Legislators / Paul A. Cutler
Paul A. Cutler
Republican · House District 18
Hear from them directly
Contact Rep. Paul A. Cutler
- Email: pcutler@le.utah.gov
- Phone: 801-923-4618
- Office: 1872 N. Main St., Centerville, UT, 84014
Constituents get priority, so say you live in their district. Writing about a specific bill? Open it and use Take action for a ready-to-send message.
Watch or join a meeting
Every committee hearing and floor session is open to the public and streamed live on le.utah.gov. Each committee's agenda has the link to watch or join online, and how to sign up for public comment.
Paul A. Cutler serves on:
- General Government Appropriations Subcommittee
- House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee
- House Government Operations Committee
- Economic Development and Workforce Services Interim Committee
- Government Operations Interim Committee
What they've said
420 remarks on 93 billsH.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the bill requires courts to consider whether a parent had insurance when mental health therapy was required, and describes the substitute's changes to the language and the effective date.
▶ Watch at 21:15Read what they said
Yes, I would. Part of this family law bill required, uh, the court to take into consideration whether a parent had insurance when mental health therapy was required. This last substitute just clarified some of the language such as order mental health treatment, uh, if the provider, if coverage is available and some language around to the extent possible to cover situations when insurance is not available. It also changed the effective date. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Thank Representatives.
S.B. 252 Water Usage at State-owned Facilities Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, saying it gives clear direction for efficient water systems in new state buildings and sets an example for the public to conserve water.
▶ Watch at 34:41Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanna rise in support of this bill. We often hear from our constituents, Hey, you're asking us to save water and we've got a school building or state building that's not, has a very inefficient, uh, watering system and is wasting water. This gives some clear direction to say for new state buildings, design your water system right, make it efficient, and don't waste water. And, uh, I think it's a good idea for us to set the example. We're asking people across the state to conserve water, the state. Uh, the least we can do is set a good example.
S.B. 154 Protection and Advocacy Agency Reporting · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says he has not heard of the state Protection and Advocacy Agency before and asks why it is needed and why one has not existed in the past.
▶ Watch at 1:13:35Read what they said
Thank you. I I've never heard of the state Protection advocacy a agency before and this appears to be a new section of code. Could you, could you pro, uh, help me understand why we need the State Protection Advocation agency and why we haven't had one in the past?
S.B. 154 Protection and Advocacy Agency Reporting · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks whether the bill changes the governor's designation or only requires the agency to report to the legislature.
▶ Watch at 1:14:19Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. It appears that it just doesn't necessarily change the governor's designation, but just has them report to the legislature.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says a subcommittee made improvements to the bill, which carried over through the Senate, and that title companies are satisfied with the changes.
▶ Watch at 1:23:01Read what they said
Thank you representative. That motion is ordered as I speak to it. Uh, we, we We adopted a uh, uh, sub committee that made some improvements to the bill, made the title companies happy and that carried over through the Senate.
S.B. 321 Municipal Election Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Supports the bill; says the late year-end report fine is $250 for municipal candidates but $100 for state candidates, and the amendment would make the fines the same.
▶ Watch at 2:54:02Read what they said
I would thank you very much. Uh, I support the underlying bill and the effort. Uh, we just discovered that the, the fine if you don't file a yearend report as a municipal candidate would be $250. Whereas the fine if a state candidate, uh, like those of you in the legislature don't file that report is $100. This amendment just makes the fines the same amount so that we're not saying the municipal, you have to pay a larger amount than the state, uh, candidates do. If we want to in a future year, raise fines on ourselves, I'm fine with that, but I think we should be fair and not, uh, find municipal candidates more than the, the …
H.B. 508 State Facilities Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield to a question.
▶ Watch at 26:55Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Mr. Speaker. Would the sponsor yield to, uh, a question? Representative Brooks will yield to a question?
H.B. 508 State Facilities Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks how the bill addresses concerns that subcontractors would lose lien protection on public projects.
▶ Watch at 27:04Read what they said
Uh, there are some who are, are concerned that subcontractors aren't, uh, protected because on public projects they can't, uh, place a lien against the, the primary, uh, contractor like they can in the private sector. And if we do away with these bonds that they won't be protected. How, how, how would you respond to these or, uh, these folks that are concerned about that, what's the best way to address that concern?
S.B. 228 Community Reinvestment Agency Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether the sponsor will yield to a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 38:30Read what they said
to the bill Representative Cutler. Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Will The sponsor yield to a series of questions?
S.B. 228 Community Reinvestment Agency Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks about the difference between a community reinvestment area and a traditional redevelopment or tax increment financing area, and when each is used.
▶ Watch at 38:42Read what they said
For those of us who, uh, are not as familiar with community re um, reinvestment areas c could, could you remind us of the difference between a community reinvestment area and a traditional RDA or commercial development, uh, area that uses tax increment financing and, and when, when, when a municipality or a political subdivision would use one versus another?
S.B. 228 Community Reinvestment Agency Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether new community reinvestment areas are still being created or whether the tool is being wound down.
▶ Watch at 39:29Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And are these still being, are, are new, uh, reinvestment, community reinvestment areas still being used today? Or is this primarily just an, uh, no longer a popular tool
S.B. 228 Community Reinvestment Agency Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether a Draper legislator's bill consolidating tax increment tools affects this community reinvestment area.
▶ Watch at 40:28Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, our, our good, uh, friend from Draper has introduced, uh, a number of, uh, or, or a bill that consolidates a number of these tax increment tools. Does that bill have any effect on this, uh, community reinvestment area?
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says the bill's House ideas were refined in the Senate, and that the Senate amendments restore the original policy that initiative and referendum signature gatherers can only be paid hourly, after the change was flagged by the rules chair.
▶ Watch at 1:09:35Read what they said
Yes. These are actually the house's ideas, uh, which are the best ideas that go to the Senate. Uh, but we use the Senate to update them. This restores, uh, clarity the way signature gatherers are paid. Our good real rules chair pointed out that the bill had inadvertently changed the way, uh, initiative gatherers, uh, initiative and referendum gathers could be paid. This restores the original policy that they can only be paid hourly.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Explains that the House suggestions clarify in state code that electric scooters and high-powered electric devices cannot be ridden on interstate freeways, that no one 16 or younger may ride an e-bike on a freeway, and that UDOT agreed to update its map; gives reasons to concur.
▶ Watch at 1:52:24Read what they said
I would. Thanks. Uh, again, these ideas were house ideas. The good representative from Eagle Mountain pointed out that, uh, the code does not specifically prohibit, uh, uh, bikes on freeways and the, uh, traditionally udot had managed where bicycles are allowed on freeways and where they're not allowed on interstate freeways by rural. And they, UDOT has a beautiful map that shows basically in the Salt Lake area, you can't ride on uh, interstate highways, but in rural Utah you can, uh, UDOT was fine with the house suggestion that we make it clear in the state code that you can't ride electric scooters, uh, high powered electric devices on, on interstate freeways and also no youth, anyone 16 …
S.B. 234 Rulemaking Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Raised a point of order about members' attire under the body's decorum rules, then rescinded it.
▶ Watch at 1:54:39Read what they said
We have rules of decorum in our body and my understanding is that, uh, the gentlemen are required to wear both a jacket and a tie. There is a, uh, conspicuous member of our body who is not wearing a tie that I can tell. That is a tie, Tie. Talk to anyone from rural Utah. I rescind my point of order.
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, saying it is a step in the right direction even though it does not include everything originally sought to protect children.
▶ Watch at 1:55:59Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I just wanna rise in support of this bill. While it may not have everything that we started with in terms of protecting our children, it's still a step in the right direction and I appreciate the, the efforts and encourage your support.
S.B. 290 Victim and Witness Privacy Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Asks how evidence on digital devices would be handled in practice so that non-relevant data is not released.
▶ Watch at 22:18Read what they said
Mm-hmm. I wondered if you or someone from the prosecutor's, uh, defense or maybe the ags office, I understand the theory and and agree with the theory. H how does this, how is this gonna work in practice when you have evidence on a digital device and that, uh, uh, how is that evidence going to be, um, not, not released? Could somebody, could somebody speak to that?
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Asked how economic damages would work under the three recovery paths, using a hypothetical about a person injured by a driverless vehicle.
▶ Watch at 38:15Read what they said
Representative Cutler. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Cole Moore, for your work on autonomous vehicles. I think this is, uh, I, I am believe autonomous vehicles are, will improve our safety and, uh, be a real benefit for us. But I wanted to understand how this works. If, uh, especially the economic damages, I understand the non-economic damage limit makes sense and the, uh, a hundred thousand dollars per replacement of vehicle or whatever. Let's, let's use a bad hypothetical that, uh, Dave is, is flying his, uh, his, uh, uh, what do we call those things? Paraglider, his paraglider and, uh, uh, the autonomous and, uh, hasn't, has some kind of a problem, tries to land on the road. …
S.B. 193 State Legal Holiday Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Asks what happens if a school district does not align its schedule with the bill and whether employees would receive paid leave for the holiday.
▶ Watch at 1:13:46Read what they said
Representative Cutler. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If, if an LEA does not make their schedule a align with this, what, what happens? Uh, they set their schedule that this coordinated their best, what, what their needs are. And that's that there's, there's not, it, it, And what if one of their teachers says, well, I want to take this off. Are they required to give them PTO for that or are they or required to use their other PTO? There is part of all State employees do have part of the, the Holy Day recognition. And that's again, the respect for all faith is that they can take a personal day, leave the bill. You thank you for the notation. …
S.B. 193 State Legal Holiday Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Comments that schools would not have to close, offers an example of a half day off before a deer hunt, and raises the cost estimate and fiscal note question.
▶ Watch at 1:15:54Read what they said
Thank you. Yeah. We're talking Good Friday, but not, but you're, you, you'd like education entities to take that off, but they don't to, to schedule around that. Still let people there, but they don't have to. Right. It, It, it could be, I remember as a boy that, uh, we had, uh, celebration of Orange Day, the Hunter Hunter weekend. Half day would be taken off of school on the Friday before the annual deer hunt. But that's a different topic. But there, there are patterns where a half day is very workable. And I'm told you the cost of this with, with going from a full day to a half day, certainly a few million dollars rather than …
S.B. 193 State Legal Holiday Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Notes that the bill could cost state agencies up to 4.3 million dollars in lost or deferred output.
▶ Watch at 1:17:02Read what they said
Yeah. But, uh, as it says, could cost state agencies up to 4.3 million, uh, in, in, in terms of lost or deferred outputs.
S.B. 193 State Legal Holiday Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Says Easter is his favorite holiday and makes a light remark about other holidays.
▶ Watch at 1:17:20Read what they said
And, and I wanted to state that Easter is my favorite holiday. It's what I think is most important. I I wish we could swap it for some other holidays. Yeah. By Columbus Day. Just kidding.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Presents H.B. 381, describing changes to supervision rules for children riding e-bikes, licensing and safety courses, and the bill's provisions for high-power devices and retailers.
▶ Watch at 41:30Read what they said
I started to present this before lunch and, uh, Senator Brammer had some questions. Uh, I wanted to get some further clarification on that. I I do understand this is not his favorite bill of the session, but I I do believe it's still a good bill. Um, the current law requires supervision for children on e-bikes. Um, HB 3 81 actually allows for unsupervised use, which is more freedom than allowed under the law today. The bill expands supervised use from only a parent to a parent or other responsible adult. It also allows unsupervised legal use if the youth watches a short 20 minute, 10 minute, uh, video online on bike laws and safety after a short training. …
S.B. 307 Garnishment Fee Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks the sponsor whether he will yield to a question about the bill.
▶ Watch at 2:02:37Read what they said
Rather than changes a few ways, uh, would the sp would the good sponsor who I hope has read the bill yield to a question Representative starter, will you yield?
S.B. 307 Garnishment Fee Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says he hoped the sponsor would explain more about the bill than the brief summary of a few adjustments.
▶ Watch at 2:02:57Read what they said
I was just hoping he would explain something beyond, makes a few adjustments in his summation.
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Said the bill is waiting for a substitute requested by an agency.
▶ Watch at 2:35:10Read what they said
Yes. We're we're waiting for the, uh, to catch up on a, a sub that was requested by, um, an agency.
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks to move the second substitute for SB 275 and says he would like to speak to it.
▶ Watch at 2:40:45Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. We'd like to move second substitute, uh, to SB 2 75. And I'd like to speak to that,
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the second substitute clarifies that a state-endorsed digital identity can be used for age verification and sunsets the current mobile driver license program once the new identity is operational, which would save the Department of Public Safety over a million dollars on an audit.
▶ Watch at 2:40:54Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, colleagues. Uh, second substitute was requested by some of our friends at, uh, DPS and it does two important things. It clarifies that a state endorsed digital identity can be used for age verification, which was always the intent. Uh, second, it, uh, sunsets the, uh, current, uh, mobile driver's license Pro driver's license program, uh, only in a timeframe after the state endorsed digital identity, uh, is made operational. Uh, that's the intent of the, uh, and that will allow, uh, department of Public Safety to save, uh, uh, over a million dollars on an audit by clearly signifying we're going to a new standard for digital identity. Uh, that ex that is the, uh, uh, …
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says SB 260 from last year set principles for digital identity, and that SB 275 implements the state-endorsed digital identity program with regular legislative reporting, in-state technical infrastructure requirements, and a Digital Identity Bill of Rights covering the right to a physical ID, selective disclosure, freedom from surveillance, and transparency.
▶ Watch at 2:42:19Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Last year, uh, the legislature passed SB two 60, which established key guiding principles for digital identity. And, uh, that set up, uh, some very important things, uh, that we all rely on, such as digital identity belongs to an individual, not to the state that individuals control their own digital identity. It included strong privacy and anti surveillance guardrails, uh, into the statute, which is becoming more and more important in this age of ai. And it required us to work carefully with stakeholders and work on the technical, uh, details of this. Before any implementation this year, we're coming back with the implementation plan. So the purpose, uh, of, of SB 2 75 is …
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Presents second substitute S.B. 275, which implements the state-endorsed digital identity program under the principles set in last year's S.B. 260, including individual control, privacy and anti-surveillance protections, required stakeholder work, regular legislative reporting, and in-state technical infrastructure, and says the bill passed House and Senate committees unanimously.
▶ Watch at 2:42:19Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Last year, uh, the legislature passed SB two 60, which established key guiding principles for digital identity. And, uh, that set up, uh, some very important things, uh, that we all rely on, such as digital identity belongs to an individual, not to the state that individuals control their own digital identity. It included strong privacy and anti surveillance guardrails, uh, into the statute, which is becoming more and more important in this age of ai. And it required us to work carefully with stakeholders and work on the technical, uh, details of this. Before any implementation this year, we're coming back with the implementation plan. So the purpose, uh, of, of SB 2 75 is …
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says SB 275 lets Utah lead responsibly in digital identity while upholding liberty, privacy, and transparency.
▶ Watch at 2:47:42Read what they said
SB 2 75 will allowed us to lead responsibly in digital identity innovation while staying grounded in our core principles of liberty, privacy, and transparency. Thank you.
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says the bill will let Utah lead responsibly in digital identity innovation while keeping to its principles of liberty, privacy, and transparency.
▶ Watch at 2:47:42Read what they said
SB 2 75 will allowed us to lead responsibly in digital identity innovation while staying grounded in our core principles of liberty, privacy, and transparency. Thank you.
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Rep. Cutler asked how the sponsor responds to critics who say most targeted ads reach adults and the tax would raise costs for everyone.
▶ Watch at 59:56Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you. Uh, I I have a question, uh, as well. What do you say to the critics who certainly we want to prevent, uh, uh, advertise target advertisements to our kids, but the bulk of advertisements target those with the money, target target adults, um, both on social media and on other internet platforms. What, what do you say to the, to critics saying you're raising costs to, to everybody?
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Rep. Cutler asked how money in the restricted account would be divided among the listed youth programs and who would decide the appropriations.
▶ Watch at 1:02:00Read what they said
Thank you. As a follow up to that, that the bill, uh, says subject to appropriation money in the account may be used for some, some very good cause. Child literacy programs, youth sports, recreation, youth volunteerism, mental health programs for children, adoption, foster care. It doesn't specify how that money is to be divided up. Is this essentially up to the legislative executive appropriations committee, or how do you envision the, the appropriations for this happening? Yeah,
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Rep. Cutler asked whether ads intended only for impressions, without a click-through link, would be exempt from the tax.
▶ Watch at 1:05:49Read what they said
Thank you. So, c can you clarify that a little? Sometimes, uh, some of our, uh, uh, large advertisers place advertisements, not necessarily just to be clicked on, but just to get more views. Yeah. Just to give impressions. So you're saying if it, if it's just an impression, then it's not subject to the tax, it has to have a link to click through to a,
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Rep. Cutler asked Ms. Peters how much the tax would have affected her organization, which he understood sent messages to constituents, if it had been subject to it.
▶ Watch at 1:16:11Read what they said
Thank you very much for those comments. I, I, I have, I guess one question for you. Uh, I don't believe that, uh, uh, Americans for Digital Opportunity would be subject to this tax, but, uh, because you don't qualify for the a hundred million, uh, dollars or the, uh, uh, a million dollars in Utah, but, uh, I, I would be curious if, if you want to opine on how much, uh, my understanding is that, uh, your organization is the one that sent a number of these, uh, messages to our constituents, uh, how much that tax would've affected you if, if you had been subject to it.
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Rep. Cutler said the bill is not perfect but is an experiment worth pursuing to change the targeted advertising model, and he will support it.
▶ Watch at 1:28:53Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate those comments. I'll, I'll just also take the chair's product to, to add to discussion on the motion that I'll be supporting this motion. I don't think this bill is perfect, but states are laboratories of democracy. We have been in a, uh, cha a fight challenge to figure out how do we change the model of targeted advertising that, that we're seeing. How do we change the model of, uh, how we're we're dealing with, with online, uh, addictions? And I think this is an experiment worth, uh, pursuing. Uh, so while not perfect, I'll, I'll support it.
H.B. 2 New Fiscal Year Supplemental Appropriations · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks whether the sponsor will yield to a question on the motion to circle.
▶ Watch at 41:05Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the underlying sponsor of the bill. That mayor, is that, uh, in, in order Representative Peterson, uh, Sponsor of the yield? This is, this is, is it to, to the motion to circle or I I think it's germane to the motion to circle, yes. Um, a question, if the, if the sponsor Will, will yield Representative Peterson, will you yield
H.B. 2 New Fiscal Year Supplemental Appropriations · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks how the bill is amended when a program funded in the base budget does not pass the Senate.
▶ Watch at 41:31Read what they said
Keller. Uh, when, when a, when a bill that is funded in this base budget is, uh, not passed by the Senate, how does the, how does this bill get amended to reflect that your speaker?
H.B. 2 New Fiscal Year Supplemental Appropriations · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Clarifies the question and asks whether the base budget bill is formally amended when a funded bill fails in the Senate.
▶ Watch at 42:38Read what they said
I, I apologize Mr. Speaker. I probably didn't word that question very well. I'm, I'm more looking to understand the technical process. Uh, if, if a bill that is funded in the base budget bill does not pass the Senate, is, is there an official amendment to the base bill or does the base budget bill stay the same?
H.B. 604 Local Government Official Amendments · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Moves a substitute amendment to strike lines 37 and 38, leaving only governor's cabinet members and paid advisors to the governor.
▶ Watch at 45:09Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'd like to make a substitute motion to strike lines 37 and 38, which is one BII, leaving only the members of the governor's cabinet and only paid advisors to the governor.
H.B. 604 Local Government Official Amendments · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says the motion would also strike the same section in county code, then retracts that statement.
▶ Watch at 46:17Read what they said
And Mr. Speaker, I, I, uh, need to say that motion also includes striking the same section in the county code. Uh, nevermind. Says the draft attorney just refers to it. Take that I take that back.
S.B. 176 Landscaping Procurement Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Rep. Cutler moved to pass SB 176 Second Substitute out favorably as amended.
▶ Watch at 1:04:29Read what they said
Ahead. I'd be happy to go ahead and make a positive recommendation on a second substitute to HB 1 76 as amended.
