.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. HB three 20 deals with the AI policy lab. It's a reorganization and renumbering of some of the definitions and sections. It updates guidelines on how agencies collaborate on AI policy and agreements. It enables the office to develop and publish guidance for businesses and consumers about AI best practices. It defines more specific guidelines for selecting participants to work with, including focusing on applicant's relevance and utilities. So one of the functions of the AI policy lab is to invite businesses to come in, show 'em how show, show the policy lab, how they plan to deploy AI and then seek for some regulatory certainty. And so this would encourage that clarifies that the office is vetting …

  ▶ Watch at 1:12:00

• H.B. 390 Veterans PTSD Clinical Research Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Presents the bill as a research study of PTSD treatment for veterans using psychotherapy with investigational compounds, and says Utah institutions will operate within federal regulatory rules.

  Read what they said

  Thank you colleagues. You, you'll have, uh, some material on your desk in, in regards to this bill, but, uh, what this bill addresses is Utah's home to a substantial veteran community, including many individuals with service related trauma who rely on state and regional healthcare systems for care. Unfortunately, Utah reports higher suicide rates than the national average, including among veterans underscoring the urgency of developing more effective interventions. Utah's research institutions, including the Huntsman Mental Health Institute, are nationally recognized and and have expertise in in psychiatric, uh, clinical trials, trauma-informed care, and federal regulatory compliance. Uh, Utah institutions routinely conduct FDA regulated investigative in investigational drug trials involving complex and vulnerable populations. So Utah, through this bill …

  ▶ Watch at 1:29:07

• H.B. 390 Veterans PTSD Clinical Research Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026

  Waives summation and moves that the bill be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  Uh, I will waive summation. My motion is that we read first substitute house bill three 90 for a third time.

  ▶ Watch at 1:31:57

• S.B. 119 School and Classroom Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026

  Explains that the bill moves constable licensure from cities and counties to a state entity and sets the requirements for obtaining that license.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. This is the bill that moves Con Constable licensure from cities and counties to doppel. It establishes what the requirements will be to get that license.

  ▶ Watch at 1:47:54

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026

  Explains that the bill sets up state oversight and licensing requirements for constables, and lets constables contract with counties or cities for services.

  Read what they said

  what the requirements will be to get that license. It provides oversight, uh, and enforcement of that licensure within Dopel. It also allows constables to continue doing what they're doing, but they can also contract with counties or cities for constable type services.

  ▶ Watch at 1:48:01

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026

  Says the bill creates a middle ground: commercial misuse of identity is already actionable, but defamation requires proving damages, so the bill adds a new claim with a notice-and-takedown step and preserves news, parody, and similar speech.

  Read what they said

  This, this meets the middle ground. We already have a law that deals with commercial misuse. Somebody that tries to monetize your NIL you, that's actionable and defamation, which is a longstanding statutory and common law claim. The problem with defamation is that it can be difficult because you have to demonstrate actual damages. And, uh, in the fast moving pace that we have with online, that might be difficult to do and somebody could put up a deep fake and, and use, use somebody else's name, image, or likeness. And it can cause serious damage, reputational harm, but you might not be able to actually put a dollar figure to that which undermines your defamation claim. So this, this …

  ▶ Watch at 1:50:20

• S.B. 290 Victim and Witness Privacy Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026

  Moves a substitute motion to adopt the first substitute, which he says is closer to the right balance but still needs work.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. I, I appreciate the, the motion and, and the sponsor of the motion, what was said. Um, with that said, I have similar concerns and so I make a substitute motion that we adopt substitute one. Uh, the reason being is I, I do think it's closer to the gold Goldilocks moment and, and maybe still has some work to do, but I think it's, I think it gets us, uh, closer in the negotiations as this bill continues to move forward. So that would be my motion.

  ▶ Watch at 1:30:05

• S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Moves a motion regarding first substitute S.B. 218.

  Read what they said

  Motion to encircle first substitute Senate bill two 18. We have a motion to encircle first substitute Senate bill 2 18 2 18.

  ▶ Watch at 7:48

• S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Moves to delete the title and body of first substitute S.B. 218 and replace them.

  Read what they said

  Uh, Motion to delete title and body of first substitute Senate bill two 18 And replace

  ▶ Watch at 8:19

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Says the substitute makes mostly technical changes and further defines constable licensing requirements, including age 21, required hours, and post-certification, plus new deputy and apprentice licenses.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, some of these are just technical changes. Some of them, uh, further explain what it would take for a constable to get a license. Uh, as we, as I previously mentioned on this bill, we're moving the license licensure of constables from counties and cities to Doppel. And so as they oversee this new license, um, it, it just beefs up or I guess makes it more explicit what some of those requirements will be like moving the age to 21, requiring certain number of hours requiring that they have post certification. And then it creates a, a deputy constable license licensure as well as a, as an apprentice. And so this, this sub further defines those.

  ▶ Watch at 8:34

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Says the bill responds to Salt Lake County's decision to stop licensing constables, moves constable licensing to DOPPEL with state oversight, and lets constables keep serving statewide civil process.

  Read what they said

  Uh, yeah, if I may, president to the bill. This, the, the need for this bill was brought to me by Salt Lake County. They had decided that they were no longer interested in licensing constables. Um, they, they were one of the jurisdictions that was still licensing constables. Most have got away from that. And so if they were no longer gonna license constables, that would take away the license of about a third of the constables in the state. And, and it also signaled to other cities and counties that they were possibly gonna restrict constables. Constables still serve a pretty vital role in civil process. And so the thought was, where can we put, where can we …

  ▶ Watch at 9:51

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Says constables already can work statewide under existing law, and the change places their license at the state level at Salt Lake County's request so oversight matches their jurisdiction.

  Read what they said

  That that's true, but about 20 years ago, maybe more, um, statute allowed for them to work statewide anyways. And so that's part of the concern of counties is they're giving, they're the ones issuing the license. But if they, you know, if, if, uh, you, Uintah County decided to appoint a constable, that constable could do work in Cash County or in Washington County or wherever. And so that's part of the concern of counties is we, we issue the license, but then they could work anywhere where we, where we don't have jurisdiction. So it was, it was really at Salt Lake County's request to say, put this, since they have statewide jurisdiction already, we should house them …

  ▶ Watch at 12:26

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Presents the bill to consolidate routine civil cases, such as evictions and debt collections, in Third District Court so defendants can get legal help, with trials sent back to home districts; says a substitute is being worked out with the courts.

  Read what they said

  for what is typically deemed about 70% of all civil filings are somewhat routine in that their eviction and collections and what we have in Salt Lake works really well. And we previously had it in Davis County where one, one judge, or one or two judges can handle a lot of these cases, uh, as they are somewhat routine. But what that also does is it consolidates the dockets and allows defendants in these cases who are more often than not pro se, get resources to help them through these cases. And so you have pro bono attorneys, you have legal aid, you've got community action that comes to these dockets and helps, helps these people resolve the cases, …

  ▶ Watch at 21:30

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Says the idea came from the Utah Bar Foundation to promote access to justice, and moves that the bill be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  Alright, thank you. And, and just a quick summation. The original idea from this bill was brought to me by the Utah Bar Foundation, which is a separate and distinct entity from the Utah Bar Association. But the Bar Foundation looks at these types of, um, issues and trying to find access to justice, promote access to justice. And so this came at at their behest and, and, and I believe their supportive. Um, and so with that, my motion is that we read Senate Bill two 70 for a third time.

  ▶ Watch at 24:14

• S.B. 283 Court Fees and Administration Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Moves to circle the item so the sponsor can step off the floor.

  Read what they said

  Senator Cullimore. Senator Cullimore. Motion to circle. Motion to circle sponsors off The floor. Motion to circle.

  ▶ Watch at 28:19

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Explains that the bill makes technical changes and removes a potential registry for name, image, and likeness rights, and states the motion to substitute the bill.

  Read what they said

  Changes we, we had previously put in a property, right? We, we said it's not a property, right? It's just a general right. And I'll explain the bill here in a minute. Um, and so some of this is, uh, technical and then it's, uh, um, it, it got rid of a potential need for a registry of this right. For your name, image, and likeness that, that you, that could be created through artificial intelligence. Thank you. So I'll place the motion.

  ▶ Watch at 40:42

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Explains that the bill addresses non-commercial deepfakes that may cause reputational harm but do not meet defamation requirements, adds a notice and takedown step with limited damages, recognizes an exclusive right in name, image, and likeness, and preserves news, commentary, satire, political speech, and transformative works.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. Thank you. So, AI and deepfake technology have fundamentally changed how identity identity can be misused. And Utah law already addresses two ends of the spectrum. So we address the commercial misuse of a person's name, image, or likeness through existing cause of action. And I think we passed that bill last year. And then the, the common law, which we've also, uh, put into statute, the common law claims of defamation, including libel and slan slander, which already applies regardless of whether content is created by AI or not. So this bill addresses what we, what we think is kind of a new middle ground, non-commercial deep fakes that may not meet the technical elements of defamation, but …

  ▶ Watch at 41:24

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Explains that the substitute removes the raw milk provisions and that the bill's motion to substitute is being taken up.

  Read what they said

  Hold on, hold on. I'll explain that a little bit. Anybody who is in committee on this bill saw that raw milk issues really dominated this bill. I've removed all raw milk issues out of this bill, so we don't need to talk about that. So, so that's the substitute you're going to, you uh, do we have a, we have the motion to substitute.

  ▶ Watch at 47:00

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Presents S.B. 217 as a simpler bill to make locally grown and homemade food more available, covering signage, designated representatives, producer ownership, and a sales tax exemption clarification.

  Read what they said

  Okay. So I made this bill a lot, a lot more simple now. And the central purpose of this bill is to make locally grown and homemade food more readily available to Utah consumers. Sure. Um, across Utah, we have many small farmers home producers and family who sell families who sell things like homemade bread jams, honey salsa, fruits, and other locally produced goods at farmer's markets and direct to sale locations. But these people aren't really operating like large commercial businesses. They're just neighbors trying to provide for their families and contribute to the local economy. So this bill builds on that strong tra tradition. It removes any unnecessary and effective signage requirements for direct to sale farmer's …

  ▶ Watch at 47:36

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Responds that industry groups were not consulted on these issues because they were not raised with the bill, and explains that the bill lets producers assign sales to a representative while retaining ownership and liability.

  Read what they said

  Uh, since Raw Milk got out of it, I've not really talked to them about those specific issues. Those issues were not really raised with my bill. And so really we already have farmer's markets and it's, it's basically just creating the same standard that we already have in farmer's markets, but it's letting locally, locally grown and produce food. They can contract with somebody, right, right now to, to sell that you have to do direct to sale. But somebody who's trying to make a small business out of this, but not really like becoming a big distributor, they may want to assign their right to do that to somebody else at a farmer's market or a co-op or …

  ▶ Watch at 50:21

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Says farmers market signage has not been effective and that buyers should understand they are buying food that is not inspected.

  Read what they said

  So what I've heard is that the signage at Farmer's markets has not been really effective anyways. And the idea is that when you go there, it's kind of a buyer beware, you know, what you're getting into. And so rather than having arbitrary signs here or there, they were just saying, let's just generally have signage that says if you're buying at a farmer's market, you know what you're getting into.

  ▶ Watch at 52:00

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Explains that the bill removes that signage requirement and that buyers at such markets know the food is not inspected by a state or local authority.

  Read what they said

  Senator? Yeah. If, if you're doing direct to sale for, for food produced at home or, or food that you've produced, then you have to do, I mean, let me see where it says that. I don't, I think we remove that, that type of signage requirement. Um, what what we're saying is if you go to, if you go to that type of a market, you can only sell that type of food, you know, so that everybody knows if you're going there, this is food that does not require signage because it is not being inspected by a state or local authority.

  ▶ Watch at 52:53

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Reads the bill's definition of home cook as food prepared exclusively in a private, non-commercial home kitchen, and says a commercial bakery would still be required to collect sales tax.

  Read what they said

  If it meets the definition of home food that I'm, I'm trying to find for you right here. I apologize. I should have had this up, but it, um, okay. Home cook needs an individual who prepares food and food agreements or pr or prepared food exclusively in a private, non-commercial home kitchen. So Volcker arguably is not a private non-commercial home kitchen, and they would still be required to collect sales tax.

  ▶ Watch at 55:16

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Makes closing remarks and moves that the bill be read a third time, noting the fiscal note may affect the tax provisions.

  Read what they said

  Okay. With, with that and with the understanding that, uh, the whole tax and detention thing may come out anyways, if the fiscal, depending on how the fiscal note comes back, uh, I would move that we read first substitute Senate Bill two 17 for a third time.

  ▶ Watch at 56:30

• S.B. 154 Protection and Advocacy Agency Reporting · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Moves a motion concerning Senate Bill 275 and amendments related to a state-endorsed digital identity program.

  Read what they said

  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.

  ▶ Watch at 1:05:31

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Presents S.B. 275, which creates a state-endorsed digital identity program, adds a digital bill of rights, sets identity proofing standards, regulates digital ID verifiers, and prohibits government tracking, monitoring, and device surrender requirements.

  Read what they said

  Your president. As discussed yesterday, last year we passed SB two 60, which, uh, which did a few things as it relates to state indoor digital. ID declared that identity belongs to the individual, not the state. Embedded strong privacy and anti surveillance guardrails and then required study and stakeholder consultation before implementation. This bill is building upon that After the stakeholder, um, consultation and, and further looks to implement some of these privacy guidelines, it creates a digital bill of rights. It creates the actual state endorse digital identity program and requires, uh, the Department of Government operations to do formal rulemaking, uh, mandates. Public comment requires annual reporting, uh, points a qualified program manager. It establishes clear identity …

  ▶ Watch at 1:05:54

• S.B. 176 Landscaping Procurement Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Explains the substitute, which would exclude private contractors and let the state consider cost, including avoiding the requirement if replacement is cost-prohibitive.

  Read what they said

  The substitute would expressly exclude private contractors from these requirements, and then it would also, it also states that cost can be a factor that the state can consider when when the equipment needs to be replaced. Um, they, they can make a determination that if it's cost prohibitive, that they, they can avoid the requirement.

  ▶ Watch at 1:38:59

• S.B. 176 Landscaping Procurement Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Notes the bill creates a default with exemptions based on use, and that it applies only to first- and second-class counties.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. Thank you President. I just want to note that there, there are exemptions. It does create the default, but there are exemptions based on use and stuff like that. But, but I want to highlight also that this is limited to first and second class counties, which are generally our non-attainment areas. And so it is a meaningful, uh, way to address that while not affecting the rest of the state.

  ▶ Watch at 1:46:02

• S.B. 205 Law Enforcement Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026

  Moves that the Senate adjourn until 10:00 AM on Wednesday, February 25.

  Read what they said

  Uh, just final motion. I move the Senate adjourn until Wednesday, February 25th at 10:00 AM

  ▶ Watch at 1:52:14

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 23, 2026

  Presents the bill, which treats education data such as transcripts and course history as the property of the student and requires informed consent before schools, universities, or vendors access or share it.

  Read what they said

  Alright, thank you, chair and committee. Um, this, this bill is in line with a lot of the government data principles that we are establishing elsewhere in the law. Um, it, it relates to education data, and what this bill suggests is that the education data is the property of the student. So this is the same principle that Utahans already recognized in medical records, that their, their data belongs with the patient and it can't be shared without permission. What this bill does is it confirms that students, or if the students are minor, their parents, um, control access to educational records. It requires informed consent before the educational data is accessed or shared with third party creates clear …

  ▶ Watch at 1:17:53

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 23, 2026

  Says FERPA requires protection of records but allows students to share them, and the bill gives students the ability to share rather than institutions.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, so fer FERPA is the floor saying that, you know, these, uh, this data has to be, has to be protected, but doesn't really establish, um, it, it doesn't prohibit the student from, from being able to access this and distributed just like medical records. You're not in violation of HIPAA if you are the patient and you decide to share your records. And so FERPA iss the same way we're giving the students the ability to share these records, and we're not, we're not, uh, blowing open the, you know, any holes in FERPA where we're, we're giving permission to the, uh, institutions to start sharing this rather than rather just giving it back to the student.