S.B. 176 Landscaping Procurement Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Rep. Cutler said the bill is a thoughtful approach that avoids unnecessary spending, sets a standard for state operations, and benefits workers.
▶ Watch at 1:04:39Read what they said
I, I think this is a thoughtful, we, we've heard this bill in the past. I think this is a thoughtful approach to make sure that we're not spending more money than we need to, but that we set the standard. If we're asking, uh, citizens to improve air quality as a, as a state government, we should also follow those, those same guidelines. And I think it makes sense, makes a better environment, uh, for workers as well.
S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether multiple phases and triggers benefit taxpayers, the community or developers.
▶ Watch at 1:17:20Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There's, uh, I'm, I'm trying to work through in my mind whether having multiple phases and triggering, uh, the tax increments starting in different years is better for the taxpayer or, or better for the, uh, the community or better for the developer. Can, can you help me walk through why we would want to have more and more phases?
S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Observed that flexible timing can benefit both developers and cities.
▶ Watch at 1:18:03Read what they said
That seems like that's an advantage to, um, to developer. But I guess it can also be advantage to the, to the city because if you, if you trigger it too early, then uh, maybe the increment is not gonna be available for the,
S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether the bill changes policy for the Salt Palace convention center zone.
▶ Watch at 1:18:27Read what they said
Great point. Thank you. There's a lot of talk in here about, uh, convention center re reinvestment zone in a capital city. Is there any specific policy that you're, that's trying to be changed around the Salt Palace Convention Center project?
S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said he supports tax increment financing but is troubled by language allowing capture of 100 percent of property and sales tax in convention center zones.
▶ Watch at 1:37:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I want to tell the sponsor that I really appreciate his work and I respect his, uh, deep expertise here. I'm a fan of tax increment financing. I think it's an important tool that we need. I am troubled by this last, uh, and we, we use it in my district station park and, uh, RDA we had in, in Centerville. It's a very important tool, but I'm really troubled by this section at the very end of the bill, which seems, which says it's supersedes what's in SB 39 saying that a, a convention center reinvestment zone proposal, meaning any convention center, not just the one in Salt Lake can propose a hundred percent …
S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked why property tax is included when the prison-related levy was a sales tax.
▶ Watch at 1:39:24Read what they said
You're, you're saying this is only that extra half a percent of, of proper, well why would it, why would it include property tax? 'cause that was only sales tax, wasn't it?
S.B. 221 Housing and Transit Reinvestment Zone Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether other convention reinvestment zones exist, such as near the Mountain America Expo Center.
▶ Watch at 1:40:36Read what they said
Thank you. That's, that's very helpful. They, the part about not the capital investment zone in a capital city, but the regular conventions that a reinvestment zone also seems to be, have been thrown in there as well. And I wonder how many other zones we have. Don't we have that around the Mountain America Expo
S.B. 229 State Employee Benefits Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Moved to favorably recommend S.B. 229 second substitute.
▶ Watch at 2:33:11Read what they said
Mr. Chair, I'm happy to favorably recommend SB 2 29, uh, second substitute and would like to speak to that.
S.B. 229 State Employee Benefits Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said HR policy inevitably affects some negatively but the bill is an overall improvement worth thousands of dollars to nearly every employee.
▶ Watch at 2:33:20Read what they said
I, I think, uh, I'm, I'm really glad that I don't work in hr, uh, But I have friends who do. And, and creating HR policy is a tremendous challenge because no matter what you do, there's gonna be somebody who is impacted negatively. And I want to recognize, uh, that when creating policy for a large number of people, you have to take into account the overall finances of the state, the overall, the larger group of people and recognize that there are a number of people that are impacted negatively. And I'm, I'm sorry, uh, for, for that, for those negative impacts. Overall, I think this makes, uh, is a tremendous improvement for our state employees overall. Thousands …
H.B. 450 Data Privacy Amendments · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Speaks in favor of the fifth substitute, saying it restores funding for privacy auditors, keeps audit duties in the state auditor's office, and places policy with the Data Privacy office, with support from the auditor's office and Attorney General.
▶ Watch at 36:18Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I wanna speak in favor of this, uh, uh, fifth substitute and explain. We've been working carefully with our good state auditor with the State Attorney General to make some improvements to the date of privacy. Bill, one of the key issues was we took out a, uh, portion of the code and that inadvertently removed the funding for privacy auditors. So this fifth sub puts the code back in, uh, it, it changes the state. What we previously had a state, uh, data privacy auditor we're putting, they are keeping the audit function in the state auditor's office, but there is no longer the position called the State Data Privacy auditor. Uh, so there won't …
H.B. 450 Data Privacy Amendments · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Supports the fifth substitute, saying it restores funding for privacy auditors, keeps the audit function in the state auditor's office, and removes the state data privacy auditor position.
▶ Watch at 36:18Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I wanna speak in favor of this, uh, uh, fifth substitute and explain. We've been working carefully with our good state auditor with the State Attorney General to make some improvements to the date of privacy. Bill, one of the key issues was we took out a, uh, portion of the code and that inadvertently removed the funding for privacy auditors. So this fifth sub puts the code back in, uh, it, it changes the state. What we previously had a state, uh, data privacy auditor we're putting, they are keeping the audit function in the state auditor's office, but there is no longer the position called the State Data Privacy auditor. Uh, so there won't …
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether the change applies to the Senate, and whether Senate presenters could still present from the dais.
▶ Watch at 1:05:04Read what they said
This, this, uh, practice of presenting from the, uh, the diocese is more common among the Senate than the House. This does not affect the Senate at all. This is only a house rule modification. So we would take the lead in going down and the, and, uh, presenting in front of the, uh, the panel. But our Senator Vickers would continue to, could continue to present from the diocese. Is that correct?
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks whether House members would present from the table while Senate members could still present from the dais.
▶ Watch at 1:05:16Read what they said
So we would take the lead in going down and the, and, uh, presenting in front of the, uh, the panel. But our Senator Vickers would continue to, could continue to present from the diocese. Is that correct?
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Thanked the sponsor and said the change sets a good example for the other chamber.
▶ Watch at 1:05:50Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the efforts to lead and set a good example for the other body.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and says he appreciates the effort to lead and set an example for the other body.
▶ Watch at 1:05:50Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the efforts to lead and set a good example for the other body.
H.B. 479 Election Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for a question about voter check-ins not matching ballots cast in person.
▶ Watch at 1:28:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to A question? Representative Burton, will you yield to a question?
H.B. 479 Election Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks whether the bill addresses differences between voters checked in and ballots cast at in-person voting.
▶ Watch at 1:29:01Read what they said
I appreciate the, uh, the efforts the sponsors made to keep, uh, vote by mail available. Uh, my question is in related to in-person voting, in the past, some, uh, some counties have had challenges where the number of voters checked in, uh, using some form of ID does not match the number of cast ballots. Is there anything in this bill that will help us improve the differences we've seen, uh, and the challenges we've seen for this in-person voting and where the number of voters checked in does not match the cast ballots?
H.B. 479 Election Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Says the sponsor's efforts on voter security are appreciated, but that reasonable people may disagree on whether the cost is worth the improvement.
▶ Watch at 1:30:18Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, I think, uh, I appreciate the good sponsor its efforts to improve, uh, voter security and elections in Utah. I, I think reasonable people can disagree on whether the, the cost of doing this in terms of time and money is, is worth the small incremental, the, the incremental improvement, uh, on, on, uh, to our elections. Thank you.
H.B. 346 Sexual Abuse of a Child Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Presented HB 346 to clarify the definition of positions of special trust in the child sexual abuse enhancement, citing a court case about an uncle who was a stepbrother, and asked the prosecutors association to add comments.
▶ Watch at 2:23:06Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to say that I fully recognize this is the most important committee and, uh, I appreciate your time and attention. Thank you for finally recognizing that, Uh, as, as the experts on this committee know, sexual abuse of a child is, uh, a heinous crime that has an enhancement when someone is in a, a position of trust, a special position of trust or position of special trust. There was a court case where, uh, uh, and I believe this was in Davis County, where the definitions attached to, uh, people of special trust, uh, were found. They, they did not include, uh, a couple of key, uh, positions such as the cohabitants of …
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked whether the bill would apply only until the planned PTO model takes effect, with no separate sick leave afterward.
▶ Watch at 1:05:26Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, so the, my understanding, which might not be accurate, is the, the new, the Senate bill that combines sick leave into A PTO, um, uh, leave, once we moved to that PTO model, there would not be separate sick leave.
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked how the bill would treat sick leave banked before the PTO change compared with the other Senate bill, and whether the fiscal note would decline over time.
▶ Watch at 1:05:48Read what they said
So does this bill only address the time up until that point and the previous balance, It would address from 2014, the sick leave banked from 2014 to the day that this new policy goes into place. And, And so eventually the fiscal note would get to zero on this over time, as people retire the fiscal note every year will will the pre will go down. Go down. And, and my understanding is the, uh, the, the government ops folks that spoke previous, I'm not sure if, uh, somebody's here who's gonna speak to it, said that previous sick leave has value, uh, and that, that they retain that value. But, and you, and so could you, how do …
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Acknowledged that payment would apply only at retirement.
▶ Watch at 1:07:31Read what they said
Mm, I see. Oh, that, that's helpful to understand. Only, only at the point of retirement.
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked whether the payout applies if an employee quits to work in the public sector.
▶ Watch at 1:07:38Read what they said
If you, if you quit to go work for someone else and in the public sector,
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked what happens if a retiree is later rehired in the public sector.
▶ Watch at 1:07:55Read what they said
Um, I got a question about that last point. Let's say I'm at the point of retirement, I retire, and then three months later, six months later, I'm bored. I get hired again in the public sector. What happens then?
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked whether the fiscal note must be funded by the Executive Appropriations Committee for the bill to take effect.
▶ Watch at 1:09:52Read what they said
There you go. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I, I guess another question is, is this a, I'm not clear on, uh, the benefits, if, if this, does this fiscal note have to be funded by EAC for the bill to be affected?
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Spoke on the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:10:12Read what they said
All right. Now, all right. I'm, I'm gonna make a, uh, do we have a quorum? Can we take action? Yeah.
H.B. 584 State Employee Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Declined further remarks and restated the motion to favorably recommend HB 584.
▶ Watch at 1:11:26Read what they said
I'll waive. Great. Um, so the motion before us is to favorably recommend HB 5 84.
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says the substitute improves and clarifies the bill and includes clarifying language from stakeholders.
▶ Watch at 1:23:18Read what they said
Uh, the, I believe this, uh, substitute ch uh, improves the bill clarifies, has some clarifying language in it from stakeholders. Great. Thank you.
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Explains the amendment is a technical cleanup that clarifies the term refers to an individual.
▶ Watch at 1:24:09Read what they said
This has just an, an additional technical cleanup to, uh, clarify. A have drafting code person versus individual Oh. Makes it clear that it's an individual.
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Moves to favorably recommend the first substitute for SB 275 as amended to the full House.
▶ Watch at 1:25:02Read what they said
Mr. Chair. I'd like to favorably recommend, uh, first substitute SB 2 75 as amended to the full house.
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says the bill is one of the most important long-term identity policies for the state and that Utah should set its own digital identity policy rather than large technology companies.
▶ Watch at 1:25:13Read what they said
Briefly. I, as, as many of the commenters have, have, have mentioned, this is one of the most important long-term, uh, policies that we can set as a state to protect people's individual identity, and which is becoming more and more important in this, uh, world of ai. Where there is, uh, so much confusion about who, who is someone who they really say they are. And I, I believe this will, um, allow Utah to continue to show leadership and help our people. Uh, and if, as was said, digital identity is coming, no matter what, we can either let the giant co tech companies, uh, set the policy for us where we can set the policy. And in …
S.B. 275 State-Endorsed Digital Identity Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Explains that digital identity means a state-endorsed credential that can be mathematically verified, not only a username and password.
▶ Watch at 1:26:38Read what they said
So I, uh, I, sometime we, we, there are systems that use a, a username and a password. I, I believe what this is saying is, the intent of digital identity is, is not to say, uh, a, a username and password or a shared authentications system. This digital identity is an electronic record. It's basically saying digital identity in this case means a state endorsed digital identity credential that can be mathematically proved and verified, not a username and password only. Only. Okay.
S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked whether a parody video of a public figure created with AI and shared at a conference would be actionable under the bill, and whether the figure would need to show actual damages.
▶ Watch at 1:39:28Read what they said
I just wanted to run through scenario, make sure I understand the effect of this. So, previously at a conference that some of these people, uh, some of the people in the room attended, I had a, I used Parrot AI to create a video of, of Mark Zuckerberg, uh, talking about, uh, one of the, uh, point of our state indoors digital identity. And in the case that Mark Zuckerberg was unhappy with my, it was meant to be a parody or a joke, but in, if, if he were to be upset with that, my understanding is, and claim slander or claim something, he would have to provide me notice of this. And then his only recourse would …
S.B. 277 Utah Homes Investment Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asks Mr. Waldrip how much money is in the Utah Homes Investment Program, what its intent was, and how it compares with other housing programs.
▶ Watch at 1:53:28Read what they said
Cutler, Mr. Chair, I have a question for Mr. Waldrop, if that's okay. Uh, Mr. Waler, we have a lot of housing programs and, uh, I wasn't, I'm not very familiar with the Utah Homes Investment Program. Could you explain how much money is there and what the intent was? And, and I think I understand where it's, where it's going, but just a, a quick reminder of how that compares with the other housing programs we have.
S.B. 277 Utah Homes Investment Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asks whether the loans would still flow through credit unions and banks and what happened to earlier interest rate stipulations.
▶ Watch at 1:56:24Read what they said
And, and prior to this, you, you put very strict stipulations on what the interest rate could be. I don't see those stipulations here, but you're still, uh, are all these proposed loans would still flow through the, the, the credit unions and the banks, correct?
S.B. 277 Utah Homes Investment Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Moves to adopt the first substitute to S.B. 277.
▶ Watch at 2:03:38Read what they said
Mr. Chair. I'd be happy to favorably recommend, uh, SB 2 27, 2 77. Or excuse me, I'd happy to move the first sub on SB 2 77.
S.B. 277 Utah Homes Investment Program Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Moves to favorably recommend the first substitute to S.B. 277.
▶ Watch at 2:04:35Read what they said
uh, favor, make a motion to favorably recommend first substitute SB 2 77, and be happy to speak to that.
H.B. 361 Elections Provisions Amendments · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, saying the sponsor's work will help move elections forward in a safe and secure manner.
▶ Watch at 9:13Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker on a rise in support of this bill. The sponsor's done some, uh, impressive work on this and this will help move our, uh, uh, elections forward in a safe and secure manner.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Says the bill does four things: improves court-ordered mental health therapy when parents cannot agree, defines coercive control, sets rules and a roster for custody evaluators, and adjusts attorney's fee awards.
▶ Watch at 2:23:06Read what they said
This bill does four things. It, uh, changes some, uh, it makes some improvements around court ordered mental health therapy, especially when parents can't agree. It sets up a structured process on how to agree to provide, uh, therapy and ask the court to consider, uh, uh, therapy close by. It. It defines coercive control, puts some good language around there. The, uh, court, uh, encouraged that it makes rules around custody evaluators and sets up a roster so people know what custody evaluators are available. And then lastly, it to make some adjustments to awarding attorney's fees. And that's the, uh, the bill.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Says the fee change refines criteria so court orders to pay costs and fees are reasonable, and asks courts to address voluntary underemployment used to show lower income.
▶ Watch at 2:23:51Read what they said
Uh, it refines the criteria to, uh, ensure that court orders to pay costs and fees are reasonable. It, it, the primary change is if somebody is trying, is voluntarily not, uh, working or is underemployed as a way to try to show that they have lower income, it asks the court to address that. Okay.
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Presents the bill, which makes three changes to alimony law: tax treatment of alimony, retirement as a changed-circumstance rule with a hold-harmless for pre-2020 decrees, and cohabitation timing.
▶ Watch at 47:57Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. This bill, uh, makes some, uh, changes to alimony statute. There are three changes to be aware of. Number one, when the tax Cuts and Jobs Act was passed in 2017, it changed the way, uh, the federal tax treatment of alimony. Many states since then have updated their code to say, judges should take that into account the tax treatment. This also says Utah should take that into account the tax treatment of alimony. Point number two, previous to 2020, uh, the retirement was known as a foreseeable event in determining alimony, meaning that the judge took into account when, uh, retirement was planned and that you should plan that, that, uh, the alimony …
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Says the substitute is friendly, closes another loophole, and is good policy.
▶ Watch at 52:07Read what they said
Uh, this is a friendly substitute. I think it closes, uh, another loophole and it's good policy.
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Says the substitute is friendly, closes another loophole, and is good policy.
▶ Watch at 52:07Read what they said
Uh, this is a friendly substitute. I think it closes, uh, another loophole and it's good policy.
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Summarizes that the bill includes several policies to improve the alimony process and thanks the body for support in closing loopholes.
▶ Watch at 52:37Read what they said
I think this has a number of policies that help us improve the alimony, uh, process and appreciate the body's support in closing some of these loopholes.
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Summarizes that the bill includes several policies to improve the alimony process and closes some loopholes, and thanks the body for its support.
▶ Watch at 52:37Read what they said
I think this has a number of policies that help us improve the alimony, uh, process and appreciate the body's support in closing some of these loopholes.
S.B. 100 Federalism Revisions · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Moved to place Senate Bill 100, third substitute, on the consent calendar.
▶ Watch at 59:59Read what they said
Oh, yes. Seems Like a, Yeah, I think that's in order. Um, make the motion. Okay.
H.B. 558 Elections Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Drawing on 12 years in local government, said land use and local issues are not partisan and worried disclosure would shift focus from candidate qualifications to party.
▶ Watch at 1:34:00Read what they said
Thank you. To quote a member of our committee, this isn't the worst idea I've heard, But I, but I don't think it's the best. And I wanted to walk through my concerns and, and ask you about. So I agree in some of our bigger cities, there may already be a lot of partisanship going on, especially in maybe our largest city and maybe a couple of our very large city. But my experience in 12 years in local government was very different than the experience up here in terms of a partisan nature. It was very much, we are trying to work together to solve, you know, to fill potholes, to find money for sidewalks to figure out, …
H.B. 558 Elections Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asked whether a constitutionalist candidate would support a city recreation baseball program.
▶ Watch at 1:38:20Read what they said
Yeah. Thank you Mr. Chair. I, I, uh, one, one quick follow up. I wonder if a constitutionalist candidate would support a, a rec baseball program, or if they might say that's not the role of, of local government.
H.B. 361 Elections Provisions Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asks whether the bill addresses a separate postcard sent with voter registration information that included clerk details.
▶ Watch at 2:29:09Read what they said
Representative Cutler. Thank you. I assume this Disability is sending a separate postcard with the, our notification that had the clerk's information on it. Wait, uh, sometimes you get a postcard that has your registration on it as, as a preliminary notification, not the ballot itself.
H.B. 361 Elections Provisions Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asks whether that issue was addressed elsewhere, recalling a past problem with a separate postcard.
▶ Watch at 2:29:33Read what they said
Did we address that somewhere else? Because wasn't that the, one of the problems we had a year or two ago was a separate postcard. It wasn't the actual ballot info, but it was an Official, there is a, I I don't remember the exact thing.
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · House floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 20:47Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Will The sponsor yield to a series
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · House floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Asks what share of school-route students take online training and how a parent-monitored online class differs from the bill.
▶ Watch at 20:54Read what they said
Uh, the Mr speakers, you, you provided some interesting statistics at the beginning. What percentage of those who go through the school route do the online, uh, drivers training? I don't know if I have that number actually right in front of me, but there's a significant number. It's becoming increasingly more popular. And it could be that, you know, any driver could still opt to just go that route as well. There's just going to be multiple options. Uh, what's the difference between a parent monitoring the, uh, a student doing an online class versus what you're suggesting, uh, which is not, uh, and what you're suggesting in this bill?