  ▶ Watch at 1:19:39

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 23, 2026

  Says he has not seen issues with institutions honoring consent but notes obstacles that make it hard for students to access their own records, and the bill aims to make that easier.

  Read what they said

  I don't think we're seeing issues, but what we are seeing is there are roadblocks and obstacles for, for, uh, students. It's not always easily easy for them to access their own, their own records. And, and really it's, it's, it's almost as if those records become, uh, property of the institution as opposed to the students. So they can, they can obviously get those, we're not concerned about the, the institutions violating ferpa, rather, we're just trying to create a better, a more, a more easy path for students to, to, uh, use their records as they want. You know, they may, they may take courses in multiple different institutions and, you know, but, but maybe need to, uh, …

  ▶ Watch at 1:20:42

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 23, 2026

  Says the bill contemplates that institutions would offer a secure digital or electronic mechanism, though the specifics are not yet clear.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. I think, uh, underline 1 25, that's, that's what's contemplated is that it would, the institutions would offer a secure digital or electronic mechanism. And so what that looks like, I think is up, you know, is, is, uh, maybe not totally clear yet. And but, but that's the idea that there would be some technology that would, that would allow for that.

  ▶ Watch at 1:24:18

• S.B. 296 Student Consent Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 23, 2026

  Says there is work to do on logistics and implementation and that input will be gathered to address concerns.

  Read what they said

  Um, yeah, I think, I think there's obviously some work to do on the logistics and making sure that this is properly implemented. Um, and, uh, yeah, it, it is, uh, it's a high number Bill and, uh, we'll, we'll get some input and see, you know, see what we can do to work through some of that.

  ▶ Watch at 1:27:35

• S.B. 306 Special Districts Modifications · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 23, 2026

  Presents S.B. 306, which would let Salt Lake County withdraw from first responder districts such as SLAA on the same terms as municipalities, without changing funding or core operations.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Thank you. Chair and Committee. Uh, when the Utah legislature approved the creation of slaa, and I'm gonna explain this because I've met with many people that say slaa and don't know what it stands for, but it stands for the Salt Lake Valley Law Enforcement Service area. Uh, so in the, when we approved slaa and the Unified Fire Service area in the early two thousands, municipalities were given an explicit ability to withdraw from those districts. Uh, Salt Lake County at that time chose not to secure a statutory withdrawal process for itself. Uh, and so there was intentionally no mechanism in law for the county to ever exit these districts. What this does, um, it gives …

  ▶ Watch at 40:58

• S.B. 309 Single-family Home Rental Modifications · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 23, 2026

  Said the bill has unresolved implementation questions and moved to hold the bill and proceed to the next agenda item, with time to develop registration provisions.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, thank you, chair. I think, I think the problem that the sponsor is trying to, to address is, is definitely on point. Like we've got housing affordability issues. Um, there's, there's, uh, I I think the policy goal of getting people into homes, because that's where wealth is created and, and retained is, is a good point and a worthy policy goal. Uh, my concern is there's, there's a lot of questions about the, the, uh, the implementation of the program as it's currently constituted, as, as we heard from the tax commission. Um, and, and I guess some, some of the outstanding questions I have in addition to what the, the chair previously raised is whether, whether this …

  ▶ Watch at 1:23:56

• S.B. 49 Natural Organic Reduction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Says current law already allows burial on property one owns, and that the bill allows licensed mortuaries to offer this service.

  Read what they said

  Colleagues. I I just wanna remind everybody that I, I looked into some of these policies a year or two ago and was surprised to find out that under the current state of the law you can actually bury anybody on property you own right now. So it, it doesn't really change the law in that regards. What this does is it allows licensed mortuaries to perform this type of a service for people.

  ▶ Watch at 31:09

• S.B. 31 Office of Professional Licensure Review Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Says he does not usually find himself on the side of expanding tort recoveries.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. So colleagues, I don't usually find myself on the side of expanding tort recoveries.

  ▶ Watch at 57:38

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Presents S.B. 211 as a response to the Utah Supreme Court's Gardner v. Norman decision, saying it restores the collateral source rule as it was understood for decades and does not create a new cause of action or impose a tax.

  Read what they said

  the side of expanding tort recoveries. Uh, I I like to think of my legislative career working on behalf of business certainty, liability reform, and responsible limits on litigation. But I do believe in predictability. I believe in reasonable guardrails, and I believe in illegal climate that allows u Utah businesses to thrive. But I also believe in something even more fundamental. I believe that public policy in the state of Utah should be set by the legislature and not writ rewritten by judicial activism. And that is why two 11 is necessitated today. A few months ago, the Utah Supreme Court issued its decision and Gardner b Norman. In that case, the court fundamentally altered upended the way damages …

  ▶ Watch at 57:41

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Moves that the first substitute of S.B. 211 be read for a third time.

  Read what they said

  I'll move that. We read first substitute Senate Bill two 11 for a third time, And the question is, shall first substitute Senate Bill two 11?

  ▶ Watch at 1:02:29

• S.B. 154 Protection and Advocacy Agency Reporting · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Waives summation and moves that second substitute S.B. 154 be read a third time.

  Read what they said

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

  ▶ Watch at 1:37:17

• S.B. 242 Transportation Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Explains that the amendment moves money related to the recently imposed fee into an account appropriated by the legislature, while still going to transit.

  Read what they said

  So this amendment just, uh, in, in the good sender's bill it, it moves some money around related to the fifth of the fifth that was recently imposed. And this just clarifies where that, that, that, that the money will still get spent for transit, but that it will, uh, move to an account that will be administered or, or at least appropriated by the legislature.

  ▶ Watch at 3:45:39

• S.B. 242 Transportation Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Discusses following the amendment online and confirms it is amendment one in the sponsor's name. · speaker not certain

  Read what they said

  I was gonna try to follow you online. Uh, seeing that it's actually amendment one in your name. Senator, that helps me a lot.

  ▶ Watch at 3:46:17

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Presents SB 275 as building on last year's digital identity principles, describing its program, rulemaking, privacy limits, identity proofing standards, and requirements for wallet providers and in-state infrastructure.

  Read what they said

  Okay, so last year the legislature passed SB two 60, which established Utah's guiding principles for digital identity. Identity. Uh, the bill did three critical things that declared that identity belongs to the indi individual, not the state. And embedded strong privacy and anti surveillance guardrails and statute. It required a study in stakeholder cons consultation before implementation. So that bill was intentionally cautious. It didn't create a live program, it didn't deploy infrastructure and it didn't mandate participation. It just set the philosophical foundation. And then we told the department to study best practices, consult privacy, and report back before implement implementation. That groundwork was done and now 2 75. So 2 75 takes the principles adopted last year …

  ▶ Watch at 3:49:23

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Says the bill has broad support, including from the ACLU and others, and moves that SB 275 be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  I'll just say, uh, this also has broad support from anybody from the A CLU to, you know, on the other side of the spectrum. So, uh, with that I will move that we read SB 2 75 for a third time. Thank

  ▶ Watch at 3:52:16

• S.B. 251 Local Health Department and Department of Environmental Quality Coordination · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026

  Makes closing announcements and moves to adjourn the Senate until Tuesday, February 24 at 10:00 AM.

  Read what they said

  and a final motion here, Uh, no further announcements from, from the lunch and I move the Senate adjourn until Tuesday, February 24th at 10:00 AM We have a motion to adjourn.

  ▶ Watch at 4:07:55

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 20, 2026

  Presents SB 292 as an attempt to set a legal framework for liability involving autonomous vehicles, including a capped recovery path, no punitive damages, a negligence standard, product liability definitions, and a state-of-the-art defense; says the bill is still being revised with stakeholders.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Admittedly, can I present from here? Yes. Admittedly, this, this bill still needs a little, little bit of work. We're moving to, we're moving into unchartered territory with, uh, autonomous vehicles coming online much more now. Current tort frameworks were built around human drivers, but level four and five autonomous vehicles don't neatly fit into negligence law. So this bill is an attempt to find some structural, structural clarity around that. Um, the bill as is currently constituted, I've been meeting with stakeholders, it's gonna adjust quite a bit. And so we're looking to regulate four level four and five autonomous vehicles. Create a framework where there, there could be an easier path to recovery, uh, you know, but …

  ▶ Watch at 2:23:52

• S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 20, 2026

  Commits to continue working on the bill and moves to favorably recommend SB 292 to the Senate floor, with a commitment to keep working with stakeholders.

  Read what they said

  Thank you with the commitment that we will continue to work on this. I'll favor, uh, motion favorably recommend this senate bill. We Have a motion favorably recommend Senate Bill 2 9 2 to the floor of the Senate with the, um, sponsor's, uh, commitment to continue to work with stakeholders.

  ▶ Watch at 2:27:03

• H.B. 330 Liability Limitations Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026

  Shares concerns that the affirmative defense is very broad, reaching administrative rules, permits, and licenses, and says it could be narrowed to address the described situation.

  Read what they said

  President, just, just wanted to voice similar concerns. I think if you look at, uh, lines 37 to 46 where it identifies where somebody could rely on an affirmative defense, it goes quite broad. It goes just be, it goes beyond law and goes even down to administrative rule permits, licenses, orders. I mean, this gives, this gives a lot of authority to rulemaking at a state agency level or at a local level without a lot of public input. And, and so I appreciate the scenario that was described as the basis of the bill, and I think that this could be crafted in a way to, to address those types of claims. But as is this, this is …

  ▶ Watch at 57:44

• H.B. 60 Water Rights Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026

  Introduces the public safety database amendments bill, which addresses a database the Legislature has been working on for a couple of years.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. This bill addresses the public safety database that we've been working on for a couple years.

  ▶ Watch at 1:13:37

• H.B. 220 Public Safety Data Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026

  Describes H.B. 220, which shifts multiple required public safety reports to CCJJ for a statewide portal, standardizes reporting across agencies, and improves public access to anonymous data.

  Read what they said

  database that we've been working on for a couple years. This particular bill was recommended by the Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee. It updates how public safety is reported and centralized by shifting multiple required reports to CCJJ for inclusion in a statewide public safety portal. And then it standardizes reporting requirements across agencies improves public access to anonymous data and makes, uh, other technical changes to the database.

  ▶ Watch at 1:13:40

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026

  Explained that the bill, brought by Salt Lake County, moves constables under the Department of Commerce's licensing division (DOPL), setting licensing, oversight, how one becomes a constable, and their jurisdiction, and noted a coming non-substantive technical substitute.

  Read what they said

  Go. Thank you President. So the, this bill was brought to me by Salt Lake County. Um, many of you may or may not interact with constables, but that's been a position in Utah for many, many decades. I, I think actually since the inception of our state, the evolution of constables has changed though obviously, and largely now they, they serve a lot of civil process. Um, and, but, but we've retained the way that they become constables through appointment of county or city officials. However, 15, 20 years ago, something like that, we changed that They have statewide jurisdiction, which posed a problem to cities and counties that are appointing constables and don't really have much oversight or …

  ▶ Watch at 3:45:02

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026

  Moved that First Substitute S.B. 218 be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  A motion is that we read first substitute Senate Bill two 18 for a third time.

  ▶ Watch at 3:46:50

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026

  Presented SB 267 as a framework for software used in schools, covering a statewide digital privacy agreement, academic effectiveness standards, and parent notice and audit requirements starting in 2028, then opened the bill to questions.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. Okay. So, 2 67. Uh, the impetus of this bill came from conversations I had with parents in my own neighborhood. They started, they approached me about concerns they had with what their children were able to access on school issue devices, and during school related online activities. And since that time, I've heard from even more parents, uh, across the state who share similar concerns. Uh, these parents are not anti-technology. They understand that technology is part of our lives and likely to be part of our kids' education. The concern is simple, though. If schools are assigning, requiring, or recommending software, it should be safe, privacy, protective, and then actually educational. So, that's what this bill …

  ▶ Watch at 1:11:46

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026

  Said stakeholders are still working on the bill, a substitute is expected, and the state office and LEAs do not object as currently drafted.

  Read what they said

  That's fair. And, um, we, I, and the stakeholders are also having those on ongoing conversations. Um, so I expect there will be another substitute at some point. Uh, I will note that I'm not gonna speak for them, but running this by the state office and LEAs they don't, they don't have concerns the way it's currently drafted, but obviously they're not the vendors. So the vendors may have concerns, but at least, at least from the education standpoint, I think, uh, as you mentioned, that they're already doing a lot of this. So it's not a new substantial burden on them. And in some respects, they kind of like, like the idea of, uh, having a curated list …

  ▶ Watch at 1:16:34

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026

  Asked to respond and said the bill's definition is where the disagreement lies. · speaker not certain

  Read what they said

  Can, can I respond To that? Yeah. And so that's, that's part of the difficulty I have. Right? And, and I, you know, that that's the problem that I see. Yeah, go ahead.

  ▶ Watch at 1:21:22

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026

  Said the definition allows either peer-reviewed research or evidence of positive learning outcomes, so the examples given could qualify.

  Read what they said

  So if you look at the definition online, it's 52 56 academically effective. I think the, the conjunction you need to look at is, or online 55. And so the examples you gave, Khan Academy, Duolingo, any of those, it could be peer reviewed research, or it could be evidence of positive learning outcomes. So I think, I think Khan Academy could have demonstrated evidence of positive learning outcomes, and that, that that standard, granted is a little bit broad here, but it's, it's one of those, it's not all of those.

  ▶ Watch at 1:21:35

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026

  Said the bill lets an LEA trial new software outside the state list with parent consent.

  Read what they said

  Can I also say somewhere in the bill, I'm trying to find it right now, but it, it allows an LEA to diverge and test new stuff. They do have to get consent from parents to say, we're, we're trying a new software that, that still meets these standards. But it, but it basically gives a trial period, um, if an LEA wants to diverge from whatever the state, state office curated list is.

  ▶ Watch at 1:23:18

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026

  Said the agreement would be similar to the current one with some modifications.

  Read what they said

  Um, I think it would be very similar to what's being used by right now, but there may be a few modifications to, to bring it into compliance with this bill.

  ▶ Watch at 1:23:58

• S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026

  Said a museum visit would be outside the bill, but a vendor tool used in class might qualify.

  Read what they said

  So I think it was at a museum, it would be outside of the, uh, contemplation of this bill. But if, but if it was brought in and, and a regular software that, like the school's gonna adopt as a vendor, then it, it might qualify

  ▶ Watch at 1:24:48

• H.B. 557 Revisor's Technical Corrections to Utah Code · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026

  Says the bill makes many technical corrections and cross-reference corrections throughout the Utah Code, and fixes some errors.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. This bill just makes a lot of technical corrections and, and cross referencing corrections throughout our code as well as some, uh, uh, ner errors and corrects those.

  ▶ Watch at 25:14

• H.B. 172 Food Safety Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026

  Moves to uncircle the second substitute of H.B. 220, Public Safety Data Amendments, for discussion.

  Read what they said

  Senator Cullimore, You, Mr. President Prote. Motion to UNC Ccle second substitute house bill two 20. The motion is to UNC circle second substitute house Bill two 20. Public Safety Data Amendments. Discussion.

  ▶ Watch at 1:07:25

• H.B. 220 Public Safety Data Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026

  Waives summation and moves that the second substitute bill be read for a third time.

  Read what they said

  I waive summation. My motion is that we read second substitute house bill two 20 for a third time.

  ▶ Watch at 1:09:34

• H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026

  Says the second substitute language from line 135 to 156 appears to apply to every newly constructed solar plant regardless of incentives or location.