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · House floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Asks how much training is required to be a driver instructor for the six hours.
▶ Watch at 22:09Read what they said
Th Thank you Mr. Speaker. What today to be a driver's instructor, how much training is required to, to be a driver's instructor to do those six hours?
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · House floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Says some parents may not follow traffic rules, shares his own experience teaching children to drive, and states he would oppose the bill.
▶ Watch at 22:57Read what they said
Uh, thank, thank you for that. My personal observation in driving the, uh, highways of Utah is that there are many parents who don't seem to know or follow the rules, uh, uh, today. And I'm not sure they're qualified to provide instruction. Uh, and I, as a parent, teaching children to drive was one of the scariest things I ever did. Uh, a near death experience more than once. And I appreciate having someone who's trained in, in the laws and the technique for training, providing some instruction to, to my children. So, uh, I think after that I think I'll be opposed to this. Thank you.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Presented H.B. 381, which creates a high power electric device category with a 20 mph cutoff, sets age-based riding rules and a safety course for riders under 16, clarifies that devices with pedals are not automatically e-bikes, and restricts scooters and high power devices from freeways.
▶ Watch at 1:02:08Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate you here. If it's okay, I'd love to have my intern pass out a Yeah, that's okay. A handout. And, uh, it's always fun to start, if we can get this going again. Oh, do I need a mirror? Yeah, Let's see if we can do our cheese. Go. Okay. Okay, go ahead. I just need Into to, I didn't make it, but I did do the house committee. I was gonna say, you, you sat in the house. Yes. Love it. Choose the content. Oh, yeah, I do. Send a display. Let's try that. Yes. Except then I'll have to throw this over here, but I can do that. Okay. Go ahead. See …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Confirmed the bill is the third substitute. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:12:13Read what they said
I believe we're on the, We're on the third, Third substitute. We're on the third. Yes. Not, not two. We don't want to.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Said the bill does not directly address the courts but reduces the helmet violation for e-bikes to a lower infraction, and that courts could be addressed in a future bill.
▶ Watch at 1:21:19Read what they said
Uh, this bill is not directly addressed the courts, other than it, it changes the, there was some evidence that, uh, people were not getting charged for helmet violations because they were very, it's a very, it's a higher level infraction, and this changes the helmet violation for a e-bike or to something very low. So the police officers might be more likely to do an infraction, but that's not really what the courts, uh, so I would say no, this, this doesn't deal with the courts, but that's certainly something we could address if you, if that's in a future bill, if that's a suggestion.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Said local law enforcement reports that people do not understand the rules, which vary by city, and that simplifying the law would help enforcement.
▶ Watch at 1:22:06Read what they said
I I, I think part of it as a courts part of it, from what I've heard from local law enforcement is people don't understand the regulations. And often it's, it's different from, it's not necessarily consistent from city to city because there hasn't been, uh, a consistent, uh, approach. And their, uh, the law enforcement, local law enforcement that I spoke with said, this will help us, because now we can educate people and it's clearer what's allowed and what's not allowed. Therefore, we can do a better job enforcing the law now that it's clearer and, uh, okay. Easier to explain and understand to people. So we, we hope everything I've heard said, we, we think we can …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Gave closing remarks, saying the bill will help save lives and give more kids a chance to learn to ride safely.
▶ Watch at 1:25:18Read what they said
Let's go back to representative for summation. I'm grateful For the support. I think this will help save lives and give more kids a chance to learn how to ride safely.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asks the committee to adopt the second substitute and an amendment that restores a provision added earlier for the tax commission.
▶ Watch at 3:17:30Read what they said
And if you wanna speak to those, I Would, uh, yes. I would like you to adopt the second sub and the amendment, which puts back in something that was added earlier for the tax commission, uh, just to clarify. Uh, and we forgot to include it in the, the second sub.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Explains that the bill sets up a process in which counties propose digital authentication methods, which the state archivist and Department of Technology Services would evaluate with industry input before any standards are adopted.
▶ Watch at 3:17:58Read what they said
I'm speaking to the second sub, or I'll talk to the concept overall. So the purpose of this bill committee is not to set the detailed rules for how county recorders can digitally authenticate, uh, records or digital authenticate someone who submits record. What, what the purpose is, is to set up the process that we're going to use to make the rules about digital authentication. So the process is that if a county says we want to do digital authentication, this could be, for example, say maybe it's publishing in the, uh, a record on a blockchain or digitally authenticating with a state endorsed digital identity, which is not in code yet. So they can't do that, uh, a, …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Says the second substitute removes parts that title companies were uncomfortable with, so those issues can be addressed in later discussions.
▶ Watch at 3:20:28Read what they said
So the, and the second substitute just takes out, there was some parts that we had in there, uh, that, uh, the title companies were uncomfortable with. We, we took those out, uh, basically to go a little bit slower in our process of, of evaluating and to make sure they were, uh, they're included in the discussions going forward.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Says counties can still do everything they do today, while digital plats currently must have a remotely notarized digital version. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 3:21:33Read what they said
You can still do everything you can today, but today you have to have those, the digital version remotely notarized. Correct? Right. Okay.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Explains that a county would propose an authentication method for digital plats to the state archivist, and that state-endorsed digital identity or blockchain options are possible but not yet chosen.
▶ Watch at 3:21:53Read what they said
What has to happen is let, let's say we want to say how can we accept digital subdivision plats and make sure that the person submitting them is who they say they are and that they are authentic. There will be a proposal that goes to the state archivist brought, brought by a county to say, this is how we think this is the best way we think to authenticate, uh, the submission of a digital plat. Okay. That is better than the remote notary process we use today. Okay. But we don't know what that process is. We're just gonna let that play out. Well, We, we, there there are a, a couple of different options. We didn't want …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Says county recorders are not required to accept digital records, paper recording remains available, and the bill allows more efficient authentication methods.
▶ Watch at 3:24:02Read what they said
Yes. So To be very clear, there is no requirement to take digital records for county recorders. County recorders do not, are not forced to. This is just optional. And the ones who have expressed interest are those along the Wasatch front that do higher volumes of recording of documents. Okay. Uh, but there is, we make it very clear it's here. It's also in a couple of other places that we are not eliminating paper, uh, recording. You can keep that. But there may be some of the counties that county court say we're doing 80% of our documents are now digital anyway, but they're using a DA remote notary, uh, format mm-hmm. For authenticating the document. And there …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Says the title association spoke against the bill earlier, sent two letters, and that its concerns were incorporated; its absence today is viewed as a sign of comfort.
▶ Watch at 3:25:02Read what they said
I, I I don't know if they're here to speak against It. They're not here. Clearly. They, they came and spoke against it the first time. They wrote me two letters. We incorporated a number of things. If they're not here, I think that's a good sign that they're more comfortable. Okay.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Responds to the committee member and says the bill will help move recording into the digital age. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 3:30:41Read what they said
Thanks for preventing our, our power hungry state archivist. He is, he Is very, uh, happy to help. I think this will help us move into the 21st century with di uh, digital recording. Thank you. Okay.
H.B. 531 Scarification Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asks whether the bill adds protection for minors getting tattoos or other scarring modifications.
▶ Watch at 53:14Read what they said
This appears to, uh, provide additional protection for, for minors when it comes to tattoos or other scarring modifications. Is, is that, is my understanding correct.
H.B. 531 Scarification Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asked whether the substitute adds protections for minors regarding tattoos and other scarring modifications, and whether scarification falls under its own rules.
▶ Watch at 53:14Read what they said
This appears to, uh, provide additional protection for, for minors when it comes to tattoos or other scarring modifications. Is, is that, is my understanding correct.
H.B. 531 Scarification Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asks how scarification differs from tattooing.
▶ Watch at 53:58Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For those of us who aren't familiar with scarification, what's the difference between scarification and tattooing?
H.B. 531 Scarification Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asked the difference between scarification and tattooing.
▶ Watch at 53:58Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. For those of us who aren't familiar with scarification, what's the difference between scarification and tattooing?
H.B. 539 Public Safety Modifications · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asked the sponsor to yield to a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 1:07:50Read what they said
Thank you. Um, would the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Representative MacPherson, will you yield to a series of questions?
H.B. 539 Public Safety Modifications · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asks whether the sponsor will yield to a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 1:07:50Read what they said
Thank you. Um, would the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Representative MacPherson, will you yield to a series of questions?
H.B. 539 Public Safety Modifications · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asked whether the bill would allow a perpetrator to contact a child who is a victim of domestic violence.
▶ Watch at 1:07:59Read what they said
Interested in, uh, how this helps, uh, victims of domestic violence and specifically on line 8 55, uh, where, where it talks, uh, about, uh, contacting a child. I wondered if you could just clarify if, if the child is the victim of deli domestic violence, does this allow the perpetrator to contact them?
H.B. 539 Public Safety Modifications · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asks whether the bill's change regarding contact with children would allow a perpetrator to contact a child who is a victim of domestic violence.
▶ Watch at 1:07:59Read what they said
Interested in, uh, how this helps, uh, victims of domestic violence and specifically on line 8 55, uh, where, where it talks, uh, about, uh, contacting a child. I wondered if you could just clarify if, if the child is the victim of deli domestic violence, does this allow the perpetrator to contact them?
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Supports the bill, saying its loans can help municipalities finance infrastructure that holds up new housing builds, and thanks the sponsor for improvements.
▶ Watch at 1:19:42Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanna rise in support of this bill. The sponsor has done, uh, great work in, in putting together a plan that can actually help municipalities and local, uh, uh, local areas build more infrastructure to support housing and especially starter homes. Uh, there are the loans that will be available through this program can make a, a big difference in finalizing the infrastructure that often holds up, uh, some of the new builds. So I, I stand in support and appreciate the improvements that he's made to the bill.
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, saying its loans can help municipalities build infrastructure for starter homes and thanks the sponsor for changes.
▶ Watch at 1:19:42Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanna rise in support of this bill. The sponsor has done, uh, great work in, in putting together a plan that can actually help municipalities and local, uh, uh, local areas build more infrastructure to support housing and especially starter homes. Uh, there are the loans that will be available through this program can make a, a big difference in finalizing the infrastructure that often holds up, uh, some of the new builds. So I, I stand in support and appreciate the improvements that he's made to the bill.
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 23, 2026
Presented HB 320 with the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy, adding joint interpretation agreements, allowing other state agencies to be parties to agreements, and extending audit authority over agreements.
▶ Watch at 37:35Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate, I was just here to say I can, I'm next door presenting a bill, but I can, I'm great to do this now. So, HB three 20 is in partnership with the, uh, AI policy Office from our Department of Commerce. The office has been doing great work for a couple of years, and they've realized that we need to tweak a few of the, uh, policies that they work under. Uh, first major change is right now they do, uh, regular, they, excuse me, they get, they do regulatory mitigation agreements that say, if you want to play in this AI sandbox, here's the agreement we're gonna work under. You agree to, to …
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 23, 2026
Explained the first substitute, which treats retirement as a change that may not be foreseeable for alimony decrees entered before 2020, and the May 12, 2020 effective date it uses.
▶ Watch at 2:07:40Read what they said
Thank you. The, uh, uh, in sub one, the policy change is previous to 2020, when alimony was considered, retirement was considered a foreseeable event, which meant that the judges took into account when retirement would happen, what the retirement assets were, uh, and if retirement would change when, when they were determining a, an alimony decree. And if, if they didn't want to do that, then they would write something in there to say. And if retirement changes, then you can change the alimony decree in 2020, the legislature, uh, decided, Hey, I think we want to clarify or flip this and say, retirement, uh, is a, a change in the retirement may not be a foreseeable, uh, event. …
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 23, 2026
Presented the bill, which came from interim Government Operations work and includes five recommendations on signature gatherer training, verification notices, packet format, the signature gatherer's name and signature, and related standards.
▶ Watch at 2:28:13Read what they said
This, uh, this bill came from the interims government ops, uh, or excuse me, yes. Gov ops committee where we looked at all the things, uh, that we'd heard about signature gathering. We made five recommendations. Number one, put in statute the training course, which has already been created by the Lieutenant Governor for signature gatherers. So they know what the rules are when they go out and, uh, gather signatures. Number two, when your signature is verified, when we get to the new in 2027, we get to the new voter registration system. A text or an email will be sent saying, uh, your name was, uh, was captured, uh, your signature was verified. It may also include, if …
H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Supports the bill, saying more disclosure helps people make good decisions and improves trust in government.
▶ Watch at 20:09Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. I wanna stand in support of this bill. I believe that, uh, when people have more information, they can make good decisions. I support more disclosure. We're in a period of time where there is a distrust in government, and I believe, uh, additional more disclosure helps improve trust and help people make good decisions. So I am, uh, in, in favor of this. Thank you.
H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Cutler speaks in support of the bill, saying more disclosure helps people make good decisions and can improve trust in government.
▶ Watch at 20:09Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. I wanna stand in support of this bill. I believe that, uh, when people have more information, they can make good decisions. I support more disclosure. We're in a period of time where there is a distrust in government, and I believe, uh, additional more disclosure helps improve trust and help people make good decisions. So I am, uh, in, in favor of this. Thank you.
H.B. 440 School Lunch Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks why the bill limits recess use as a discipline tool and whether teachers would lose the ability to keep students in from recess.
▶ Watch at 38:47Read what they said
Uh, first I wanna thank the sponsor for making improvements to the, uh, school lunch sections. I, I support her efforts there and I think those are good improvements. My question or concern is around the recess and more around teacher, uh, ability for teachers to have any, uh, ability to discipline students or help create order in their classroom. It may surprise some of you, but when I was, uh, in elementary school, I was asked to stay in from recess sometimes for, uh, behavior issues. And, uh, and that was a, a form of discipline that we used back in the, uh, the past century. Uh, and it seems like we are, are now eliminating another tool that …
H.B. 440 School Lunch Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks why recess would be removed as a classroom discipline tool, noting that staying in from recess was used when he was in school.
▶ Watch at 38:47Read what they said
Uh, first I wanna thank the sponsor for making improvements to the, uh, school lunch sections. I, I support her efforts there and I think those are good improvements. My question or concern is around the recess and more around teacher, uh, ability for teachers to have any, uh, ability to discipline students or help create order in their classroom. It may surprise some of you, but when I was, uh, in elementary school, I was asked to stay in from recess sometimes for, uh, behavior issues. And, uh, and that was a, a form of discipline that we used back in the, uh, the past century. Uh, and it seems like we are, are now eliminating another tool that …
H.B. 440 School Lunch Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and makes a brief remark about his own school experience.
▶ Watch at 40:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If this policy been placed, maybe I would've turned out a little bit better.
H.B. 440 School Lunch Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Makes a brief remark about his own school experience.
▶ Watch at 40:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If this policy been placed, maybe I would've turned out a little bit better.
H.B. 372 Child Welfare Changes · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, saying the sponsor listened to family court concerns and reached a compromise.
▶ Watch at 1:41:57Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also rise in support of this bill. I've watched the sponsor listen to concerns, uh, uh, from those involved in the family courts and come to a compromise and I appreciate her efforts improving the family court system.
H.B. 372 Child Welfare Changes · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Supports the bill, saying the sponsor listened to family court concerns and reached a compromise.
▶ Watch at 1:41:57Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also rise in support of this bill. I've watched the sponsor listen to concerns, uh, uh, from those involved in the family courts and come to a compromise and I appreciate her efforts improving the family court system.
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asked whether prohibiting administrative costs from grants is a significant policy change or a clarification.
▶ Watch at 45:01Read what they said
On, uh, looking at the first sub, uh, line 5 55, you just spoke to this, that typically, especially in the academic, uh, world, you take the admin costs out of a, out of a grant. But you're saying we're not going to allow that. Is is that a significant change in policy, or is this just a clarification? 'cause I thought usually the admin costs come out of those.
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Confirmed that agencies must specifically request administrative costs or cannot spend grant funds on them.
▶ Watch at 45:49Read what they said
Thank you. And then on, um, So in, in other words, they can still have administrative costs, but they have to specifically ask for them and we have to specifically grant those and if They forget to include the admin costs in the grant request, then they can't spend it on advent costs?
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asked for an explanation of the dedicated credits provision allowing agencies to spend excess revenue.
▶ Watch at 46:10Read what they said
And online, uh, 6 26, you, you were, and you I think spoke to this. I don't, could you explain again, the, uh, the dedicated credits revenue? I don't quite understand, um, this, this section, uh, where it says, an agency can expend a hundred percent of the excess. Can you just talk about that when there's excess and dedicated credits versus, uh, versus non-dedicated credits, I guess?
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asked what the excess amount refers to.
▶ Watch at 47:00Read what they said
so this is across what, what this is saying is, uh, when he says excess of the amount, uh, what, what is that? So the excess of the amount that we've appropriated back?
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asked whether agencies collecting only 90% cannot spend the full amount.
▶ Watch at 47:39Read what they said
And, and Yeah, I I, I just can't picture it, but I, I trust your judgment. I just don't quite understand. Doesn't mean if, if the credits are only 90% of the allocated amount, Then they can't expend a hundred percent.
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Said that made sense and asked whether it is a cash flow issue. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 47:58Read what they said
that, does that make sense? That makes sense. Okay. Got it. Thank you. Yep. So is it a question of cash flow then?
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler asked whether the auditor believes the legislature must set budgets for all offices and whether the auditor should be treated differently.
▶ Watch at 1:10:36Read what they said
I, I think our good state auditor answered my first question, which was gonna be do you believe the state all, for all of our agencies and constitutional offices, the legislature is obligated to set a budget? Correct. Uh, it f from your first answer, I gather you believe the state auditor should be different in, in, in our approach than other state constitutional offices. Is that
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler asked how the emergency valve would work logistically in practice.
▶ Watch at 1:11:39Read what they said
Could, could you go over how this emergency valve would work in, in practice? Because in practice agencies can't withdraw more than, than they've been allocated. How would this logistically work if you were to hit this emergency valve someday?
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler asked the sponsor whether the reimbursement-only grant language affects OHV programs and whether exceptions are allowed.
▶ Watch at 1:18:30Read what they said
Uh, before action. I wonder if I could ask another question of, uh, of the sponsor around the, uh, the question. The OHV fund from Mr. Stewart in line 4 96, uh, except as otherwise, provided the grant appropriation administration, administering agency may disperse grant funds only as a reimbursement of an expense, uh, is could, uh, first of all, would you, would you, could you comment on that situation and could, uh, a grant or a program ask when they go for their appropriation to, uh, keep working the way they way it works today as an exception? Or, or are you completely changing the policy? Could,
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler said he was referring to line 496 and may not have been looking at the substitute.
▶ Watch at 1:19:26Read what they said
To? Well, I, I was, uh, referring to 4 96 in the substitute. I'm not sure if that was the same line he was referring to. Oh, oh, maybe I'm not in the substitute. You
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler confirmed he did not see the language in the substitute.
▶ Watch at 1:19:48Read what they said
So I don't see it in the substitute. So must have been fixed. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler suggested the substitute appears to resolve Mr. Stewart's concern.
▶ Watch at 1:20:14Read what they said
It, it, it wasn't, but could I ask Mr. Stewart to, to me, this seems like Mr. Stewart, this resolves your concern.
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler said that language looks to be gone in the substitute. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:20:23Read what they said
Before the sub. But it looks like that's gone in the, in the Substitute If it is gone.
H.B. 545 Budgetary Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler said he would vote against the substitute motion so the full House can debate whether all constitutional offices should align.
▶ Watch at 1:30:01Read what they said
Thank you. I also wanted to speak to the motion. I think this is an important policy question, and by leaving it in and allowing it to go to the full house, that allows more people to participate in the discussion and, and give their opinion on, on whether this is an appropriate policy change to have all the constitutional, uh, offices align, or whether there should be an, an exception. So, I'll, I'll also be voting against the substitute motion and, and, uh, appreciate the, uh, the discussion we've had today. I think it's an important one, and I was unaware of it before today, So, yeah.
H.B. 379 Child Care Provider Food Preparation Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asked whether the second substitute would let the department make rules stricter, and whether the sponsor expects the rules to be less strict than current ones.