  Read what they said

  the second substitute. So everything in the, in the second substitute from line 1 35 on, to me that looks like, or I guess from 1 35 to 1 56, uh, that to me, maybe I'm not going back into the statute and and interpreting everything, but, uh, it, it seems like that would apply to every new constructed solar plant, uh, regardless of, of incentives or where it's being built. It seems like that would apply to everything that is, uh, out there for, for new construction. Was that on Mr. President? Uh, go ahead. On line 1 56. Now the documentation required, Um, so I'm just reading through, a person may not construct a solar power plant without …

  ▶ Watch at 8:16

• H.B. 132 Military Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026

  Explains that H.B. 557 is a technical bill that corrects references to repealed provisions and makes other technical corrections to Utah Code.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. So this Viss technical correction is just that it eliminates or corrects references involving repealed provisions, uh, makes other technical correct corrections,

  ▶ Watch at 30:38

• H.B. 557 Revisor's Technical Corrections to Utah Code · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026

  Describes H.B. 557 as a long bill of technical corrections that removes redundant language, fixes cross-references and numbering, amends sunset and repeal dates, and adds a coordination clause.

  Read what they said

  makes other technical correct corrections, including eliminating redundant or obsolete language, makes Mitre wording changes, updates cross cross references and corrects numberings and other errors. It also amends Sunset acts, repeal dates, and, uh, adds a coordination clause. So, uh, long bill with a bunch of technical corrections.

  ▶ Watch at 30:46

• H.B. 557 Revisor's Technical Corrections to Utah Code · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026

  Waives further presentation and moves that H.B. 557 be read a third time, with the understanding that senators can review it overnight.

  Read what they said

  I'll waive. Um, a motion is with, with that understanding that everybody can review this for the next day, uh, that we read HB 5 57 for a third time.

  ▶ Watch at 31:31

• H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026

  Presents H.B. 71 on provider directories and behavioral health access, including directory updates, single case agreements, a working group, and insurance commissioner rules and penalties.

  Read what they said

  So they appear on paper to be available to patients needing care, but in actuality, they're not, not available or not actual businesses or just simply not, not there. Um, this means that the provider directories that patients rely on to find care using their insurance and in this case, uh, sometimes in a mental health crisis, are largely inaccurate and create a significant barrier to patients getting mental healthcare. So this bill requires covered insurers to help patients get behavioral health services quickly. And if an in-network provider isn't available within a specified timeframe, which is usually seven days for standard care or 24 hours for crisis, the insurer must offer a single case agreement with an out-of-network provider …

  ▶ Watch at 42:49

• H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026

  Believes marriage and family therapists have been completely removed from the bill.

  Read what they said

  I, I believe marriage and family therapists have been completely removed from the bill at this point.

  ▶ Watch at 45:14

• H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026

  Moves that third substitute H.B. 71 be read a third time and says he will further review the bill.

  Read what they said

  I'll move that third substitute house Bill 71 be read for a third time and I will further review this bill to make sure my answer was accurate.

  ▶ Watch at 45:40

• S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 17, 2026

  Has concerns raised by the taxpayers association but supports some accountability measures and will vote aye.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, thank you Chair. Only Because he has a lovely flag behind him, so we'll go with, we'll Go with that. I do have some concerns as was raised by the, by Billy and the taxpayers, um, association. Um, but I also do believe that that, uh, you know, some accountability measures might be appropriate. Um, so while I have some hesitations, I plan on voting. Aye.

  ▶ Watch at 1:18:29

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 12, 2026

  Presents S.B. 270, which would move debt collection and eviction cases into a centralized handling system with one or two judges, noting that changes to the bill are still being worked out.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Thank you, chair. So the, the intent of this is, and, and I I don't have all the exact numbers, so, uh, maybe Michael Drexel can correct, correct me, but about 70% of all civil filings in the state of Utah are related to debt collection or evictions. And, and, uh, roughly half of those are filed in Salt Lake County. Because of that, we've been able to see some models where there's some efficiencies in having one judge that handles most of the preliminary stuff of these cases. And that in that in fact, actually resolves almost all of the cases. And because so many of those are filed in Salt Lake County, we've been able to see …

  ▶ Watch at 1:47:38

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 12, 2026

  Responds that cost estimates are still being worked on and that ongoing costs would be significant, perhaps one to two million dollars, with fewer costs if commissioners handle more cases.

  Read what they said

  That that is what, sorry, chair. Are We good? Yeah, please. Okay. That's, that's what we're working on. If we change this to floating district court judges and move it to primarily commissioners, it will drastically reduce the cost. But there's still gonna be significant. Well, those, there will still be ongoing costs. I don't, I don't even know if I can guess, but, you know, a million, 2 million maybe. So I maybe more, I don't know, Michael.

  ▶ Watch at 1:50:50

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 12, 2026

  Says the bill might add one or two commissioners and that he does not want to interfere with the commissioner funding request.

  Read what they said

  And, and to that, the, the thought would be that this would be one or two additional commissioners. Okay. Okay. So I like that. I don't Wanna step on your commissioner request, but maybe there's

  ▶ Watch at 1:52:09

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 12, 2026

  Explains that the bill would create a separate court venue in which the court acts as the trier of fact for these cases.

  Read what they said

  Um, I, I mean by, by having your own right. Se separate court venue for this and having the, uh, the court being the trier of fact.

  ▶ Watch at 2:00:47

• S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 12, 2026

  Moves to favorably recommend S.B. 270, acknowledging that substantial work remains on the bill.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, I'll make the motion that, uh, understanding there's a lot of work to do here still that we favorably recommend Senate Bill two 70.

  ▶ Watch at 2:01:33

• H.B. 199 Health Data Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026

  Presents H.B. 199, which strengthens operational aspects of the health data authority in response to an OAG performance audit, adds direct identifiers, prohibits re-identification, strengthens security and privacy requirements, requires data deletion, and ensures opt-out requests apply to downstream users.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. Um, the goal of this bill is to strengthen the operational aspects of the health data authority. Uh, and this is largely in response to an OAG performance audit. The audit concluded that there is value in this data program, but some operational aspects need improvement. So this provides some of those technical improvements and it eliminated eliminates outdated language, clarifies how sensitive data can be used within the department and by local health entities. Um, and then it also adds more items to the list of direct identifiers. Strengthen language to prohibit re-identification. Strengthens language relating to security policies requires reporting on privacy and security as part of the department's privacy program, uh, requires users to …

  ▶ Watch at 1:03:02

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 11, 2026

  Presents S.B. 275, which builds on last year's digital identity principles by creating a state-endorsed digital identity program with a digital identity bill of rights, rulemaking, reporting, and privacy protections.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Thank you, chair. Um, pull that up. Close. Yeah. Yep, you go. So, last year this legislature passed SB two 60, which established Utah's guiding Principles for Digital id. Uh, it, that bill did three critical things. It declared that identity belongs to the individual and not the state. It embedded strong privacy and anti surveillance guardrails into the statute. And then it also required study and stakeholder cons, consultation before implementation. So it was, it was intentionally just kind of laying the groundwork. It was a little bit cautious. It didn't create a live program, didn't deploy infrastructure, um, did not mandate participation, but set the philosophical and Civil, civil Liberty Foundation first. And so we told the …

  ▶ Watch at 41:33

• S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 11, 2026

  Gives closing summation, saying digital identity is coming and Utah is working to lead a coalition of states on this approach.

  Read what they said

  No, I appreciate the motion, appreciate this committee's work. Um, I would just say as, as some of the comments alluded to, digital identity is coming regardless of whether we address it or not. And so I think Utah is unique in being ahead of the curve in dealing with this and, and getting in front of it. And hopefully by the work we're doing here, Chris Bramwell has been a rock star in this stuff. We're building a coalition of other states to get on board so that when, as we lead out with this, there'll be a critical mass of other states that are also doing this so that the technology is implemented and, and it has widespread …

  ▶ Watch at 1:00:45

• S.B. 112 Utah Exemptions Act Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 23) · Feb 11, 2026

  Asks the sponsor to confirm whether the new exemption would apply to people with or without real property.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. Thank you, president. So the, this exemption would now be applied, would now be, uh, uh, question for the sponsor. Senator Weiler, will you yield? Yes. Go ahead, Senator. This would be a new exemption applicable to anybody with or without real property. Is that correct?

  ▶ Watch at 10:02

• H.B. 79 Governmental Immunity Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 23) · Feb 11, 2026

  Makes a motion regarding First Substitute House Bill 199.

  Read what they said

  President Motion to encircle First substitute House Bill 1 99. We have a motion Encircle First substitute House Bill 1 99.

  ▶ Watch at 50:29

• H.B. 199 Health Data Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 23) · Feb 11, 2026

  Moves that first substitute H.B. 199 be read a third time.

  Read what they said

  A motion is that we read first substitute House Bill 1 99 for a third time.

  ▶ Watch at 52:07

• S.B. 121 Medical Cannabis Program Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026

  Comments that the bill came from a citizen initiative, that court rulings on initiatives have created uncertainty about legislative amendment, and that this bill is a consensus, bipartisan effort treated as a statute that can be amended.

  Read what they said

  And, and my, you know, the only commentary I would have is, you know, this was, this came from an initiative we've received, uh, you know, a Supreme Court ruling that anytime that the initiative passes in certain circumstances, it may alter reform government and therefore the legislature can't amend it if it would do anything to impair the intent of the initiative, which is difficult to determine in and of itself. And then the language of the court left us with a lot of uncertainty as to how to interact with, you know, with the law. And, and now we have something where, uh, you know, I I I just think that the, the courts have taken us into …

  ▶ Watch at 40:15

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 9, 2026

  Presented S.B. 256, which addresses non-commercial deepfakes and identity replication, adds a notice and takedown requirement with limited damages, and includes exemptions for news, parody, political speech, and transformative works.

  Read what they said

  Alright, thank you chair. So, AI and deepfake technology have fundamentally changed how identity identity can be misused, uh, in Utah law. We already addressed this on two ends of the spectrum. So last year, I think it was just last year, we passed a bill that addresses commercial misuse of a person's name, image, or likeness through and exists through law for abuse of that personal identity. Uh, then we also have common law and statutory defamation, which includes libel, slander. And in this bill we make it, it, it arguably already applies to ai deep fakes. But then in this bill we make it explicit that content that is created by AI is also subject to defamation. What …

  ▶ Watch at 2:35:34

• S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 9, 2026

  Said he is open to further discussion and moved to favorably recommend S.B. 256.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, thank you, chair. Um, again, I'm open to further discussion on this and, and hopefully get some, get some good minds to look at this and offer some suggestions. But with that, I recommend that we, or I'll make the motion that we favorably recommend SB 2 56.

  ▶ Watch at 2:42:56

• S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 9, 2026

  Says there is one piece of the bill he would still like to discuss, and moves to favorably recommend the bill.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, thank you Chair. There there is one little piece of this bill that I'd still like to discuss, but Senator Harper knows what it is. But with that, um, I'll make the motion though that we favorably recommend.

  ▶ Watch at 2:46:46

• S.B. 49 Natural Organic Reduction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026

  Responds that current law already allows burial on private property without disclosure and that the bill adds guardrails beyond current burial rules.

  Read what they said

  I think that there's a really interesting concept in this idea that there would be so much work that would go into hiding some soil. Um, but I, I hear what you're saying because for some this, I'm learning is a much bigger concern than for others. I think that, um, if you knew right now, for example, that in Utah it would be legal for me to bury someone in your backyard on your private property, as long as I had your permission and there is no disclosure required. So, um, my hope that, like I said, we are even setting up this piece of the law with more guardrails in place than are currently in, in for any …

  ▶ Watch at 34:39

• S.B. 49 Natural Organic Reduction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026

  Speaks in favor of the bill, saying it respects end-of-life choices, does not change private property rules, and that the sponsor addressed concerns.

  Read what they said

  Thank you, president. So I rise to speak in favor of the bill. I think what Senator Brammer, a good Senator Cullimore mentioned is that under current law right now, you can actually bury somebody on your private property and there's nothing prohibiting that right now. I actually am not a fan of the second sub. I think it goes too far, but I plan to support it. You know, I like, I liked it the way it was, but, um, you know, the reality is this can happen everywhere, and I think we need, I think we need to operate in reality too. The reality is that most people are not gonna use this to put somebody in their …

  ▶ Watch at 36:54

• S.B. 60 Income Tax Rate Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026

  Requests leave to open a bill file.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. I need to make a motion to get leave with the body to open a bill file.

  ▶ Watch at 1:11:31

• S.B. 60 Income Tax Rate Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026

  Describes a proposed bill on financial fraud through social media and spam calls, and says state action could support federal efforts.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, so the financial institutions here in Utah, the banks and the credit unions, uh, there are some national efforts to address fraud in financial services that is, uh, being deployed through social media platforms and spam calls and stuff like that. Um, if there were efforts at the state level to support the federal level, it would, it would put some appropriate pressure on Congress potentially to actually act.

  ▶ Watch at 1:11:41

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Presents SB 218, explaining that constables are established by the Utah Constitution, that counties and cities are declining to appoint them due to unclear oversight, and that the bill sets statewide licensing and accountability standards without eliminating constables or expanding their powers; notes a substitute bill is being offered.

  Read what they said

  Okay. So constables are a position in Utah that are actually established by the Utah Constitution. And while their duties have probably significantly changed since the Constitution was established, they still play a pretty relevant part in our, uh, legal ecosystem. Um, however, how they are appointed is, is kind of a, a relic from those early days. And, and they're appointed by counties and they're appointed by cities of a certain size. Uh, the problem that's arising is that a lot of these counties and cities don't really have oversight over them. Uh, there's, there's been question about whether Department of Public Safety actually has oversight. And so as, as these questions have arisen, more and more counties and …

  ▶ Watch at 1:01:07

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Says the substitute adds licensure requirements related to experience and that some parts may still be debated, so he wants the committee to adopt the substitute now.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, the substitute adds some licensure requirement related to experience. And so, um, I have some parties still talking to me. This, some of this may be up for debate still, but, but right now, I think it's important that we adopt the sub so we can put some of these licensure requirements in there.

  ▶ Watch at 1:03:25

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Moves to replace SB 218 with the first substitute, SB 218S01.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. I'll make the motion that we delete title and body of Senate bill two 18 and replace it with first substitute Senate bill of two 18.

  ▶ Watch at 1:03:42

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Explains that the substitute moves constables from counties that previously had minimal oversight to Department of Public Safety oversight, with licensing and complaint procedures that the department is willing to accept.

  Read what they said

  Okay. So this moves constables from counties with, that previously had minimal oversight, if any, from Department of Public Safety. And not, not that any agencies were doing anything wrong, it's just nobody, nobody really knew who or how oversight was appropriate or anything like that. So we're, we've worked with the agencies, we're gonna move it under Doppel. Doppel is willing to accept this set up, the licensing, licensing procedures and, and the complaint procedures. And that's, that's essentially what this bill does.

  ▶ Watch at 1:04:10

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Moves to favorably recommend the first substitute of SB 218.

  Read what they said

  I will make the motion that we favorably recommend first substitute Senate bill two 18.

  ▶ Watch at 1:09:21

• S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Says he has worked with counties, the Utah Association of Counties, constables, the Department of Public Safety and Doppel, and believes the bill is close to consensus, though the licensure provisions may be modified.

  Read what they said

  If I can say, Yeah. Chair, come back to you. I've, I've worked with a lot of the stakeholders as you, as you've heard counties, uh, talked with UAC and their general counsel, um, worked with the constables, worked with, uh, uh, DPS and Dopel and I, I believe we we're pretty close to a consensus bill, if not there. And so we may work on modifying a little bit some of the licensure stuff, but, but the intent and purpose of this bill has, has consensus, so

  ▶ Watch at 1:09:32

• S.B. 204 Physical Therapy Payment Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Plans to vote yes but suggests the committee establish principles for deciding which insurance bills to support.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, I plan on voting yes, but I think some of the issues that have been raised might be, might be prudent to, to look at, you know, may maybe we need to establish some principles of, you know, what you know of these bills, what are the principles where we say yes on some and no on others. And, and I think that warrants further discussion. And so, uh, with, but with that, I'll vote yes.