▶ Watch at 1:38:03Read what they said
Representative Cutler, My understanding in reading the, the, I assume you've been speaking to the first substitute. Thank you. Um, second substitute. Second Substitute Am speaking to the second substitute Is you're not necessarily specifying the, the, the, the rules. You're saying that the department is gonna make these rules, so in theory, they could make them more strict, but your assumption is that, that they will be less strict than they're today.
H.B. 379 Child Care Provider Food Preparation Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Moved that the committee favorably recommend second substitute HB 379.
▶ Watch at 1:42:10Read what they said
Mr. Chair, I'd like to continue with a to, uh, move that we favorably recommend HP 3 79. Second substitute childcare provider Food Preparation amendments.
H.B. 346 Sexual Abuse of a Child Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Presents HB 346 to clarify undefined terms in the position-of-trust enhancement for child sexual abuse, such as uncle and cohabitant, after a recent appellate case, and adds language on step and marriage-related family relations.
▶ Watch at 12:39Read what they said
Speaker, in the state of Utah, sexual abuse of a child is a serious crime. And currently in our code there are enhancements that make it more serious when it is committed by someone who is in a position of trust, uh, often a family member or someone in the home. Very close. In a recent appellate court case, uh, state v Francis, uh, there was an issue that was discovered that some of the terms are not well-defined in our state code, including uncle and cohabitants of a parent. So this bill, uh, cleans up the language and makes it clear, uh, who is qualifies as a someone who is in a position of trust such as a co-resident, …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Continues asking whether a new county could affect existing counties under the constitution and whether the working group looked into this.
▶ Watch at 14:25Read what they said
Appreciate the sponsor and his willingness to always take on these really, uh, challenging issues that have long-term implications. Uh, my my question relates to whether we would have to have any changes in the Constitution if an additional county were to be added. It's, it's clear that we can change boundaries, but it, um, I'm not, it's not entirely clear to me if a new county is added, if, if that, uh, could be argued that would change the counties now existing and, and some of the language in the state constitution. Wondered if your work group looked into that?
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 1:36:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker with a sponsor yield to a series of questions. Representative, uh, started, will you yield to a series of questions?
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield to a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 1:36:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker with a sponsor yield to a series of questions. Representative, uh, started, will you yield to a series of questions?
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks how a seat is filled if a legislator changes party during session and then resigns.
▶ Watch at 1:36:28Read what they said
I have, yes. Representative. I thank you Mr. Speaker. I have visited Paradise and it's very nice in the summer. Uh, I'm not sure that, that I want to live there this time of year though. Uh, Mr. Speaker, if someone changes their party affiliation, uh, during the legislative session and then resigns, uh, how does, how does their, uh, seat get filled in the, under this scenario, Mr. Speaker?
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks how a seat is filled when a legislator changes party affiliation during session and then resigns.
▶ Watch at 1:36:28Read what they said
I have, yes. Representative. I thank you Mr. Speaker. I have visited Paradise and it's very nice in the summer. Uh, I'm not sure that, that I want to live there this time of year though. Uh, Mr. Speaker, if someone changes their party affiliation, uh, during the legislative session and then resigns, uh, how does, how does their, uh, seat get filled in the, under this scenario, Mr. Speaker?
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks how a resignation just before a session, when there is no time for a special election, would differ from current practice.
▶ Watch at 1:37:02Read what they said
Thank you. And, uh, uh, can you go over again the scenario? If, if a, someone resigns, let's say, uh, right before in, in the months before a legislative session, uh, November, October, November, December, uh, how that, uh, when there's not time to hold, uh, a special election, uh, election, how will that differ from what happens today? Um,
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks to go over again how a resignation shortly before a session would be handled when there is no time for a special election.
▶ Watch at 1:37:02Read what they said
Thank you. And, uh, uh, can you go over again the scenario? If, if a, someone resigns, let's say, uh, right before in, in the months before a legislative session, uh, November, October, November, December, uh, how that, uh, when there's not time to hold, uh, a special election, uh, election, how will that differ from what happens today? Um,
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Says the sponsor worked to improve the bill and that it fills some gaps in current law.
▶ Watch at 1:38:00Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, I appreciate the sponsor working with us to make some improvements and I think this is an improvement to our current, uh, situation. Fills some gaps. Thank you.
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Thanks the sponsor for working on improvements and says the bill fills some gaps.
▶ Watch at 1:38:00Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, I appreciate the sponsor working with us to make some improvements and I think this is an improvement to our current, uh, situation. Fills some gaps. Thank you.
H.B. 197 School Materials Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Will vote no, citing fewer material challenges in his district and preferring technology filters for online advertisements over new legislation.
▶ Watch at 2:48:14Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, I support the sponsor's good intention with this bill and I support the sensitive materials changes that we've made in the past. Uh, I am, uh, a no vote on this because I think it's, uh, un unnecessary, uh, for two reasons. One, in in my district, uh, back in 20 22, 23, we had a lot of challenges. And for example, 65 people were cha challenged, uh, material books the next year it dropped down last, uh, last year, four people this year, only two people. So to me, this says that the things we've done in the past are working very well, but the, the primary reason that, um, uh, I I'm gonna …
H.B. 511 Procurement Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Asked whether the 10% figure was hypothetical, since the bill text states a preference without a number, and why a numeric value was used.
▶ Watch at 1:05:25Read what they said
There we go. Thanks for the double dip. I just wanted to clarify. I don't see, you used the hype, you used a 10% in the scoring matrix. Was that hypothetical? What I see in the bill is just a preference, but not that preference is not quantified. Is this substitute one? Uh, that's my problem Looks like on lines 2 33. So why, I guess why put in a, a numeric value instead of just a preference, like a veteran's preference? Because it seems like that what's the thought process?
H.B. 409 Legislator Leave Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Asked whether the bill gives public employees an unfair advantage over private employees who serve in the Legislature.
▶ Watch at 1:20:33Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I could, could you go over again to, to me, when I first read through this, I, the, the thought was this creates an incentive, an unfair incentive for a public employee to serve in legislature as, as opposed to a private employee. Uh, like I take, I take a leave, an unpaid leave of absence, but convince me why this is not an unfair advan. Is this an unfair, is this an advantage for a public employee that, that a private employee doesn't have? Uh, and if, and if not, uh, convince me of that.
S.B. 108 Online Marketplace Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield to a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 45:04Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker with a sponsor yield to questions Representative Fiefia, will you yield to a series of questions?
S.B. 108 Online Marketplace Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks what happens when a local government requires a feature or regulation that a digital platform does not include.
▶ Watch at 45:10Read what they said
Could you take us through the scenario when a municipality or another local government agency, uh, requires a feature or has a regulation that is not included in a digital platform? What, what happens in that case?
S.B. 108 Online Marketplace Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether a platform could reduce its features to avoid complying with local regulations such as rental restrictions or address disclosure.
▶ Watch at 46:13Read what they said
Thank you. That makes a lot of sense. Mr. Speaker, one more question. Is there any opportunity for say a new entrant or an existing, uh, platform to reduce the features they offer as a way to get out of complying with, uh, regulations, local regulations, for example, that whether a, uh, a rental is allowed or, or not allowed? Could they hide the address or do something that would keep, uh, a local government from enforcing regulations?
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Presents the bill, describing provisions on conflicts over court-ordered mental health therapy, a coercive control definition, a custody evaluator roster, and attorney's fee rules.
▶ Watch at 1:33:04Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill, uh, improves the experience in family court for those going through high conflict, uh, divorce or child custody cases. And it focuses on four things that will protect children and put children first. Number one, when a court orders mental health therapy and there is a conflict between the parents on, on what to do or, or who to, uh, select as a, uh, for mental health treatment. It gives a structured process for how to handle that conflict, um, uh, and, and some guidelines when people don't agree. Number two, which I think is the most important part of the bill, is it adds a definition of coercive control and improves court's ability …
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Answers that the bill aims to reduce litigation costs and conflict through evaluator selection guidelines and clearer coercive control standards.
▶ Watch at 1:35:51Read what they said
Uh, the purpose of this is to decrease litigation costs and decrease conflict by making it clear how a court should handle, uh, high conflict cases by setting guidelines on how to choose a custody evaluator, which would hopefully reduce the, the cost and the conflict, and especially more guidelines around coercive control.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Explains the bill does not address court technology and describes the therapy selection process, school attendance protections, and insurance preference that could lower costs.
▶ Watch at 1:36:42Read what they said
I, I'd help, help me just conceptually understand it. So I, I don't think there's anything here specifically related to technology in improvements in their courts, but, uh, this should help the process when there is a conflict about if the court orders mental health therapy, how to choose and select that, uh, uh, therapist or that mental health treatment should reduce the time in court, because now there's a clear process. Uh, each parent brings three names and there are some, uh, guidelines around conflict of interest. It improves the process to say children shouldn't be missing school for court ordered therapy. And if there is the possibility that, uh, one of the parents' insurance can pay for that …
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Says government is involved in marriage and custody disputes, that protecting vulnerable people including abuse victims is a core function, and that courts should step in fairly.
▶ Watch at 1:38:19Read what they said
Un unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, in our society, we do, uh, uh, marriage is, uh, uh, a role of of government. We provide a marriage license and the courts system is set up to help deal with these unfortunate cases of, uh, when there is a child custody dispute. It would, it is obviously much better when people can resolve these issues on their own without government intervention. But a core function of government is to protect the most vulnerable in our society and victims of domestic violence. And those who, uh, have suffered abuse are among the most vulnerable. And, uh, in my opinion, it's entirely appropriate for the courts to step in and protect those who have been abused …
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks to ask the sponsor a question or two and the sponsor agrees to yield.
▶ Watch at 1:39:20Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker with a sponsor yield two, a question or two. Representative Christofferson will yield to a series of questions.
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether the corridor preservation changes will lead to more corridor preservation and advance planning or less.
▶ Watch at 1:39:29Read what they said
Could you speak to, could the sponsor speak to the changes in the corridor preservation, whether that, uh, in his opinion will result in more corridor preservation and planning ahead, or, or less how that changes?
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether the corridor preservation changes will lead to more or less planning ahead.
▶ Watch at 1:39:29Read what they said
Could you speak to, could the sponsor speak to the changes in the corridor preservation, whether that, uh, in his opinion will result in more corridor preservation and planning ahead, or, or less how that changes?
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Says the bill does not deal with policy on special masters.
▶ Watch at 1:39:46Read what they said
My my understanding is this does not have any, does not deal with the policy around special masters.
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether the bill will help with corridor preservation for the West Davis highway expansion, and the sponsor's answer is that it applies only to local roads.
▶ Watch at 1:40:42Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, do you think specifically this will assist with the quarter preservation for West Davis highway expansion or, uh, not, not related. This is local, uh, local roads, not state roads. Thank you very much.
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether the change will help with corridor preservation for the West Davis highway expansion.
▶ Watch at 1:40:42Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, do you think specifically this will assist with the quarter preservation for West Davis highway expansion or, uh, not, not related.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Says actual harm is already covered by existing statute after a recent law change, and this bill addresses threats.
▶ Watch at 1:41:13Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That's an excellent question that, that others have also asked the actual harm if there is evidence or, uh, credible allegations, uh, of harm is already covered in this statute. I don't believe we brought that part of the statute in, but that was covered. Uh, and, and that was, uh, actually improved a couple of years ago. We passed M'S Law, so if there is evidence of actual harm, then that is already covered in the statute. This just deals with threats, uh, under the definition of, of course, of control.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Says he would need to check the code reference and explains that threats to harm pets are used by abusers to manipulate behavior.
▶ Watch at 1:42:10Read what they said
Uh, uh, Mr. Speaker, I'd, I'd have to look at the reference for the actual harm, but, uh, this was often this section was brought in because, uh, by domestic violence advocates and family members is often the threat to harm a pet is, is used by, um, uh, a cove, um, uh, parent or, uh, abuser as, as a way to say, you know, if you don't do this, I'm gonna kill or harm your pet. And that, uh, as, as a way to manipulate behavior, um, that I can't speak to whether the existing code references that, uh, household animal definition or not.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Gives closing summation, saying the bill was developed with family advocates and courts, and that the courts support the coercive control definition.
▶ Watch at 1:44:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker ProAm. The, we spent significant time with, uh, both advocates, family advocates, and uh, also with the courts, talking with the courts about what changes would, uh, uh, improve the system. Uh, the courts have been supportive of these changes, especially bringing the definition of course of control in, so there would be more consistent definition that, uh, uh, the courts could point to as they were already considering this but didn't have it in code. So I appreciate the input from, from others and the help from my colleagues, uh, on improving the family court system. Thank you.
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Spoke in favor of the motion, saying the bill is important nationally and that other states are watching it.
▶ Watch at 46:07Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to speak in favor of that motion. This is an important bill nationally. Uh, I, I presented on your bill at the NCSL, the tech committee, and many states are watching and, uh, want to know how they can improve, uh, their versions of this. Uh, so it's, I appreciate the, the improvements and, uh, and full, full support of this and, and many others are as well. So, thank you. Thank you.
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks why an $18 million loan for the Point of the Mountain is included in the bill and what it has to do with starter homes.
▶ Watch at 55:18Read what they said
I have a couple thanks. And I assume you're speaking to the second sub? Yes, the second sub. That's right. Um, a couple of things. There's an $18 million loan for point of the mountain in here. Why, why is that included? What does that have to do with starter homes? You read it carefully, Mr. Virus care.
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says he supports the concept and asks whether the loan interest rate will be above or below the federal funds rate.
▶ Watch at 57:22Read what they said
Does that answer your Question? Yes, thank you. And I'm supportive of the concept, uh, on these infrastructure loans. It says the, uh, interest rate will be within 1.5% of the federal funds rate. Is your anticipation. This will be above the federal funds rate or below the federal funds rate. Uh, and I mean, how, how big of a discount are we talking on these loans?
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether applications with more starter homes could receive a better interest rate.
▶ Watch at 59:18Read what they said
Great. And in, in terms of, uh, I, I realize you've given a lot of leeway to the board on how to run this. We don't wanna be too prescriptive, but is it anticipated that, uh, applications that have a higher preference or a higher number of starter homes could get a better interest rate than others? Or is it anticipated everybody will probably get the same interest rate on this?
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks where the funding for the $100 million would come from and whether it is new money.
▶ Watch at 1:00:40Read what they said
Great. Thank you. And, and last question on the, uh, the makeup of where this money is. I think you mentioned a hundred million dollars is the goal to, to start with where this is gonna come from, it says, uh, you know, the federal government could always provide an appropriation where it could come from private sources or appropriations by the legislature. Would that include, do you anticipate that current funds would be used or funds could be appropriated from rainy day funds or other housing funds for this? Is this all new money? No,
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether private sources could invest in the fund and receive a return.
▶ Watch at 1:02:12Read what they said
And you mentioned private sources. If, if there were private sources, does this means somebody could invest, be basically become an investor in this fund? Or is this anticipate like more grants? Point, point?
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Notes coordination with UDOT and the Utah Housing Corp and says his questions have been answered.
▶ Watch at 1:03:12Read what they said
Great. Thanks. And we've worked closely with the partners in UDOT around this, uh, you know, the Utah Housing Corp currently administers some of that money. You know, I think there's probably worth a discussion whether that money should be Sunset at some point. I think this is a better use for at least a hundred million dollars of it. Um, because again, it's gonna be going directly into very needed capacity infrastructure projects across the state. So does that Yes, That answers my question. Thank you very much. It's really helpful.
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Moves to favorably recommend HB 492 second substitute to the full House.
▶ Watch at 1:31:38Read what they said
I'd like to further, uh, make a motion that we favorably recommend HP 4 92 transportation infrastructure and housing amendments to the full house.
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says the effort is admirable and asks whether local tax increment zones would also be phased out.
▶ Watch at 1:46:21Read what they said
This is a lot. Uh, I appreciate your efforts and, um, your efforts to Sunset existing specialized zones. I, I want just to make sure I understood, uh, clarify this. First of all, it's admirable. I'm worried that you'll be successful because a new representative will come and think they have a great idea and create a new zone. Uh, that's likely to happen. But, so in your slide, you suggested you're only focusing on the state, um, tax increment financing, but it looks like you capture a number of local tax increment financing zones in this as well. That would be phased out in 2028. Is, is that correct?
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether the tool would be subject to the 60% cap.
▶ Watch at 1:47:44Read what they said
Are commercial development area and Correct. That will still be available. And will, will it be subject to the 60%?
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether funds could be used for purposes beyond the zone where a project is located.
▶ Watch at 1:59:31Read what they said
Correct. For example, I think you had great Salt Lake and you had other, other large purposes. Sure. Instead of only using that within the zone, recognizing that some of these projects have impacts outside the zone in which they're created
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether the percentage is required or optional and whether a deal could benefit a larger area.
▶ Watch at 1:59:57Read what they said
Um, and, And you're not requiring the percentage, you're saying this is, this is an option. You could structure the deal so that some benefit goes to a larger state rather than all the benefit just going to say one community for data center.
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks about the large load customer definition, which covers users seeking 100 megawatts or more.
▶ Watch at 2:00:24Read what they said
Okay. Uh, next question. You have a name, uh, something in here about large load customers, uh, which is addressing people that come in asking for a hundred megawatts or more of new electrical load? Yeah. Can you, can you talk to that? I don't quite understand what they're, what you're doing with that.
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether the bill prohibits incentives for large load customers such as data centers and whether local tax increment tools could still be used for them.
▶ Watch at 2:12:25Read what they said
Yeah, I had another question just to follow up on the large load. So I, I wanted, just to clarify, does, does this, it looks like this prohibits any incentives for large load customers such as data centers after, uh, May 6th of this year, unless it's done through this new tool, the regional help me regional significant development zone. So does this mean that locals will not be able to use any other tax increment tools to, um, I guess it, it include even small data centers as part of a redevelopment effort and everything basically has to go to this state tool if it involves, uh, a data center over a hundred megawatts watts?
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether the bill was intended to be a data center bill.
▶ Watch at 2:15:44Read what they said
if this wasn't supposed to be a data center bill, right? That's, that wasn't the intent of it actually. Right?
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says he agrees with the approach and asks whether the regional zone must start with local governments.
▶ Watch at 2:16:24Read what they said
Great. I appreciate that. And, and I agree, agree with your approach. My understanding, if I understand this bill, is the, the, the regionally significant development zone starts with the locals. So this can't be a state down. Correct. You can't have state economic, uh, economic development going out and recruiting data centers and putting 'em in somebody's community.
H.B. 507 State Coordination of Regional and Local Economic Development Projects Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says he likes the balance of local decision-making on regionally significant projects.
▶ Watch at 2:16:48Read what they said
All city driven. Okay. I, I, I like the balance because these are regionally significant decisions to have something like that in our, in a community. And it, and it affects all of us with the large load. So excited to see where this goes.
H.B. 493 Consumer Products Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether the department has spoken with companies and whether penalties would be large enough to change behavior given a store's profits. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 40:19Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wasn't, but I will take that to opportunity. Um, uh, question for you on these violations have, have they had a chance to speak to these companies to determine, uh, a violation needs to be, um, if, if the intent is to change behavior, it needs to be, um, practically more essentially than the profit they would make mm-hmm. Off of the, so is there any Correct. Is there any indication if we're talking about 48%, they, they, you know, depending on the size of the chain, they could be even a $10,000 penalty. Yeah. Uh, infrequently, uh, assessed may not deter. I'm just curious if that has
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Moves to adopt the first substitute to the bill.
▶ Watch at 39:54Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I would move to adopt, uh, sub, I thought it was three, but I guess it's sub one. First substitute.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Moves to adopt the first substitute to the bill.
▶ Watch at 39:54Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I would move to adopt, uh, sub, I thought it was three, but I guess it's sub one. First substitute.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Says committee discussion led to changes after title companies raised concerns about digital records and authentication, including added consultation with industry and an extra public input step; says the fiscal note for the substitute was approved.