  ▶ Watch at 1:28:06

• S.B. 31 Office of Professional Licensure Review Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Asked jokingly whether cosmetology provisions were being added to the bill.

  Read what they said

  Thank you. Chair. Did you say you were gonna add some cosmetology stuff in in this? Yeah,

  ▶ Watch at 2:36:13

• S.B. 31 Office of Professional Licensure Review Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Continued joking about the cosmetology act provisions for physician assistants.

  Read what they said

  Excited. I was worried that we weren't gonna do with cosmetology Act, physician's assistant's ability to do things related to the cosmetology act, but nothing

  ▶ Watch at 2:36:21

• S.B. 31 Office of Professional Licensure Review Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 6, 2026

  Said the bill is large and may need further work, and moved to favorably recommend the first substitute.

  Read what they said

  Alright. Thank you. Chair A, as we've heard, this is obviously a big bill and there's, there's a lot addressed in this bill. And so to former Senator Cullimore Bramble's point, you know, uh, maybe not gonna get it perfect on the first go. And, and it sounds like there's some stuff that could be addressed. And so, but I have every expectation that, uh, the good Senator Cullimore will, will continue to work with stakeholders and work on that. And so my recommendation or my motion is that we favorably recommend SB 31 for substitute.

  ▶ Watch at 3:12:23

• S.B. 34 Public Education Revisions · Senate floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026

  Makes the announcements and moves that the Senate adjourn until Monday, February 9 at 11:00 AM.

  Read what they said

  Has the announcement and the motion is that I move the Senate adjourn until Monday, February 9th At 11:00 AM I think we have a motion to adjourn until Monday, February 9th.

  ▶ Watch at 1:28:55

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Presents the bill to make locally made food more available, removes a farmers market signage requirement, addresses a raw milk drafting error, and says the sales tax exemption is still under review.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Thank you, chair. So the, the central purpose of this bill is to make locally grown homemade, locally grown and homemade food more readily available to Utah consumers, and to create a clear, easier path for local producers to sell what they grow and make it in their communities. So across Utah, we have several small farmers home producers and families who sell things like homemade bread jams, honey salsa, fruits, produce, and, and all sorts of other locally produced goods at farmers markets and direct to sale locations. Uh, these people aren't just operating like, they're not operating like large commercial businesses. They're just neighbors, people in the community trying to provide for their families and trying to …

  ▶ Watch at 51:12

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Responds that the bill relies on consumers to make safe choices and that he is open to further discussion on raw milk.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. All good questions that you've wrestled with for 12 years. So, um, uh, yeah, I guess, I guess it's a, again, I just go back to the buyer beware type thing. That, that, uh, there are lots of things that we sell that are problematic and, and we just trust consumers to do what's best for them. And so, um, if there's a path to be had on this, I'm certainly open to those conversations still. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

  ▶ Watch at 56:22

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Says the raw milk portion may be pulled from the bill if it is resolved in the related bills.

  Read what they said

  Y Yeah, I think, I think this is all part of a broader conversation potentially, so yeah, if we can.

  ▶ Watch at 59:42

• S.B. 217 Local Food Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Thanks members for their support and commits to revising the raw milk portion and the sales tax issue before the bill reaches the floor.

  Read what they said

  I appreciate the support and it will be my commitment that the raw milk portion will be, will be worked on. Um, uh, I, I'll hope, hope and intend to meet with the representatives from U DAF Farm Bureau, uh, the sponsors in the house of the other bills. And see, see what we can work out. So by the time this hits the floor, there will be something different dealing with raw milk, and then the tax, the tax issue I've gotta work out as well too. So we will continue to work on that.

  ▶ Watch at 1:09:48

• S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Sen. Cullimore supported clarification but asked whether the one-year period could run from termination so employees strung along could still recover all wages owed.

  Read what they said

  Yeah. Yeah. More of a question, I guess. Um, certainly it seems like there's need for clarification here, so I can, I'm supportive of that. I'm a little bit sympathetic to the idea that somebody could be strung along for six or seven months and I, I can see that with a small business or a small employer and saying, hey, and then, um, terminating them. And then let's say it takes 'em seven, eight months to start the claim. I wonder if the, I, it seems like if, if we want to keep the, the intent of, or the spirit of the one year statute of limitations, I, I wonder if there's a way that we could draft it …

  ▶ Watch at 1:28:50

• S.B. 213 Utah Payment of Wages Act Statute of Limitations · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Sen. Cullimore moved to favorably recommend S.B. 213, saying the discrepancy needs clarifying though further discussion may be warranted.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, I'll, I'll make the motion. Um, I appreciate that explanation and, and, and, uh, yeah, I understand that. So there may be, I dunno, maybe, maybe some further discussion, discussion might be warranted. But, but I think this is important to clarify because we've got a discrepancy in the admin code and, and, and laws. So, um, I'll make the recommendation and, and I'll stew on this some, but make the recommendation that we favorably recommend SB two 13.

  ▶ Watch at 1:30:57

• H.B. 65 Construction Code Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Asks whether a relaxed air leakage testing standard is intentional and whether current air leakage standards can be kept.

  Read what they said

  Oops. Thank, thank you Chair and representative. So there's a lot going on in this bill. And, and as it pertains to some of the air leakage testing, um, what, what I'm hearing is that we're, we're, uh, going or moving, moving in a way that's a little bit more lenient than what it is right now. And just, just wanted to get your thoughts on that and see if, if, if that was intentional or if, if there's a way to keep the air leakage standards where they currently are.

  ▶ Watch at 1:41:58

• H.B. 98 Residential Notification Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Said he had meant to move the substitute and moved to replace H.B. 98 with the first substitute.

  Read what they said

  I, Senator Cullimore. Sorry. Yeah, I pressed my light to move the sub, but then I realized that he was talking about cookies, but Doc didn't actually bring any cookies, so, but I'll, That would be a penalty for that, hadn't there? I also go ahead and move to, uh, delete house Bill 98 and Title and Body and replace it with first substitute House bill 98.

  ▶ Watch at 1:55:14

• S.B. 215 Eviction Record Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 3, 2026

  Sen. Cullimore said he will support the bill, noting that 90 days is quick for payments that could be challenged and that he appreciates the change.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, thank you. Uh, I, I'll support it for the same reasons that Senator Weiler said. Also, note that I appreciate the change. 90 days is pretty quick. Um, just because, uh, there could be payments, final payments that get challenged within those 90 days and that, that can be problematic. And, um, and, and I, and I think it's just good practice. You know, 90 days is pretty quick for future landlords and considerations, so I appreciate you working with, uh, with the stakeholders and, uh, plan to support the bill.

  ▶ Watch at 2:06:31

• S.B. 50 Anesthesia Dosage Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026

  Notes that it is Weber State Day on the Hill and that Senator Millner is already off attending it.

  Read what they said

  Thank you President. As we know today is Weber State Day on the Hill. Uh, Senator Millner is already off enjoying

  ▶ Watch at 52:01

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Explained that the substitute moves collateral source language into a new section to make clear the bill does not apply to medical malpractice cases.

  Read what they said

  Um, substan substantively, it's really not different. It just, uh, it just moved some language because there are some, some, uh, confusion about whether this pulled in Mel Med Mal and the intent was always not to pull in med mal. The problem in our code is collateral source is actually defined in, in some of the med mal sections. And so it was referring back to that, which made it kind of confusing. So we just pulled out all of that, put it all in a new section and just refer back to the, the definitions that are in men mal, without actually citing that, that part of the code.

  ▶ Watch at 1:57:16

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Moved to replace S.B. 211 with the first substitute.

  Read what they said

  I'll make the motion that we delete title and Body of Senate Bill two 11 and replace it with first substitute Senate Bill two 11.