▶ Watch at 40:11Read what they said
I would like to speak to that motion. Yes, I would. Thank you. We had a great discussion in, in committee and some of the title companies expressed, uh, the, some concern and they'd like a little bit more input in the process regarding digital records and authentication of, uh, individuals who submit digital records. So we modified the bill to, uh, make sure that there we, that there was consultation with industry, with title company, uh, a board specifically, and we added an extra step with additional public input that title companies could provide input, uh, during that process. And I'm also pleased to tell you that the fiscal note for sub three was just approved.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Says committee discussion raised title company concerns, so the substitute adds industry consultation and an additional public input step, and that the fiscal note for the substitute was approved.
▶ Watch at 40:14Read what they said
We had a great discussion in, in committee and some of the title companies expressed, uh, the, some concern and they'd like a little bit more input in the process regarding digital records and authentication of, uh, individuals who submit digital records. So we modified the bill to, uh, make sure that there we, that there was consultation with industry, with title company, uh, a board specifically, and we added an extra step with additional public input that title companies could provide input, uh, during that process. And I'm also pleased to tell you that the fiscal note for sub three was just approved.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Moves amendment one to the substitute and asks to speak to it.
▶ Watch at 41:35Read what they said
like to move amendment one to, to, uh, sub one in my name and speak to that.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Moves amendment one to the substitute, adding a phrase that the tax commission does not share its records with the state archivist, so the bill is not confused with tax records.
▶ Watch at 41:35Read what they said
like to move amendment one to, to, uh, sub one in my name and speak to that. Yeah, that motion's always, always I speak To it. Yes. So the, the tax commission digitally authenticates people when they submit their tax returns and they wanted just to add one small phrase in there to make sure that people weren't confused about, uh, this bill, which deals with county land records and has nothing to do with tax records. So this amendment says, unless otherwise prohibited by law, the, obviously the tax commission does not share their records with the state archivists like county recorders do with their records. So this just makes it a little bit cleaner that this has nothing …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Explains the amendment clarifies that the bill concerns county land records and not tax records, noting the tax commission does not share its records with the state archivist.
▶ Watch at 41:44Read what they said
So the, the tax commission digitally authenticates people when they submit their tax returns and they wanted just to add one small phrase in there to make sure that people weren't confused about, uh, this bill, which deals with county land records and has nothing to do with tax records. So this amendment says, unless otherwise prohibited by law, the, obviously the tax commission does not share their records with the state archivists like county recorders do with their records. So this just makes it a little bit cleaner that this has nothing to do with tax records.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Explains the bill sets a process for counties to accept digitally authenticated records, requiring a state archivist proposal, Department of Technology Services review, and state records committee approval, and says it does not approve any digital records.
▶ Watch at 42:53Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm pleased. So the purpose of, uh, HB three 19 is to set up a framework or guidelines for counties to, uh, accept digitally authenticated records as an alternative to the traditional method of putting a notary, uh, stamp on a, uh, paper record or, or other, uh, records that are submitted within, uh, notary. The history of this is, uh, in, we worked with the Blockchain coalition and other folks who want to move forward as, as, as we need to move more and more to the digital age. And we thought, what's the absolute, very minimal step we could take towards digital authentication of individuals who submit records or entities. And, uh, we realized, …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Presents the bill, describing a process in which counties may propose digital authentication of records, the state archivist and Department of Technology Services review security, and the State Records Committee approves any proposal; says the bill approves no digital records by itself.
▶ Watch at 42:53Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm pleased. So the purpose of, uh, HB three 19 is to set up a framework or guidelines for counties to, uh, accept digitally authenticated records as an alternative to the traditional method of putting a notary, uh, stamp on a, uh, paper record or, or other, uh, records that are submitted within, uh, notary. The history of this is, uh, in, we worked with the Blockchain coalition and other folks who want to move forward as, as, as we need to move more and more to the digital age. And we thought, what's the absolute, very minimal step we could take towards digital authentication of individuals who submit records or entities. And, uh, we realized, …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Says participation is entirely optional, paper records remain allowed, and digital options are only an alternative for counties.
▶ Watch at 45:29Read what they said
Absolutely, yes. There are absolutely no requirements and in fact, the bill prohibits, uh, county recorders from going digital only. So paper records, traditional records, are still, uh, allowed and mandated. The county records or the county optionally can consider a different way that might be more secure to accept records.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Says the process is opt-in, counties may not go digital only, and paper records remain allowed and required.
▶ Watch at 45:29Read what they said
Absolutely, yes. There are absolutely no requirements and in fact, the bill prohibits, uh, county recorders from going digital only. So paper records, traditional records, are still, uh, allowed and mandated. The county records or the county optionally can consider a different way that might be more secure to accept records.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Says the sponsor met with title companies twice, removed some concerning lines, and that county recorders agreed some concerns were valid.
▶ Watch at 46:37Read what they said
Thank you for the question and the opportunity to clarify. We invited title companies to meet twice. We, we met with them. We listened to concerns. We, the, the first sub is in response to the title companies to make sure they have input in the process. We remove some lines that they were concerned about. So we feel like, uh, this gives them a voice and that we've listened to their concerns and the county recorders also agreed that some of their concerns were valid.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Says title companies were invited to meet twice and their concerns were heard, the substitute responds to their input, some lines were removed, and county recorders agreed some concerns were valid.
▶ Watch at 46:37Read what they said
Thank you for the question and the opportunity to clarify. We invited title companies to meet twice. We, we met with them. We listened to concerns. We, the, the first sub is in response to the title companies to make sure they have input in the process. We remove some lines that they were concerned about. So we feel like, uh, this gives them a voice and that we've listened to their concerns and the county recorders also agreed that some of their concerns were valid.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Urges support, saying the bill sets a process to keep digital records secure as the state moves toward digital authentication.
▶ Watch at 47:23Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill sets up a process to make sure as we move to digital authentication, that it's done in a safe, secure way. Uh, that as we move forward with, uh, um, uh, verification to try to combat the frauds, we see that we potentially see in this age of AI that we have the right process to ensure that our records are protected and that we do this in a, uh, open public, uh, process. And I believe this will improve efficiencies and, uh, improve security for digital records in the future and urge your support. Thank you.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Gives closing summation that the bill sets a process for safe, secure digital authentication of records and urges support.
▶ Watch at 47:23Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This bill sets up a process to make sure as we move to digital authentication, that it's done in a safe, secure way. Uh, that as we move forward with, uh, um, uh, verification to try to combat the frauds, we see that we potentially see in this age of AI that we have the right process to ensure that our records are protected and that we do this in a, uh, open public, uh, process. And I believe this will improve efficiencies and, uh, improve security for digital records in the future and urge your support. Thank you.
H.B. 190 Child Care Business Tax Credit · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Expressed appreciation for the sponsor's effort to improve conditions for families and encourage more children.
▶ Watch at 1:24:12Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the sponsored effort to improve, uh, situation for families and, uh, encourage more children.
H.B. 387 Kratom Modifications · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Asked how the bill compares with Senate kratom bills from senators from Cedar City and Spanish Fork and what happens if those pass or fail.
▶ Watch at 1:25:46Read what they said
Could the good sponsor speak to how this legislation compares with other legislation coming from the Senate, from our colleague from Cedar City, and also our colleague from Spanish Fork? What happens if, if those pass and what happens if they don't pass? Could you provide that, uh, comparison?
H.B. 387 Kratom Modifications · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Asked whether the bill increases restrictions on kratom sales if the other bills do not pass.
▶ Watch at 1:27:12Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So would it be fair to say that you're putting additional restrictions on maybe not as far as some of these other bills, but if they are, if they don't pass, this still increases the restrictions on cred sales?
H.B. 346 Sexual Abuse of a Child Amendments · House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Presented HB 346 to clarify definitions related to sexual abuse of a child, including uncle, cohabitant, and partner, as part of the special trust standard.
▶ Watch at 53:12Read what they said
Representative Cutler HB 3 46, sexual Abuse of a Child Amendments. Whenever you're ready. Oh, sorry. I gotta Turn you on. Test, test, test. 1, 2, 3. Great. Thank you. It's nice to be back in the law enforcement committee. Haven't been here for, uh, all year. Uh, appreciate the opportunity to be with you. Uh, HB 3 46 amends some definitions that relate to the sexual abuse of a child, for clarification. And my understanding is there was a, a court case that Uintah the appellate, uh, court state versus Francis, that, uh, addressed some of these issues. And the concern was that there were certain words that were not defined well in our Utah State Code, including uncle …
H.B. 42 School Cybersecurity Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the bill is tied to the RFA for cybersecurity grants handled by the cybersecurity center, which would bring in schools and LEAs.
▶ Watch at 27:22Read what they said
Thank you. Is, is this, uh, policy tied to the, uh, RFA? We heard earlier, uh, we have a program for local and, uh, cybersecurity grants that are handled by the cybersecurity center, and there's an effort to bring in the schools and the LEAs to be a part of that program.
H.B. 42 School Cybersecurity Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks how the bill would be funded if the RFA is approved or not approved.
▶ Watch at 27:44Read what they said
Uh, so the, this would be, uh, to follow on that this would be funded as if, if that RFA was approved, and if that RFA is not approved, what happens?
H.B. 42 School Cybersecurity Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks how the cost was reduced from the first version of the bill.
▶ Watch at 28:39Read what they said
The thank you Mr. Speaker. The, the first version had a very, uh, a multimillion dollar cost to it. Right. How did, how did you re reduce that By, uh, taking out the services but keeping the standards?
H.B. 42 School Cybersecurity Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks about the division of roles between UETN and the Cybersecurity Center.
▶ Watch at 29:32Read what they said
And the, um, thank you. Is there a delineation between the role of UETN and the Cybersecurity Center?
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Presents H.B. 320, which expands the agreements the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy can enter into to include other state agencies, adds joint interpretation agreements on how state law applies to AI, and authorizes the office to audit and renew agreements, and asks for support.
▶ Watch at 37:06Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. The art of, uh, office of Artificial Intelligence policy was created a couple of years ago, and after working for a couple of years, it's time for some updates. Uh, the, the most important, uh, update is in the type of agreements that the office can make, uh, and is authorized to enter into. Originally they anticipated the regulatory mitigation agreements, which would mean, uh, a company would come and work with them and they would mitigate, uh, uh, any effects as long as they were working in the AI sandbox together. And, and that continues, but there's a couple of important changes. One, instead of just agreements with the Office of AI Policy and the …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks to yield to a question from the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 1:30:29Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker with a sponsor yield to a question. Representative Teuscher will yield to a question.
H.B. 530 State Permitting Council · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asks the sponsor about permits for economic development and says he would prefer fewer permits, but the bill helps people navigate the process.
▶ Watch at 39:45Read what they said
If, if, if he was a fan of the economic development, uh, permits that will be, uh, talked about in this, in this bill, I, uh, um, you guys seen that parks and rec show where says, I can do what I want. That, that's what I'm a fan of. Just that's, I'd like no permits, but, but this will help, uh, people to, to navigate the process that, that they need to for, whether it's for their business or, or, or, uh, whatever they're, they're trying to accomplish.
H.B. 530 State Permitting Council · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Moves to favorably recommend HB 530 on behalf of the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 40:23Read what they said
Well, with, with that, Mr. Chair, I'll go ahead and make a motion on behalf of this sponsor that we favorably recommend HB five 30 state permitting counsel.
H.B. 249 Federal Funds Modifications · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asked why the bill sends the review to EAC rather than to the full Legislature, and how the process would work.
▶ Watch at 44:47Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, just could you speak about the recommendation to go to EAC as opposed to a wider, what, what, how do you see, how do you envision this process coming, uh, happening and, and why alert EAC and not the full legislator legislature?
H.B. 249 Federal Funds Modifications · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Moved to favorably recommend the first substitute of HB 249 to the full House.
▶ Watch at 46:35Read what they said
Mr. Chair. I am happy to, uh, favorably recommend HB 2 49 first substitute, uh, to the full house federal funds modification.
H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asked whether everyone required to file a conflict of interest disclosure would answer these new questions.
▶ Watch at 52:06Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to clarify and confirm the intent is that anybody who files a conflict of interest disclosure would, uh, answer these questions and it would be added to every, uh, uh, person that, that is required to file a conflict of interest disclosure.
H.B. 446 Conflict of Interest Disclosure Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asked whether officials who file annually would answer the new questions each year.
▶ Watch at 52:26Read what they said
So anyone who's currently midterm, you know, we are never midterm 'cause we're every two years. But, um, then they would, well I guess we all file annually anyway, so Yeah, they would file annually, right? We, we,
H.B. 504 Political Advertising Modifications · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Gives a hypothetical in which three candidates use the same template or AI-generated design and asks how the disclosure rule would treat each one.
▶ Watch at 1:10:12Read what they said
Thank, thank you. First, I wanted to apologize when we spoke earlier, I reference Representative FA Bill from 2024. Oh, I thought it passed. It did not pass. So the, the language in that is, is not in code. So I was, I was wrong there. I, I apologize. But let's take a, uh, hypothetical situation. Mm-hmm. So, hypothetically, representative Malloy, uh, has a campaign template. He goes to Canva or Adobe, uh, Photoshop, and chooses a template that has a, uh, a logo, the red and white colors, and puts his name on it. Mm-hmm. And uses that in a political advertisement. And Representative MacPherson, uh, also goes and uses the same template and puts his name on the …
H.B. 504 Political Advertising Modifications · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Shows Adobe Stock images filtered for AI-generated content and says audio and video already require disclosure, while print does not.
▶ Watch at 1:14:25Read what they said
You good representative? Uh, yeah. So, so looking at these, you you were demonstrating, sorry. So what's the, what's the point that you want? So I was trying to see difference here. It didn't as a double screen, so I apologize. Oh. Um, and some of, and I know in some of these they do have, which ones are AI generated? Um, and which ones are not? I can't remember. I'm sorry. I meant to, I, when you were talking about Adobe, I was bringing it up. So let me see. But they do have a filter on here where it does Oh, generated AI only here it is. So if you look at, it's gonna pull it up right …
H.B. 504 Political Advertising Modifications · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Identifies two issues to resolve: knowing AI use by a candidate, and language about intent to copy or deceive.
▶ Watch at 1:26:16Read what they said
So I, I I think the intent here is, is very good and I, after having this conversation, I can see some really bandages. So I see two issues that I'd like to see resolved. Number one, that a candidate knowingly uses ai. I think the case of if you hire a graphic designer, you're not gonna know what they do. A good, a good graphic designer might tell you, but if you hire someone over the internet Yeah. Uh, to, to design a logo for you, very inexpensive like, like many folks do, especially if they're don't have many resources or they're just starting a campaign, they might go and just buy something over the internet. Right. So I …
H.B. 504 Political Advertising Modifications · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Spoke on the bill. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:27:55Read what they said
Yeah. So thank you. Yes. Alright. But I, I would love to create a lot of political ads for all of you guys with AI just saying A, a a anything from the sponsor you wanna
H.B. 302 Government Speech Neutrality Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asks whether individuals who do not speak for a government entity face any restrictions on their speech.
▶ Watch at 1:37:08Read what they said
So an indi, if I may continue an individual who might be not express the views of the majority of a, uh, of a government entity, not the official views. Can, you would say there are no restrictions on their free speech? I would say that this bill has no restrictions on it. If there, if there's other, there may have others. Yeah, there may be others out there
H.B. 454 Public Assistance Fraud Amendments · House Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asked for examples of the public assistance the bill is intended to address and what it would involve.
▶ Watch at 26:24Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Deter. Um, I just, just, can you just gimme some examples of public assistance that you're kind of talking about? I just like, yeah. What would this entail? Yeah. Um, I'm just trying, try to be careful here. Um, yeah.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Explains the substitute, including disclosure rules for commercial sellers, helmet fine changes, an optional safety class fee, and a driver's license pathway for high-powered devices.
▶ Watch at 48:19Read what they said
Yes, I would. Thank you. This substitute incorporates a number of the suggestions from my colleagues, including, uh, that only the commercial seller of an e-bike or an eev device, uh, has to disclose certain, uh, or put a sticker, uh, with a notice on that so that private sellers, uh, are not subject to that to requirement. Uh, it, it updates the maximum fine for a helmet violation. In current law, our current law does not distinguish between an e-bike helmet violation and a motorcycle helmet violation. This leaves the motorcycle helmet violation as an infraction, but if you are riding a, an e-bike or a scooter or one of the lower power devices, then the, it's a maximum, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Explains that the substitute adds changes on commercial seller disclosure stickers, helmet fines for e-bikes and scooters, an optional safety class fee, and driving-license rules for riding high-powered devices.
▶ Watch at 48:19Read what they said
Yes, I would. Thank you. This substitute incorporates a number of the suggestions from my colleagues, including, uh, that only the commercial seller of an e-bike or an eev device, uh, has to disclose certain, uh, or put a sticker, uh, with a notice on that so that private sellers, uh, are not subject to that to requirement. Uh, it, it updates the maximum fine for a helmet violation. In current law, our current law does not distinguish between an e-bike helmet violation and a motorcycle helmet violation. This leaves the motorcycle helmet violation as an infraction, but if you are riding a, an e-bike or a scooter or one of the lower power devices, then the, it's a maximum, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Describes the bill's goals for e-bike and scooter rules, device classes, a high-powered electric device category, and a dual path for youth ages 12 and 13 to ride independently.
▶ Watch at 50:09Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, colleagues. I appreciate, uh, the opportunity to present this currently in our regulations around e-bikes, scoters and e motorcycle. We have a mishmash of regulations. They're very, and that has led to inconsistent enforcement and misunderstandings among parents and riders about what is allowed and what is not allowed. This, uh, uh, attempts to simplify those regulations, give parents better information, and update the regulations for the new waves of devices that we see out there. It also, the intent is to give parents, uh, more information on making a good decision on what kind of device to buy and to promote youth Independence. We want more kids riding bikes, more kids off their screens and outside. …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Describes the bill's goal of simplifying e-bike, scooter and e-motorcycle rules, sets device classes, requires a driver's license for high-powered devices, and creates supervised or certified riding options for youth 12 to 13 on highways.
▶ Watch at 50:09Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, colleagues. I appreciate, uh, the opportunity to present this currently in our regulations around e-bikes, scoters and e motorcycle. We have a mishmash of regulations. They're very, and that has led to inconsistent enforcement and misunderstandings among parents and riders about what is allowed and what is not allowed. This, uh, uh, attempts to simplify those regulations, give parents better information, and update the regulations for the new waves of devices that we see out there. It also, the intent is to give parents, uh, more information on making a good decision on what kind of device to buy and to promote youth Independence. We want more kids riding bikes, more kids off their screens and outside. …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Says the 20 mph limit refers to throttle-only speed on a flat surface, and pedal-assist bikes have different limits.
▶ Watch at 54:41Read what they said
Thanks. That's an, that's an excellent question. So if, if you're riding a pedal assist bike, which is a class one or a class three, then that, uh, is, uh, the, we're not con there, there's, there are li limited restrictions on that. What we're concerned about is devices that can go more than 20 miles an hour via a throttle on its own power on a flat surface. So it's defined as a flat surface with no pedaling. It can go more than 20 miles an hour. That would fall under the category of a, a high powered, uh, electric device.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Says highway in the bill includes any paved public street or state highway.
▶ Watch at 55:33Read what they said
Thank you. Excellent question. Highway is defined. It could be a city, street or a, a state highway. Any, any paved, uh, public highway or, or public street, city or state. Okay,
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Says the certificate applies to ages 8 to 15, and those 16 and older are assumed to have enough training.
▶ Watch at 56:02Read what they said
Between eight and 15 years old, which is currently, the, the restrictions on most of these devices are between eight and 15. Once you're 16, uh, the, the assumption is you've had enough training, hopefully you've been through some driver's ed or have a driver's license, and you're, you're on your own if you're 16 or older.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Says the bill does not address interactions between cyclists and vehicles.
▶ Watch at 58:22Read what they said
This bill does not address the thorny issue of cyclists, uh, and, and their interaction with, with vehicles.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Responds that the bill does not address cyclists' interaction with vehicles.
▶ Watch at 58:22Read what they said
This bill does not address the thorny issue of cyclists, uh, and, and their interaction with, with vehicles.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Says current law allows only those 8 and older to operate these devices, and the bill does not change that; children under 8 are not authorized to operate them on a highway.
▶ Watch at 59:00Read what they said
So, uh, that's an excellent question. My, my understanding is that current law, uh, also o only allows those eight and older to, uh, operate electric assisted scooters or electric bikes. This does not change that. It clarifies that, uh, as, as, uh, those younger than eight are not au uh, are not authorized to operate electric vehicles on a highway. That doesn't mean they can't ride a bike. Uh, only electric, uh, vehicles or electric bikes and electric scooters on a highway in traffic. My, uh, so that's the answer.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Says the certificate may be printed or downloaded, and officers could stop riders for it only as a secondary offense.
▶ Watch at 1:00:05Read what they said
Great question. The intent is to set up the program just like we do our outdoor recreation, uh, vehicles that, uh, a either a printed certificate or a downloaded certificate you could download to a phone would be available. The expectation, or my my understanding is the language is, uh, that they're, they're have to be in That they have earned that certificate. Uh, obviously there could be a question of, of whether they're carrying it with them. The, this, the certificate is a secondary, they could only be stopped if it was a, and asked about that as a secondary offense, not as a primary offense. So officers can't just stop and quiz people if they have, uh, certificates, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Explains that certificates can be printed or downloaded, that officers may check them only as a secondary offense, and that the program is meant to educate.
▶ Watch at 1:00:05Read what they said
Great question. The intent is to set up the program just like we do our outdoor recreation, uh, vehicles that, uh, a either a printed certificate or a downloaded certificate you could download to a phone would be available. The expectation, or my my understanding is the language is, uh, that they're, they're have to be in That they have earned that certificate. Uh, obviously there could be a question of, of whether they're carrying it with them. The, this, the certificate is a secondary, they could only be stopped if it was a, and asked about that as a secondary offense, not as a primary offense. So officers can't just stop and quiz people if they have, uh, certificates, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Opposes the motion to circle, saying the third substitute addresses the concern and that he would be glad to be alerted to any change.
▶ Watch at 1:01:47Read what they said
Uh, I, I would resist that I, my understanding is on the third substitute that some language was, was added to address that. Um, um, I can try to find the line 1905. I would also add that there is, there is no change in the, to my knowledge in the regulations around the minimum age and, and writing on a, uh, a multi-lane highway versus a, a road or, and, and there was no discussion about changing that language. So if, if there is a change, I'd love to be alerted to that
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Opposes the motion to circle, saying the third substitute addresses the concern and offering to review the language.
▶ Watch at 1:01:47Read what they said
Uh, I, I would resist that I, my understanding is on the third substitute that some language was, was added to address that. Um, um, I can try to find the line 1905. I would also add that there is, there is no change in the, to my knowledge in the regulations around the minimum age and, and writing on a, uh, a multi-lane highway versus a, a road or, and, and there was no discussion about changing that language. So if, if there is a change, I'd love to be alerted to that
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Gives closing remarks urging support, saying the bill increases freedom and safety and that he will address any ambiguity about youth riding on freeways.
▶ Watch at 1:07:24Read what they said
Representative Cutler for summation Call colleagues, uh, I believe that this bill increases, uh, uh, freedom and allows more kids to be off screens and riding bikes. If there is, I I will speak with the drafting attorney and make sure if there's any ambiguity about riding a, a youth riding on a freeway, I would commit to fixing that. Uh, if, if there is an issue with that, and I would urge your support. I think this improves safety and improves freedom for people riding, uh, bikes and the classifications to capture the new types of devices, I think are very important. Uh, so I would appreciate your support on this as would, uh, uh, our local communities.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Gives summation, saying the bill expands freedom and safety for riders and that he will address any ambiguity about youth riding on freeways.
▶ Watch at 1:07:27Read what they said
Call colleagues, uh, I believe that this bill increases, uh, uh, freedom and allows more kids to be off screens and riding bikes. If there is, I I will speak with the drafting attorney and make sure if there's any ambiguity about riding a, a youth riding on a freeway, I would commit to fixing that. Uh, if, if there is an issue with that, and I would urge your support. I think this improves safety and improves freedom for people riding, uh, bikes and the classifications to capture the new types of devices, I think are very important. Uh, so I would appreciate your support on this as would, uh, uh, our local communities.
H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks the sponsor to review how restrictions differ between adult and minor users of chatbots.
▶ Watch at 2:21:32Read what they said
Thank you. I also appreciate the sponsor's. Good work on this. I have a, uh, a couple of of questions. Maybe first, could you review again, the, the, the differences between an adult, uh, and restrictions for adult interacting with a chat bot and a minor interacting with a chat bot? How, how those restrictions are will be different? Sure.
H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks about monitoring, testing, and disclosure requirements for safety-critical situations.
▶ Watch at 2:23:51Read what they said
Thank you. And next question is, is around the safety critical situations. And I think this is an important part of the bill that you included, that you're asking these chat bots to identify situations that are, uh, critical to an individual safety. And if I understand it, you're asking them to monitor those. Are there also testing requirements, uh, and disclosure requirements around those? And could either of you speak to those? You wanna speak to that?
H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks which path developers and chatbot suppliers are likely to take.
▶ Watch at 2:25:11Read what they said
And, and which path do you think most developers, uh, and chatbot suppliers will take?
H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks why suicide-related resources are required only for minors and not for all users.
▶ Watch at 2:26:18Read what they said
So you've got a great provision in here that, that says, if a user expresses suicidal ideation, suicide, or health or self harm, the chat bot may provide resources including a referral or crisis information. We do this on our, on our, you know, if, if somebody calls a suicide line, but that's only for minors, why not provide that for everybody?
H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Expresses concern that vulnerable adults may forget they are talking to a chatbot and could be at risk. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 2:27:09Read what they said
My concern is for vulnerable adults. Uh, we have, uh, a a number of cases well publicized in the media with vulnerable adults that may not be able to understand, uh, um, that at times that there, or they may forget that they're interacting with a chat bot and, and, uh, presents a clear and present danger to them. We, we talked at length on this, um, and debated back and forth on what to include.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says a minor substitute reflecting suggestions from members of his caucus is being prepared and asks to wait a few minutes for it to arrive.
▶ Watch at 1:17:40Read what they said
Yes, please. We have, uh, a minor substitute that has some of the suggestions made by members of our caucus. And, uh, I don't think you have that in your possession, so we'd like to wait a few minutes until that arrives.
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Presents the bill, which adds signature gatherer training, notifies voters of signature verification, creates a condensed packet with a QR code and seven signatures per page, adds plain-language descriptions, revises the attestation language, and removes only invalid lines instead of spoiling whole packets.
▶ Watch at 1:18:18Read what they said
You, Mr. Speaker. Uh, during the interim se uh, session, the government ops committee worked on, uh, some of the issues that we've heard regarding signature gathering, and we, uh, spent some time talking about ways to improve the signature gathering process. Uh, I was assigned to, uh, run the bill with the recommendations from the committee. Uh, in addition, there were two other members, uh, uh, that had bills open on this issue. We met together and consolidated all those improvements into one bill, which you see as as house bill 32. There are five things that are important in this bill that this bill does. First, uh, this bill requires training for anyone that provides, that does signature …
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says the substitute would reduce signature lines per page from seven to four and affect the formatting improvements, and says he supports the goal and will work on it.
▶ Watch at 1:25:01Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the good, uh, representative from from Central Utah. And, and the idea on, on encouraging people to, um, speak to their representative and get involved. Uh, however, this introduces some problems, uh, that I'd like the body to be aware of. Uh, and, and I, I believe his intent is good, and I support the intent and would be happy to work with him to figure out if there's a way to include this. Currently, this would, um, cause problems with our efforts to get more signatures on a page because of the way it was formatted instead of seven signatures on a page. This would only allow four signatures on a page. Is, …
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says the committees reached consensus on improving signature gathering and verification with clerks and election offices, and asks for support.
▶ Watch at 1:29:42Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, the, uh, committees and legislators involved in this have done a lot of work on this. It's, we've come to consensus on ways to improve the signature gathering and verification process working with the clerks and election offices. Uh, we, we would appreciate your support and I'm, I'm happy to work with those, uh, who want to make improvements in the future. Thank you.
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says committees and legislators reached consensus with clerks and election offices on ways to improve signature gathering and verification, and asks for the House's support.
▶ Watch at 1:29:42Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, the, uh, committees and legislators involved in this have done a lot of work on this. It's, we've come to consensus on ways to improve the signature gathering and verification process working with the clerks and election offices. Uh, we, we would appreciate your support and I'm, I'm happy to work with those, uh, who want to make improvements in the future. Thank you.
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says committees and legislators reached consensus on ways to improve the signature gathering and verification process with clerks and election offices, and asks for the House's support.
▶ Watch at 1:29:42Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, the, uh, committees and legislators involved in this have done a lot of work on this. It's, we've come to consensus on ways to improve the signature gathering and verification process working with the clerks and election offices. Uh, we, we would appreciate your support and I'm, I'm happy to work with those, uh, who want to make improvements in the future. Thank you.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Asks the chair for permission to hand out a fact sheet and to have an expert witness join him.
▶ Watch at 1:52:29Read what they said
I'm shedding, Uh, I have a, uh, one pager fact sheet if I'd like to hand out, if that's okay. Madam Chair? Yes. Stewart, do you wanna be available? I'm gonna ask a, uh, expert witness to come and, and join me. Uh, Madam chair to that.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Presents HB 303, describing its changes to mental health therapy orders, a definition of coercive control, custody evaluator rosters, and attorney fee provisions, and says the expert witness can answer detailed questions.
▶ Watch at 1:52:58Read what they said
Thank you. HB 3 0 3, uh, continues. The work started a few years ago with, with M's Law in improving our court processes for those suffering from, uh, domestic violence and high conflict divorce cases, uh, with the ultimate goal of, uh, keeping kids safe and giving them effective care as much as possible there. This bill does four main things, uh, number one, and, and on, um, Madam Chair, I'm speaking to the, the, the first substitute. The difference between the, the first substitute and the original bill is after we came out with the original bill, we met with, uh, the second district, uh, a number of, uh, members of the, uh, the court commissioners and judges. …
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Defers the question to the expert witness, Stewart Ralphs.
▶ Watch at 1:57:53Read what they said
Uh, I'm gonna consider that a rule that a hard question And ask Stuart if he could address that.
H.B. 303 Family Court Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Thanks the committee for its support and says he welcomes suggestions to improve the bill.
▶ Watch at 2:18:01Read what they said
I appreciate the support of the committee. I think these are recognized best practices and always welcome, uh, suggestions to improve it. I think our, our, all of our shared goal is to improve the family court experience for, for those who, uh, must go through it.
H.B. 99 Eyewear Sales Tax Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asked to yield to questions from the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 27:55Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker with a sponsor yield to questions Representative Maloy, we yield to a series of questions.
H.B. 99 Eyewear Sales Tax Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asked about the fiscal note and how the bill relates to the transportation investment fund.
▶ Watch at 28:04Read what they said
Uh, could, could you explain the, the fiscal note and how eyewear relates to the transportation investment fund?
H.B. 99 Eyewear Sales Tax Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Summarized that the bill would reduce funding for roads and other sales-tax-funded items.
▶ Watch at 28:31Read what they said
I see. So this would have an impact on less funding for roads and I guess all the things that a sales tax would fund is, is probably the explanation. Thank you.
H.B. 141 International Money Transmission Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks whether the bill affects cryptocurrency or stablecoin remittances, and whether legally authorized workers, such as tech workers, are covered.
▶ Watch at 53:20Read what they said
Thank you with the sponsor yield to an unlimited number of questions. Representative gracious, we yield to a unlimited series of questions. No, but I'll give him one. Got one question representative. My question has two parts. The first part, does this have any impact on using cryptocurrency or stable coins to remit money? And the second part, if there is a person legally authorized to work in the United States, for example, many of our tech workers, are they under this bill? Are they no longer allowed to do money? Uh, international money trends? Uh, transmissions.
H.B. 141 International Money Transmission Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield to another question about the third part of the first question.
▶ Watch at 54:13Read what they said
But is would the good sponsor allow a third part to the first question? Representative gracious, will you yield to another question? You
H.B. 141 International Money Transmission Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks what form of identification non-citizen authorized workers without a U.S. passport could use.
▶ Watch at 54:25Read what they said
What form of of identification if they do not have a United States passport? If, if they're a authorized to to work here but not a US citizen, what form of identification could be used to to do that?
H.B. 158 Unlawful Tracking Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield to a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 2:25:05Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Representative Owens will yield to a series of questions.
H.B. 158 Unlawful Tracking Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks whether high school students who toss tracking tags into a classmate's car as a prank without malicious intent would technically be guilty of a class A misdemeanor.
▶ Watch at 2:25:12Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, there may or may not be a high school in my area where students, including the same age as my son, that may not have their frontal lobes completely, uh, mature, have a common practice of tossing air tags into another student's car. And you, they use that to, to track their friends for fun, uh, in, in this and not with malicious intent, uh, in that scenario. Uh, are, are they technic if they, are they technically guilty of a, of a class A misdemeanor?
H.B. 158 Unlawful Tracking Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks whether safeguards could distinguish youth pranks from malicious tracking, and expresses concern about ruining someone's record for conduct they did not know was a crime.
▶ Watch at 2:26:13Read what they said
But, uh, are there any safeguards that would help distinguish between, uh, youth who are, who are doing this as a, um, knowingly and, uh, but not as in a malicious intent versus, uh, the, the malicious in intent that you have here? Uh, the, the prosecutor could, uh, show some judgment and not, not, I, I would think that most law enforcement officers would not, should I press charges in this type of a scenario, but I'm concerned that this, this case is happen, allegedly has happened, and that we don't want to, uh, uh, over, over, uh, ruin someone's record for an activity like this that they didn't know was, was such a crime. But I appreciate bringing …
H.B. 184 Small Lots and Starter Homes Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Supports the concept of a starter home request process but raises concerns about vested rights, deemed legislative adoption and possible lawsuits, and suggests a variance-type approach.
▶ Watch at 1:10:28Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I wanna commend this sponsor for taking on such a rough issue. I like the idea, the concept of how could a city consider a request quest without and and ha from an individual without the individual spending thousands of dollars, uh, to prepare a site plan or spend a lot of money to prepare a rezone request, which, um, some of those can be expensive and time con time consuming. So I really like that idea. But there are also some challenges, uh, in my opinion that the, there's a particular challenge line 2 45, and I'm looking at the original or two four, um, 2 42, where it, it basically …
H.B. 184 Small Lots and Starter Homes Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Suggests longer response windows and a way to keep the process moving without vested zoning, and offers to help work on changes.
▶ Watch at 1:53:09Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I think this is a healthy discussion, and I, again, like the concept of bringing forward a, a request for starter home, that that doesn't have to meet every single, uh, uh, element of the, the current zone. So what, what would I, what could get me from a no to a yes, I'd be extending the five day response to 10 days, extending the 30 day window to 45 days, and figuring out how can we keep the process moving for a request without providing a vested zoning, right? That might open up for legal liability. So, uh, I don't have a great answer to that, but, uh, I'm willing to, um, push, push, …
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Asks whether the $10 million fiscal note figure is a one-time amount or an annual percentage of the tax.
▶ Watch at 2:06:00Read what they said
Could, could you just take a minute and clarify the, the fiscal note this $10 million is, is that, that's not a one time, that's the percentage of the tax that would happen every year.
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Confirms that $10 million is the maximum amount rather than a fixed sum.
▶ Watch at 2:06:26Read what they said
Okay. So it may not be That's just the max It could be Exactly. Got it.
H.B. 382 Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Asks what the main differences are between a bankruptcy trustee's powers to distribute assets and the powers of the assignee under this process.
▶ Watch at 2:25:53Read what they said
Just a quick question for you, or maybe Mr. Smith. Could, could, uh, or what is the main difference between the powers of a bankruptcy trustee to distribute the assets and the, the person here that's going to determine the, the assignment agreement. Is they function similar or, and what's the difference in the powers?
H.B. 382 Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Moves to favorably recommend HB 382 to the full House, with a lawyer on the committee to handle the details.
▶ Watch at 2:27:48Read what they said
He's gonna let, uh, one of our lawyers do it, but I'll go ahead and favorably recommend HB 3 82 uniform assignment of be benefit of creditors amendments, uh, to the full house.
H.B. 288 Voting Registration Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says he supports the concept of the bill and asks whether the substitute's third-party contracting provision relates only to hunting and fishing licenses or would allow auditing the whole voter database.
▶ Watch at 21:27Read what they said
Uh, I su I support the, uh, the concept of the underlying bill. I wanted to ask a question about, uh, the, what, uh, the substitute information you just put in where the Lieutenant Governor or the legislative auditor general can contract with a third party that specializes in voter registration systems. Are you aware of other cases? I i, is, is this element strictly related to the, the new effort for hunting and fishing licenses? Or is this, uh, ability to audit and, and hire someone else to investigate our voter records? Completely outside. Uh, and, and the, does this mean the whole voter database?
H.B. 288 Voting Registration Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Supports the underlying concept but asks whether the substitute's third-party contracting provision is limited to the hunting and fishing registration effort or extends to auditing the voter database.
▶ Watch at 21:27Read what they said
Uh, I su I support the, uh, the concept of the underlying bill. I wanted to ask a question about, uh, the, what, uh, the substitute information you just put in where the Lieutenant Governor or the legislative auditor general can contract with a third party that specializes in voter registration systems. Are you aware of other cases? I i, is, is this element strictly related to the, the new effort for hunting and fishing licenses? Or is this, uh, ability to audit and, and hire someone else to investigate our voter records? Completely outside. Uh, and, and the, does this mean the whole voter database?
H.B. 288 Voting Registration Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says the answer did not address his question, asks for an example, and asks the sponsor to continue yielding.
▶ Watch at 22:34Read what they said
I understand that, uh, the answer, it wasn't to the answer to the question I asked. Uh, which I, the, can you gimme an example where we, Oh, hang on just a minute. Representative Lee, will you continue to yield to a question?
H.B. 288 Voting Registration Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says the answer did not address his question and asks for an example of similar third-party contracts.
▶ Watch at 22:34Read what they said
I understand that, uh, the answer, it wasn't to the answer to the question I asked. Uh, which I, the, can you gimme an example where we, Oh, hang on just a minute.
H.B. 288 Voting Registration Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Asks whether other election or audit offices contract with third parties and give them full access to data records.
▶ Watch at 22:52Read what they said
Representative Cutler are, Are there other examples where, uh, our elections office or, uh, the legislative auditor general, uh, contracts with a third party and gives them complete access to our data records for analysis?
H.B. 288 Voting Registration Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Asks whether other elections or legislative auditor contracts give third parties full access to data records.
▶ Watch at 22:52Read what they said
Representative Cutler are, Are there other examples where, uh, our elections office or, uh, the legislative auditor general, uh, contracts with a third party and gives them complete access to our data records for analysis?
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Rep. Cutler presented the substitute bill, which would let municipalities and special service districts place unpaid bills on a property's tax bill as a lien, with added limits on fees and interest and notice to property owners, and asked for support.
▶ Watch at 36:17Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to present this bill again, this time with improvements. New and improved. Uh, currently if, uh, an an individual or a private contractor who's done work on a property can file a lien against a property for an unpaid bill after a certain period of delinquency, a municipality or a special service district can also do that if someone doesn't pay their bill. This is a, a standard fundamental thing that we have in our state. What this proposes is a more efficient way to collect payment from somebody who has not paid their bill for a a a period of time. And that is a, uh, the same me mechanism that …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Rep. Cutler responded that his understanding is the statute of limitations is four years, so older debts could not be collected this way.
▶ Watch at 40:15Read what they said
Yes, Mr. Speaker, thank you for that. And thanks to my, uh, good neighbor for reminding me that the statute of limitations, I believe is four years. So if a city went back or a special service district and tried to collect a past debt that is more than four years old, they would, they would not be able to do that is my understanding.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
In closing, Rep. Cutler said the bill does not change existing landlord and tenant law, is meant to make debt collection more efficient, and asked for support.