  ▶ Watch at 1:57:47

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Presented the bill, which would make evidence of insurance payments, discounts and other collateral benefits inadmissible in non-medical-malpractice tort cases, restoring the collateral source rule as it was understood before the October Gardner v. Norman Utah Supreme Court ruling.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Thank you, chair. So this, this bill addresses evidence and civil tort actions, specifically making certain evidence related to collateral sources inadmissible in court. So it, like, as I mentioned, it references defined terms of, of collateral, uh, source and prohibits the, and it would prohibit the introduction of evidence about insurance payments, discounts, write offs, or other collateral benefits in non med mal tort cases. So again, it exempts med mal cases. This bill is, um, let's see. So for years in Utah, the collateral source rule has been a cornerstone of tort law, ensuring that defendants or their insurance coverage cannot reduce their liability by pointing to benefits of plaintiffs receives from independent sources like health insurance. …

  ▶ Watch at 1:58:17

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Asked whether before Gardner defendants could challenge the reasonableness of medical charges.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, thank you. So in your exaggerated illustration of the 50,000 to 3000, right? Um, pre, pre Gardner, was there any reason why you couldn't challenge the reasonableness of how much medical medical care was necessary?

  ▶ Watch at 2:25:23

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Said the bill does not stop defendants from challenging bills as excessive or unreasonable.

  Read what they said

  But to, but to the exaggerated example, nothing in this bill would preclude you from challenging that that $50,000 bill is unreasonable, that it was maybe too much treatment or that the treatment that was incurred was excessive per industry standards or anything like that. You can still challenge that

  ▶ Watch at 2:26:26

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Reiterated that the bill does not preclude challenging whether care was necessary or billing was proper.

  Read what they said

  They would've been, I I get the incurred amount. That's the whole point of this bill. Absolutely. But the build amount, nothing in here I'll highlight again, precludes your ability to challenge that the, the amount of medical coverage that was, that was incurred was necessary or that the amounts billed were, were proper per industry standards,

  ▶ Watch at 2:26:54

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Said defendants can still ask doctors whether treatment was necessary and charges in line with industry norms.

  Read what they said

  but you can still challenge, you can ask the doctor, was all of this necessary for the pain and suffering and the treatment and the damages that were incurred, are these amounts in line with other similar treatments throughout, throughout the community or the industry?

  ▶ Watch at 2:27:47

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Noted the witness rarely needed expert witnesses in his decades of practice before Gardner. · speaker not certain

  Read what they said

  Thank you. Mr. Glauser. As you mentioned, you've been practicing for 41 years. Yes. Presumably most, well, most of those 41 years were prior to the Gardner decision. Correct. And you only needed those expert witnesses a handful of times in those 41 years. Up to that point.

  ▶ Watch at 2:36:39

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Said plaintiffs make the same cost calculations, most cases settle without trial, and the bill restores the previously understood collateral source rule. · speaker not certain

  Read what they said

  But, but those same calculations and assessments are being made by plaintiffs on those very same cases. Okay? We're gonna need experts to go in to testify about X, y, Z to prove our, to prove our case. I, I guess my point is, most of the, most of the time you don't need the expert witness. 'cause they don't, they don't go to trial. And what we're trying to do here is, is create the same path that's already been, that's always been present in Utah to afford the opportunities a reasonable way to, to settle the cases with, with the certainty of the, of the collateral source rules was previously understood.

  ▶ Watch at 2:37:25

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Said the intent is to restore pre-Gardner policy and he is open to changes to subsections 3(a) and 4, including anything that would make settlements harder.

  Read what they said

  Okay. Uh, The intent was just to restore the policy back to where it was pre Gardner and to the extent that this bill goes beyond that, I am, I'm certainly open to discussions, uh, the, the three A suggestion. I'm, I'm happy to work on that subsection four. I've heard some concerns about that. Happy to work on that as well. I, I probably need to better understand the concerns in subsection four. I'm reading it to where it could pre, I certainly don't want to make settlements more difficult. And to the extent that that precludes settlement options, then, then I, let's, let's fix that.

  ▶ Watch at 3:21:07

• S.B. 211 Tort Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Moved to favorably recommend the first substitute of S.B. 211.

  Read what they said

  Yeah, I'll, I'll make the motion that we favorably recommend SB first substitute SB two 11. Alright,

  ▶ Watch at 3:22:16

• H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate Rules Committee · Jan 30, 2026

  Describes the usual committee meeting schedule and the unpaid constituent and local government meetings, and says the bill clarifies compensation for attending a committee one is not a member of.

  Read what they said

  Uh, normally we have one committee meeting, official committee meeting a month during the third week of the month. Uh, some of us have additional committee meetings, but all the other meetings when we're not in session throughout the year meeting with constituents, local government leaders, we don't get paid for that. This provides a clarity that if it happens to be an official committee meeting but you're not a member of, you just won't be compensated.

  ▶ Watch at 4:40

• H.B. 19 Drinking Water Utilities Amendments · Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee · Jan 27, 2026

  Cullimore asked about the fiscal note and what workload the division expects to take on.

  Read what they said

  Yes, I, I actually, I have two or three if I may. Would that be okay? Please? Do you want me to go through you or just directly or what? Let's go right directly. Thank, thank you chair. That was, that was a segue in and, and thank you, uh, representative for, for that response. The question that I, I'm looking at the fiscal note. There's, it's, it's a, there, there's, uh, not a significant, uh, issue there. So director, are you indicating then for those that, is that 3,300 kind of a threshold that those that are maybe less than that would need your assistance and help? And those are above, it may not. Or are you anticipating, I'm …

  ▶ Watch at 1:20:52

• H.B. 19 Drinking Water Utilities Amendments · Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee · Jan 27, 2026

  Cullimore asked about provider concerns and what resources are available to meet the requirement.

  Read what they said

  Does that answer your question? Yes. I, I'm, I'm just trying to put my sit in the shoes of someone that is, maybe they have a couple of, or maybe they have a couple hundred people that they're servicing, you know, and there's all those concerns that Senator Hinkins talked about, the loss of data and infringement on financial institutions and all that goes with that. Uh, I'm just wondering what has been the response or, or your sense on to either the sponsor or, or the director to, uh, you would think that someone would say, yeah, I really need to do this, but is this a mandate that's gonna be really hard for me to fulfill? What resources …

  ▶ Watch at 1:22:50

• H.B. 19 Drinking Water Utilities Amendments · Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee · Jan 27, 2026

  Cullimore asked whether the division will provide the annual cybersecurity training.

  Read what they said

  Different, different line of thought. Real quickly, on line 1 33, it talks about annual cybersecurity training. Are you prepared to if offer that training? Is that the, are you, is, is your department gonna be over the training of cybersecurity or how's that gonna take place?

  ▶ Watch at 1:25:09

• S.B. 145 Lobbying Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Jan 26, 2026

  Asks when the gift limits were last updated for inflation.

  Read what they said

  Quick question on the rate of, um, the rate on the gifts. You said that it's consistent with inflation. Do you have data on the last time that we updated those by any chance?

  ▶ Watch at 42:37

• S.C.R. 2 Concurrent Resolution Concerning Remembrances of the 25th Anniversary of the 9/11 Attacks · Senate floor debate (day 3) · Jan 22, 2026

  Sen. Cullimore announced today's caucus lunch, a reception and breakfast events, a request to fill out calendars, and moved that the Senate recess until 6:15 PM in the House chambers for Governor Cox's State of the State address.

  Read what they said

  Thank you, president. Today is caucus lunch. There is also a reception this afternoon, evening in the Rotunda for the Association of Benefits and Insurance Professionals that will be immediately proceeding the governor's state of the state, which will be in the house chamber. We are asked to be seated by six 15 tomorrow morning. We have a breakfast rotunda, uh, or breakfast in the Rotunda for the Land and Title Association. That'll be from eight to 9:00 AM And then we'll ask you to please fill out your calendars for next week and return them to Jean. And finally, I'll make a motion that the Senate recess until 6:15 PM in the House chambers for the purpose of hearing. …

  ▶ Watch at 56:15

From the official recordings' automatic captions, with speakers and summaries identified by AI. Use the ▶ links to check the recording before you rely on a quote.