▶ Watch at 40:49Read what they said
I appreciate my colleagues' concerns about, uh, landlords versus tenants. This does not change existing law or policy on landlords or tenants. Is is my understanding. My understanding is current state law says that the landlord or is, is responsible for sewer and water regardless of whether the, uh, tenant pays that. And, and they have to get a approval to sign that off to the tenant. The law is not clear on storm drain, uh, utilities. I'll, I'll give him that. So there's no attempt to change that? No, no attempt to try to shift burden from one to another. It's just an attempt to make it a, a more efficient way to collect debts, which would save taxpayers …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Supports the bill, saying government should adopt available technology that is more efficient and protects privacy.
▶ Watch at 1:09:55Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also wanna rise in support. Sometimes government needs a little push to, to move forward and use the technology that's available, that's more efficient, that protects privacy and improves process. And I think this is one of those case. And I commend the sponsor for his work.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Supports the bill, saying it uses available technology that is more efficient and protects privacy.
▶ Watch at 1:09:55Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also wanna rise in support. Sometimes government needs a little push to, to move forward and use the technology that's available, that's more efficient, that protects privacy and improves process. And I think this is one of those case. And I commend the sponsor for his work.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Presents H.B. 319 as a first step allowing counties to propose secure digital methods of authenticating people submitting records, as an alternative to notarization, with State Archivist approval after consulting the Department of Technology Services.
▶ Watch at 1:32:53Read what they said
Thank you very much. It's great to be back in the political subdivisions committee. I I missed the great, Great to have you here representative. Great discussions that we had in the past. And so a couple of months ago, or maybe it was this summer, I had, I had occasionally attend some of the Utah Blockchain Coalition meetings. And after meeting, uh, uh, some folks there, uh, uh, one of our, one of our good county recorders, um, from Illa, uh, had a list, uh, brought to me a list of records related ideas that he thought could help us move records forward into a digital, uh, area. We, we already do accept digital records, but had a list …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Responds that title companies raised concerns, that insurability must be addressed, and that he is willing to add language or meet again with title companies while keeping specific methods out of state code.
▶ Watch at 1:50:19Read what they said
I think the, uh, as we met with the title companies, uh, last week and have had ongoing, they've raised a number of issues. Well, what if this happened? What if that happened? What, what are the possibilities that could happen as we move towards more digital records and especially digital authentication? I think some of those are real concerns. The, uh, I think especially obviously we need it for, this is intended to cover more than just real estate records, but the, if, if we're doing a real estate transaction, it needs to be insurable. And I'd be happy to, um, see if we could put some language in here that would say, before approving, you know, the digital …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Responds that the issues should be discussed during the process to find an approach that works with title companies and asks for suggestions.
▶ Watch at 1:57:34Read what they said
Well, I think that's why it's important that during this process we, we discuss the various options and fi find something that will work with the title companies, which I think is the intent of the process. Uh, if you have suggestions on how to do that, I'm open to them. We've asked for those suggestions.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Says the title companies issue was raised for the first time at this meeting and should be discussed.
▶ Watch at 1:57:51Read what they said
Have you met with the title companies? Yes. And, And, and that this, I don't think that specific issue was raised in our first meeting. It was raised today for, for the first time, but I think it's a very valid issue and, and we should discuss it.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Gives closing remarks saying the bill allows a step-by-step process with safeguards and offers to keep working with title companies, recorders, and archivists on approval language.
▶ Watch at 1:58:11Read what they said
Uh, I, I appreciate, uh, the, the, the support. I think this allows us to take baby steps forward with a lot of guardrails and training wheels. And, uh, we have a lot, I have a lot of trust in our state archivists and our, uh, that they will not approve a mechanism that that is not feasible. Uh, but we must move forward. We must start this process and, and go down the road and find, because we, we can't find what doesn't work unless we start this. And I'm, I'm optimistic that we can find a good solution that will work for everyone. And if, if we have to, and I'm happy, I'll, I'll, I'll meet with the …
H.B. 111 Wildlife Amendments · House floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Asks whether any of the affected golf courses have turkey problems and whether any are near Paradise, Utah.
▶ Watch at 1:01:09Read what they said
Yes. Are any of these prob places having problems, uh, with turkeys? Uh, ha happen to be located near Paradise, Utah?
H.B. 26 Voting Equipment Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Explains that the bill follows an interim committee study and aims to secure and standardize voting equipment, protect it from internet manipulation, and modernize procurement through an RFP so all equipment is under one system. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 26:55Read what they said
a result from the study from the interim committee, uh, of government operations. And the, the whole bill is to give us comfort that knowing that, uh, our, uh, voting equipment is secured, they're standardized and they're free from the outside manipulation of the internet. It also, um, modernize modernizes our procurement process with an RFP so that, uh, once the Lieutenant Governor has that in place and all equipment in the state will be under the same system. That's the gist of it.
H.B. 329 State Employee Maternity and Leave Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Cutler noted that line 68 limits LEA reimbursement applications to July 2026 through July 2029, after which LEAs would have to pay for the benefit themselves.
▶ Watch at 36:28Read what they said
Let me see if I can clarify. On line 68, it, it reads, uh, it, it, uh, describes when a, uh, an LEA can apply for reimbursement from the fund, and that's only open between July 1st of this year to July 1st, 2029. So an LEA could only apply for reimbursement from, from that during that time window. In theory, an LEA could keep offering this benefit, but they would have to pay for it themselves. Correct. And they would not have an opportunity to be reimbursed from the fund, from the, uh, uh, the money that would be appropriated from the stabilization fund.
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Presented HB 320, saying the proposed changes reflect two years of the office's experience, including audit authority and expanded agreement parties, and introduced the director.
▶ Watch at 1:55:27Read what they said
While We, I present this. I forgot before I, uh, vacated the chair spot to, uh, say it was okay to pass out, uh, a handout on this. So I hope the sub chair allows that. Yes, please. Uh, whoever's got that, maybe you could pass it around to the committee members. And, and also I have an amendment on this that, uh, has a, a clarifying provision that, uh, we need to move before the end. Someone could help me that when we're done, so many of you or some of you know, that, uh, I serve as the, on the AI task force with, uh, uh, a couple of other folks here and also as the technology, uh, …
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Asked Dr. Boyd whether he had anything else to add about the updates.
▶ Watch at 2:00:03Read what they said
Uh, uh, Dr. Boyd, is there anything else that you want to, to cover or point out in, in terms of this, um, these updates?
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Explained that the relevant agency is the state agency tied to the application, such as corrections or healthcare, usually whoever is in charge of enforcing the rule.
▶ Watch at 2:01:33Read what they said
Great. I, my understanding is, uh, and I'll let, uh, that speak to this is there would be an agreement between an agency, for example, a state, if it's a healthcare related application, it it may be a, uh, a healthcare state agency rather than just the Department of Commerce. So if it's using AI in the corrections system, then corrections would be the relevant agency in involved. So it's, it's the agent, the agency that's relevant to the agreement. Is that okay? Thank You. Yeah, usually whoever's in charge of enforcing it.
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Responded to public comment by saying the Department of Commerce has been given authority to regulate in this area.
▶ Watch at 2:04:21Read what they said
Th Thank you. Appreciate that motion. And if, if I could just take a minute to respond to the, uh, the, the previous comment, we've clearly, uh, given the Department of Commerce, the authority to, to regulate in this area.
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Asked Dr. Boyd whether most learning lab participants are small companies.
▶ Watch at 2:04:33Read what they said
And I'd also ask Dr. Boyd, my understanding is most of the, uh, participants in the learning lab and that we have agreements with our startups or very small companies. Could you speak to that?
H.B. 320 Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Said the changes are common-sense steps that allow more flexible agreements as Utah works through AI policy.
▶ Watch at 2:06:11Read what they said
That. This, this sets a, a, a number of, uh, common sense changes that helps us, uh, move forward in our AI policy. Uh, uh, leadership in the, in the nation allows, uh, more flexible agreements, and I think this makes it better for all of us who are trying to figure out how we navigate this new space. So appreciate the effort.
S.B. 25 Retirement Modifications · House floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Clarifies that URS has exemptions for some individuals who participate in other retirement systems, and that the bill lets Utah contribute to such outside systems in certain situations for short-term high-level staff.
▶ Watch at 26:41Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'd like to take the opportunity to clarify the last question. My understanding is that URS has exemptions for certain individuals who have not been part of the URS system. They may be, for example, some city managers have their, uh, retirement outside the URS system, if they work in different states or some professional staff do it with their professional body outside of different states. So what the bill is asking for is in, in certain situations to allow Utah to contribute to that system that's not part of URS, uh, which is a common practice for, uh, certain high level staff who may just be coming in to do a job for a couple …
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Asks that an information sheet be distributed to committee members.
▶ Watch at 58:03Read what they said
Thank you. And if it's okay, I'd like, uh, we have a, a great, uh, LRGC information sheet that has been prepared that I'd like my intern to pass out if, if people would like it, if the chair would allow
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Notes that extra copies of the handout will be collected at the end and sets up the presentation.
▶ Watch at 58:20Read what they said
Representative Stoddard loves extra paper. He, he looks for it every day. We will Collect, we will collect, uh, at the end, uh, extra copies to make sure we were, are not, uh, filling up his. Alright. Thank you. Oh, thank you. And I have a presentation here, if that could be, if we could show that. Alright, got it. It's up.
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Presents HB 32, covering online circulator training, voter text and email notifications, a condensed petition packet, changes to the circulator sheet, rules on striking lines and dates, and removal of the requirement to turn in packets to the state for storage.
▶ Watch at 58:54Read what they said
So the, uh, speaking to the second sub and many of these things, uh, those of you who are here in the interim and paying attention will, will recognize, uh, there, and there's a few new things. Uh, Representative Thurston and, uh, rep, uh, Senator Kwan also had bills in this area, and we worked together to try to take the best out of each of those and put them together, uh, into this. We've had a lot of good feedback from the state elections office, which we really appreciate, uh, from county clerks who have been very helpful, uh, in, in providing input onto this and also from legislators. So we really appreciate that. So we're, we're, there are …
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Thanks the motion maker and says the substitute improves the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:22:04Read what they said
I, I appreciate that the, the good maker of the motion voted for the first version of the vil and, uh, we've made this one even better.
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Says the bill proactively notifies signers privately instead of posting signer lists online, and thanks clerks and the Lieutenant Governor's Office.
▶ Watch at 1:23:18Read what they said
I appreciate that. And, uh, if, if you're, if you're allowing me to sum, uh, this improves a number of processes related to gathering signatures, I also wanted to point out that we have the technology today to allow people to understand if they've signed a petition or signed a ballot initiative or signed these things without publicly putting their names on the internet. In this age of concerns about data privacy, and I have lots of concerns about data privacy. I believe that it's better to have this proactive pointed one-to-one communication than to post large lists of Utah Private Utahans information on the internet where it can be correlated with other information, uh, and and, and add to, …
H.B. 112 Political Advertising Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Asked whether a campaign that uses a party's reduced postage rate must list the party on its mailer, and restated his understanding of the rule.
▶ Watch at 1:30:27Read what they said
Oh, sorry about that. You're On. Thank you Mr. I I had the same question. Where, where, could you point out the line where that requires a, a, a change if you're using the party or another nonprofit to pay the postage for you? Yes. So it's in two spots. So it's 4 37 through 4 46 and then it's in 4 63 through 4 72. The reason it's in two places is because we wanted to include, um, that for ballot propositions as well as campaigns so that the language is consistent across code. And just to make sure we're completely clear, clear on that. So if, if I have, uh, my political party, if I pay them their …
H.B. 112 Political Advertising Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Restated the postage question: whether a campaign mailer using a party's reduced rate must show the party's name.
▶ Watch at 1:32:53Read what they said
I think I know the answer, but I want, I want to hear it. Go ahead. If, If a candidate uses their parties or another nonprofit's, uh, privilege to, to send email at a cheaper rate, for example, uh, if, if I, using example of my campaign, if I send out a postcard that says, from Paul, uh, from Paid for by Friends of Paul Cutler and has in the corner, instead of a stamp, it has the inertia of the, of, of the party that's saying they paid for, this is my understanding, does that satisfy the requirements?
H.B. 112 Political Advertising Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Confirmed that the answer was clear: a campaign-funded mailer lists the campaign, and a party-funded donation lists the party as well.
▶ Watch at 1:34:41Read what they said
Correct? Yes. That That is correct. All right. As far as I'm aware, Yeah. Yeah. And that's clear. Alright. Did, you're off your mic's off, so you're fine. That concludes my questions. Did we answer your question? That's what I wanna, yes. Thank you very much.
H.B. 112 Political Advertising Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Asked whether the county attorney must make a finding before the county clerk imposes a fine.
▶ Watch at 1:45:06Read what they said
I do to, uh, I just wanted to clarify. So as I understand it today, the lieutenant governor, if it's a state, if it's a federal office, a state office, legislative office, or state school board, then the Lieutenant Governor's office both investigates and, uh, issues the fine. Mm-hmm. If it's a county office in the county's jurisdiction, then the county attorney or district attorney does the investigation and, and the county clerk initiates the fine, it's, it's not clear. Does the county attorney have to make a finding of any kind or, I mean, it's, I think it's assumed that they would, the county attorney has to say, clerk go make this fine.
H.B. 112 Political Advertising Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Said he supports the bill's intent and wants the process worked out so it is clear in practice.
▶ Watch at 1:46:07Read what they said
It, it, it does answer my question. I'm, uh, so thanks for the question. I, I agree with your intent. I think it's good. I think that more disclosure is, is a very good thing. Uh, and I can support it on the, uh, on, on the intent. Um, I'd love to make sure we work out the kinks on how this really works in practice and it's, I love that. So it's super clear to people how it's gonna work. Very open to that. Thank you.
H.B. 120 Tail Light Obstruction Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Supports the covered cargo provision and asks whether the bill applies if only one of two taillights is obstructed.
▶ Watch at 1:04:41Read what they said
Thank, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, I appreciate the good sponsors efforts. I think this is really important, especially the covered cargo seems to make a lot of sense. My concern is the, the bill says a taillight, and, uh, if any, we have two taillights for a reason, so that if one is out or, or broken or, or obstructed, you can see the other taillight. So my concern is sometimes when you have bikes on the back of a, a truck or a car, which I frequently do, uh, you might from some angle have one light obstructed. Uh, to me the, uh, is the intent that if you can, if any of the light isn't, is obstructed …
H.B. 120 Tail Light Obstruction Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Supports the bill but asks for clarification so riders are not breaking the law if at least one taillight is visible from 500 feet.
▶ Watch at 1:06:09Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, my concern is on line 46. It, uh, uh, the bill says a tail light. And my con uh, i, I support the concept of the bill. I think it's very important, but, uh, I could support it as a sponsor would work with me to clarify that. If you can see, maybe through the bikes, you can still see at least one of the taillights at that 500 foot distance that you're not breaking the law to, to carry a bike on the back of your car.
H.B. 128 Traffic Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Cutler asks to put several questions to the sponsor and asks whether she will yield.
▶ Watch at 1:15:18Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't want to, uh, have a circular discussion, but I'd like to ask a couple of questions. If this sponsor will yield Representative Defay, will you yield to a few circular questions?
H.B. 128 Traffic Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Cutler asks whether a signal is required when moving between lanes inside a multi-lane roundabout.
▶ Watch at 1:15:32Read what they said
Uh, we have some roundabouts that have, uh, more than one lane. They're at least two lanes, and you're often moving between lanes depending on, on how you're entering or, or exiting or, or moving inside the roundabout. Is this still require the, uh, once you enter the roundabout, if you're moving to an interior lane, is a signal required? And if you're in the interior lane, moving to the exterior lane is a signal required.
H.B. 128 Traffic Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Cutler asks to confirm that the only change is that drivers would not signal when entering or exiting a roundabout, and Defay confirms.
▶ Watch at 1:16:16Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So the, the only change you're saying is when you exit the roundabout, you don't have to turn on your blinker to exit, you can just exit. Or when you enter, you don't have to turn on your blinker to enter the roundabout. That is correct. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Presents the second substitute of H.B. 381, describing changes made after feedback on the tampering language, e-bike and e-motorcycle definitions, labeling, insurance, and technical corrections, and explains the bill's goal of letting kids ride e-bikes legally and safely.
▶ Watch at 38:26Read what they said
That's correct. Okay. So I'd love you to pull up the, uh, second sub substitute and I'll speak to, uh, speak to that and, uh, talk about, uh, some improvements that we've made in the bill after the after feedback. Uh, let me see here. And I wanted you guys missed out on the most exciting part of my presentation last time because of a technical glitch. So, while you're looking that up, I wanted to provide you just a little bit of entertainment. So here is a, uh, a Bountiful police officer chasing a, uh, youth on a, what we believe it was a youth on a electric motorcycle. You can see them a approaching, and they're on, uh, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Responds that the bill is not meant to change insurance requirements, says the concern was addressed in the liability language, and says he has referred the insurance question to the insurance commissioner and will keep working on it.
▶ Watch at 51:34Read what they said
Th Thank you. We worked with Mr. Marne and, and appreciate his input. Uh, line 10 13 is where we, we thought we were. It was liability issue. We put language in there to make it clear that high power electric device, something that's, uh, doesn't meet the definition of an e-bike, uh, that we're not changing the insurance, uh, requirements, uh, uh, the uninsured motorist, uh, is, is a area that I don't have any expertise in. We're happy to, I'm happy to listen to him some more. I've referred the comments to our insurance commissioner to try to get maybe a neutral third party to say, is there an issue here? And can we, uh, make sure we're, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Thanks industry and individuals for feedback and says the changes make the bill better.
▶ Watch at 53:46Read what they said
Thank you. We think this is a better, we appreciate the, the feedback from, from industry and from individuals, and we think we're making this better.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Explains that the seller disclosure was intended for retail sellers, notes that online sellers often do not follow Utah requirements, and agrees to clarify that it applies to commercial sellers rather than individuals.
▶ Watch at 55:27Read what they said
So, cur my, my understanding and, and maybe there's others who could, who could speak to this and help me with this, is currently devices have to have the sticker on them today and or, or bikes have the stickers on them. And we've, we've added a, a line, various bikes, bikes had different stickers depending on the class, and we tried to simplify the notification. Uh, you're right, this says a, a seller of a new or used vehicle, uh, vehicle. The intent was that this was for retail sellers. Uh, the reality is many of the online sellers don't follow Utah requirements, and it's very hard to enforce. But my understanding is bike shops and any bike, uh, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Explains that the bill keeps the 15 mph limit for motor-assisted scooters, separates faster devices into a high-powered category, and requires helmets and training for riders under 16 or 21 on faster devices in traffic.
▶ Watch at 57:32Read what they said
Thank you. I don't know if we could put this up back up on the screen, but we're, we're dividing. Thank you. We are enabling kids to ride more and to ride safely and to do more things, uh, to, to, to, to be safer. So there's, we're dividing up the scooters into two categories today. Today the law says a motor assisted scooter is limited to 15 miles per hour. And we're actually not changing that if you're riding a motor assisted scooter. But there are devices out there that go faster than 15 miles an hour. The, the one that's suing, uh, the Canyon School District in Draper City can go much, much faster than that. Uh, and, …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Confirms that low-end scooters are treated like a class two e-bike.
▶ Watch at 59:47Read what they said
Correct. Which I now know what that is. It's this one. It's, it's the, yeah, it's that one and that's the same as the scooter.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Explains that high-powered devices are not treated as motorcycles for insurance but are regulated similarly for safety, and that riders should get training or a safety certificate.
▶ Watch at 1:00:00Read what they said
It, it's, it's treated, it's, it's not a motorcycle for insurance purposes. Right. But it's regulated as the same way for safety purposes. We're saying if you wanna, if you wanna ride these, you should get training like you would a motorcycle or you should get some other safety training, because we know there's some people who don't want to get a driver's license, uh, but, but still use these devices. And we thought, okay, at least get a safety certificate. But if you're over 16, we're, I'm not concerned.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Summarizes the bill as enabling kids to ride independently and safely, giving parents guidance on appropriate devices, clarifying regulations, and allowing people to enjoy riding electric devices outdoors.
▶ Watch at 1:01:04Read what they said
I believe this will enable more kids to ride independently and to do that safely give parents tools to understand which devices are appropriate for kids in which aren't, help clarify regulations and allow people to enjoy the outdoors riding, uh, electric devices.
H.B. 243 Gambling Revisions · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether the Attorney General's office is aware of any active enforcement against sports betting in Utah.
▶ Watch at 39:24Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Since we have our attorney's general's office here, Mr. Burton, it sports betting is a tremendous phenomenon that's happening. Is there any active enforcement, uh, mechanism or any active enforcement that the Attorney General is, is aware of, um, for sports betting in Utah?
H.B. 243 Gambling Revisions · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Commented on the effects of social media and betting on young people and said more work is expected in this area.
▶ Watch at 40:20Read what they said
It's interesting, if I can just go a little further. We have seen a lot done on social media, and we've seen the dangers to especially, uh, young women and how social media impacts their self-image. This impacts young men far more, right? It, it's something that is affecting that population in a different way. And so I think you'll see a lot more work in this space in the coming period.
H.B. 243 Gambling Revisions · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Moved to adopt Amendment 1 to HB 243.
▶ Watch at 42:12Read what they said
Representative Cutler, oh, I'd like to move. Sorry, I gotta push the button. Happy to move. Amendment one. Okay.
H.B. 243 Gambling Revisions · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Said the Attorney General's office requested the amendment so the prohibition covers all proposition betting, not only sports betting. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 42:58Read what they said
Correct. If I may respond. Mr. Mr. Chair? Yep. Uh, yeah. So actually the Attorney General's office asked for this amendment for that very reason. 'cause they said, wait a minute, this needs to go beyond just sports betting. This needs to go into all prop bedding across the board. So we appreciate the, this amendment actually from the Attorney General's office.
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether any money would flow through the state or whether the exchange is only informational. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 53:58Read what they said
So just to clarify, this exchange that you proposed, would any money flow through the state or is this simply an information, uh, exchange that you are suggesting?
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether retirement plans are subject to state regulations or only federal ones. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 54:58Read what they said
Are there any state regulations for retirement plans? I thought they were all a national, uh, regulated.
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked why a state portal is useful instead of a national one if rules are the same nationwide. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 55:17Read what they said
If that's the case, why would a state portal be helpful? Why don't we have a national portal or a national marketplace if there's no difference from one state to another?
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether other states mandate an exchange or mandate that small businesses use it. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 56:08Read what they said
CC. Could you clarify that these states have a, a mandate for an exchange or have a mandate that small businesses must use their exchange, or Can you clarify that? It's
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether any other state offers an information exchange for private plans. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 56:44Read what they said
Are you aware of any other states who provide this, uh, information exchange for, for private, uh, for private plans as a, it seems like an, an expansion.
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether the fee to the treasurer's office and the annual plan fee in the bill are the same or separate fees.
▶ Watch at 1:15:39Read what they said
color. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, could you clarify that there's a fee mentioned that goes to the treasurer's office line 5 85 and also an annual fee for each of these plans on 6 37. Are those the same fee, or is that two separate fees that goes to?
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether the $120,000 fiscal note is for running the exchange in-house or outsourcing it to a technology company.
▶ Watch at 1:17:09Read what they said
Thank you. And I think you, uh, started to answer my next question about Line six 40 says the treasurer's office could outsource this. The fiscal note had $120,000 a year to run, to run this exchange. And, and for personnel is, is the intent to bill this in-house and run this in the treasurer's office? Or is the intent to outsource this to a technology company to run the exchange and, and just pay to run that exchange? Or, or do, do you know,
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked who pays to build and run the IT platform.
▶ Watch at 1:18:19Read what they said
Who, who pays to build and run the IT platform that this sits on? And, and it's gonna be the exchange that, that, is that in the 120,000 or
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Observed that the state would essentially be lending the treasurer's stamp of approval to a private-sector exchange.
▶ Watch at 1:18:31Read what they said
And, and people would pay a fee to be a part of this. Mm-hmm. So, so this is, I mean, you would do that in the private sector, but you're just kind of goofing or encouraging this by saying, we're gonna put the treasurer stamp of approval on it
H.B. 250 Utah Retirement Plan Exchange · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Said he is torn on whether this is a proper state role but could support moving it to the full House while reserving the right to change his mind.
▶ Watch at 1:22:02Read what they said
Representative Cutler, I'm, I'm a little torn on this. I'm, I think the sponsor has made a clear and compelling presentation. Uh, my only question, is this the proper role for the state to enable this? And, and is it, is it worth the cost? I, there's certainly clearly demonstrated this, there's a, there's a benefit to having more people save for retirement. We all agree. That's a really good thing, is, is this the right place to put it? If it's at the state level, you get the endorsement of, of our good state treasurer. And, and a lot of people will say, okay, I can get behind this. Uh, but is that the proper role of government? I, …
H.B. 309 Juneteenth Observance Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Said this was his last time presenting to the committee as a legislator.
▶ Watch at 2:31:37Read what they said
Um, I just wanna say this is my last time presenting to you all as a state legislator, so thank you.
H.B. 40 Utah Construction Trades Licensing Act Amendments · House floor debate (day 11) · Jan 30, 2026
Asks whether a state background check would likely catch a conviction from another state.
▶ Watch at 41:36Read what they said
Could the Mr. Speaker, would the sponsor speak to, or or Mr. Speaker, what kind of things does a state background check catch? Specifically if there was someone that was convicted of a crime in another state, would, uh, this a state background check likely catch? Uh, something like that?
H.B. 40 Utah Construction Trades Licensing Act Amendments · House floor debate (day 11) · Jan 30, 2026
Asks what a state background check catches, including whether it would catch an out-of-state conviction.
▶ Watch at 41:36Read what they said
Could the Mr. Speaker, would the sponsor speak to, or or Mr. Speaker, what kind of things does a state background check catch? Specifically if there was someone that was convicted of a crime in another state, would, uh, this a state background check likely catch? Uh, something like that?
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Supports the bill and asks whether electronic signing creates a timestamped log that can be audited.
▶ Watch at 1:02:20Read what they said
Thank you. I, uh, I'm supportive of this effort. I, I think we're moving in the right direction. I just wanted to ask, uh, representative Tesser, if he clarify when a user signs, uh, electronically. My understanding is there would be a, uh, data that's created that says when they sign it would have a, a timestamp. You would know who that, you, who that, uh, person is. So there is a verifiable log that could be audited, uh, if, if needed, whether we print it out or write it by hand, there will still be a log.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Presented HB 13, which would let municipalities use the political subdivision lien process that special service districts already use for unpaid utility bills, and described the substitute's added notice to the property owner.
▶ Watch at 1:32:13Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you, uh, accommodating me. If I was doing my best to save a bill from dying a sad death, uh, over in, uh, government operations, I think we saved it. I'm here to talk to you today. This is the, let's see, we've been two interim committees. This will be the second house committee plus the Senate committee that this bill has been presented in the last two years. Uh, and with some help, we've refined it and, and made it a better bill, I believe. Still catching my breath. I have a handout that, uh, if the chair will permit, I'd like to provide the, uh, for, for those who are new to …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Said the first substitute is an improvement and thanked Rep. Ward.
▶ Watch at 1:41:46Read what they said
Appreciate, uh, I think the first substitute is an improvement that The policy Thank you Representative Ward for waive, waive waiving.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Said special districts already can place a lien on property tax for unpaid services, so this part of the bill is not new.
▶ Watch at 1:43:05Read what they said
Uh, Representative Ward read my mind. That was precisely my request To, to the committee. So I'll make a comment. Uh, representative of Keller can add to it. Special districts already have the power to levy an unpaid bill, uh, or to pursue tax or a lien. They already have the ability to put a lien on property tax for unpaid services. So that's, this bill is not new in that regard, does some other things, but in that regard, it's not new.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
In summation, said the political subdivision lien is a more efficient and less harmful way to collect long-overdue utility debts than bill collectors or foreclosure, and that no foreclosure has been based on a utility lien.
▶ Watch at 1:43:40Read what they said
Thank you. I was not here when the legislature, uh, uh, came up with this type of lien for political subdivision lien, but I believe it's a more efficient way to collect debts. Uh, when, when we think about a utility, the cost of providing, say, storm drain coverage in an area or a water system, or even a water system, you're talking about very high fixed costs and very typically very low incremental costs. The costs to run that system are virtually the same, whether one person opts out or not. So what happens if, if you have someone who says, well, I don't wanna pay this. I don't wanna pay my water bill, I don't wanna pay my …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Asked about his aye vote and said he thought the committee was only accepting the substitute. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:46:12Read what they said
Fifth time's a charm. Sorry, Did you say aye? I did. I thought we were talking about just, um, I mean, accepting the substitute. Uh, oh. We've, thank you.
H.B. 26 Voting Equipment Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Explains that the bill bars any wireless capability in voting equipment used to cast or count votes, eliminates a rank voting equipment program, and makes minor technical changes.
▶ Watch at 1:09:33Read what they said
Thank you. Nice to be with you today. I appreciate the, uh, the opportunity. Uh, for those of you who participated in the, uh, interim committee, you'll recognize this. Uh, there was, I believe it was part of an audit that identified, we had one county that inadvertently had some equipment that had wireless capabilities. Uh, the wireless capabilities were never turned on, but that had capabilities. This bill clarifies that if you're gonna use, uh, voting equipment to either cast boats or to count votes, the, it cannot have any wireless capabilities at all. Can't even be in the chip set. None at all. So that there's no question about the ability to compromise voting equipment. It also makes …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler apologized for arriving late and asked that the committee adopt the first substitute so the current version appears online.
▶ Watch at 1:18:20Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you very much. Thanks for hearing me. I apologize. Sometimes the Senate moves a little slower and took 'em a while to, uh, to get to another bill I was presenting, but, uh, if there's an opportunity share, I would like to do that. If we can get, I'm sorry, the presentation up. There we go. Oh, great. So, um, I'm gonna be speaking to the first substitute and, and Mr. Chair if, if appropriate it, uh, I, I would love at some point, not for you, not to, not to take full action on it, but if you pass the, if you move the first substitute, then people who are looking at the bill online would …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said the bill aims to get more kids riding bikes safely, thanked Rep. Defay, and described confusion over e-bike classes and current age and helmet rules.
▶ Watch at 1:19:13Read what they said
Our goals in this, this is, is fairly lengthy and a lot of touches, a lot of subject. Our goal is to get more kids. My goal is to get more kids riding bikes and more kids riding bikes safely and independently. I think it's great for kids to be outside, to be riding bikes, to be able to experience, uh, Independence. We have, uh, a challenge with safety and injuries that we've seen from a lot of these e devices. Uh, we want to improve that. I want to provide some material that helps parents make better decisions and ensure consistent, fair application of the law from municipality to municipality across the spectrum currently. And, and I, I should …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler agreed to explain the classes.
▶ Watch at 1:21:25Read what they said
Uh, I, I'm happy to do that. Um, oh, okay. Alright. Yeah, you bet. Um,
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler explained e-bike classes, a new high-powered device category treated like motorcycles, a safety certificate option for independent riding by minors, a helmet requirement for riders under 21 on streets, local control over trails and parks, and rules on modified devices.
▶ Watch at 1:21:34Read what they said
Uh, well, let's see if I've, now I might have, I, great. So classes are, you have a, uh, class one is a pedal assist, and it can go no more than thir 20 miles an hour. That means it doesn't have a throttle, you have to pedal to get it to work. And if it gets to 20 miles an hour, no, the motor stops, uh, providing assistance. And currently today, eight years old and, and under 14, you can only ride it if you're with your parent. Is anybody following the law on this? Very, very, very few I think are following today. Class two is a bike with a throttle. So it will run whether you're pedaling …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler encouraged members to see the devices and talk with local police chiefs and emergency room staff about injuries.
▶ Watch at 1:32:58Read what they said
I'm not sure if they're gonna let you ride them, given are, are you safe? Uh, haven't taken the class, you haven't taken the class. Uh, and, but we'd encourage you to get familiar and talk to, we'd love you to talk to your local police, uh, chiefs about this and also your local emergency room staffs who have seen a real challenge with the type of injuries they're seeing.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said hoverboards and similar devices would be classified by whether they exceed 20 miles per hour, with faster ones like electric unicycles treated like motorcycles.
▶ Watch at 1:33:32Read what they said
Well, tho i, the, we believe that some of these hoverboards and other devices would be captured under those micro mobility devices. So it depends if they can go faster than 20 miles an hour or less than 20 miles an hour. So if they go faster than 20 miles an hour, like let's say these electric unicycles are generally faster, they're used by commuters, they're faster than 20 miles an hour, those should be treated like a, like a motorcycle, which I think that that user community agrees. That's a good idea. Uh, the hoverboards, it would depend if they're faster or slower than 20 miles an hour.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said the Department of Public Safety would oversee a short, low-cost, one-time course that could be offered online or by groups like Bike Utah or police departments.
▶ Watch at 1:36:55Read what they said
Our, our intent? So, uh, thank, thanks for the question that the course or responsibility would, uh, lie with the Department of Public Safety. They could choose to outsource the development of that course. There are, uh, zero fatalities has expressed interest by Utah, has expressed interest. There's lots of people who, who have some curriculum that they could put together. The intent is that this would be offered online is one option it would cost. We have in the bill today, it would be low cost, $10 or less to do it online. It could also be offered by a nonprofit like Bike Utah. It could be offered by a police department or another community, uh, organization who would …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler noted that rental bike and scooter companies are exempted from some requirements.
▶ Watch at 1:38:22Read what they said
And Mr. Chair, if I may, we have exempted the rental companies Green bike and in theory, the rental commercial scooter companies from some of the re requirements on, on this. So
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said rental devices are limited to under 20 miles per hour and welcomed feedback on the exemption.
▶ Watch at 1:38:39Read what they said
And, and I'd love feedback on that. We, we felt it was very challenging to include them in some of these regulations. Uh, they, they, the information's provided to us is their devices are limited. They cannot go more than 20 miles an hour. They're lower, they're lower speed devices, uh, that are rented. So they never fall into that high, high performance category.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said the bill applies to paved city or state roads.
▶ Watch at 1:39:32Read what they said
Yeah, A any, any city or state road roadway. Okay. The, the intent is paved roads. So it, uh, I, it may be looking at Rachel. It may be 25 miles an hour or more, but I think it's any, any paved road that's a city or, or state highway.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said the intent is to give local governments more tools and control.
▶ Watch at 1:40:01Read what they said
Correct. And, and I would, yes, the intent is not, is to give locals tools and, and let them make, have more control not to try to tell them what to do.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said rental companies were exempted from helmet and training requirements because they say they never rent to anyone under 18.
▶ Watch at 1:40:45Read what they said
About that. I think the, where we exempted them was the helmet requirement, because that was the challenge. They all said, we never rent to anyone under 18 uhhuh. We never do that. It's a dad joke, isn't it? But we did get Probably the, uh, the training requirement. The training requirement and the helmet requirement, other problems for them. But I'm happy to, if, if
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said the safety certificate check would be a secondary offense like seat belts and invited Chief Ackerson to speak.
▶ Watch at 1:42:13Read what they said
Well, I, I'd love for our law enforcement that's here to speak to that. We've, we've met with, uh, chief of police a couple of times. Uh, we've also, I should clarify currently the safety certificate portion of it. A police officer can't pull over someone just for the safety certificate. They have to have made some other mistake. Maybe they're writing incorrectly or, or made a traffic error and then they could check for the safety ate. So it's a secondary, it's, it's like seat belts. It's a secondary, uh, uh, something that they could, uh, be on. But I'd love to, if you're willing to hear from Chief Ackerson. Yeah, I'd love to hear from him. I, I'd …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said classification is based on device capability and officers can tell when a device clearly exceeds 20 miles per hour.
▶ Watch at 1:44:50Read what they said
Well, our, our thought in discussing is we want to have the capability of the device. So if it's capable of going, uh, those higher speeds, then that puts it in the higher category. What we suspect is that an officer, if it sees a device clearly going more than 20 miles an hour, then that will then that they can easily tell, okay, this is not, uh, a, a, a typical device. This is a high powered device. And it, and we can look at this like a motorcycle,
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said pedal bikes are exempt and throttle devices are the main problem.
▶ Watch at 1:45:49Read what they said
If they're, if they're pedaling over 20, then, then they're exempt from that. The feedback that we've got, and I'd love the chief to speak to this, is that very few communities have had problems with pedal bikes. It's the throttle devices that are really the challenge right now.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said the bill changes retail labeling to make clear what kind of device is sold.
▶ Watch at 1:59:14Read what they said
No, the labeling is in here. This, in this one. So it, I didn't mention that, but it does change some labeling when you, when you sell a bike to, uh, be more clear about what kind of device it is when it's sold by a retailer. There's a lot of online retailers, but at least a point of sale retailers that that will change the sticker that goes on it.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler said he was unaware of the insurance issue and would meet with the insurance industry to try to resolve it.
▶ Watch at 2:06:03Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, I was unaware of this. I am meeting with, uh, uh, someone today, I think at five o'clock from, from the insurance industry that, that has some comments. So I, I look forward to understanding the issue and seeing if we can resolve it. I was unaware of, of, of this issue.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Cutler asked the committee to adopt the substitute and then hold the bill.
▶ Watch at 2:09:31Read what they said
If you'd adopt it and, and then hold it, uh, after that. That'd be, that'd be fantastic.
H.B. 5 Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environmental Quality Base Budget · House floor debate (day 9) · Jan 28, 2026
Asks Representative Peterson to yield for a question about whether the bill allows purchase of water rights.
▶ Watch at 24:24Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker with a sponsor, uh, yield to a question. Representative Peterson, will you yield to a question
H.B. 5 Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environmental Quality Base Budget · House floor debate (day 9) · Jan 28, 2026
Asks whether the bill allows the purchase of water rights mentioned in the news for US Magnesium, calling it a benefit to Utah.
▶ Watch at 24:34Read what they said
Just wanted to clarify if, if this, uh, allows the, the purchase of the water rights, uh, that's been mentioned in the news for US magnesium, that will be a great benefit to the state of Utah.
H.B. 286 Artificial Intelligence Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Asked how the bill distinguishes a foreseeable harm from a known harm in its definitions of catastrophic and child safety risk.
▶ Watch at 55:37Read what they said
Thank you, chair Kins. Uh, I have a, a a number of questions. Maybe I'll just cover a couple here, and then we'll go to public comment in the definition of on online, uh, 85 and, and 61 of the, of the sub definition of catastrophic risk and the definition of child safety risk, the use the word foreseeable is used, and it's used a number of place in this. Could, could you talk about what you expect the difference between a foreseeable event or a foreseeable harm versus a known harm? Because I think that's really important, uh, um, to distinguish between the two.
H.B. 286 Artificial Intelligence Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Supported the bill conceptually but raised concerns about definitions and asked what counts as a material modification to a public safety plan.
▶ Watch at 1:20:34Read what they said
I have some discussion. I'm, I am in favor of this, of this bill. Conceptually, I think it's good. I think it's important to be transparent. I'd like to see more transparency out of our, uh, largest companies in the most with the frontier models. I think there are some challenges with this, uh, uh, legislation that need to be resolved. It was mentioned before the, by some of the commenters, the definitions. I'm concerned about some of the definitions as well, especially the, uh, uh, ambiguity between reporting what is known versus what could be foreseen in the future. And there are many use cases in the future that are unknown. I think that's a challenge. I wanted to …
H.B. 286 Artificial Intelligence Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Suggested the model weights language may distract and asked whether the sponsor would add language ending state regulation once a federal framework exists.
▶ Watch at 1:23:23Read what they said
Thank you. Appreciate that response. Uh, a couple of other points. I, I shared with the sponsor earlier that in my opinion, the model weights language is not the most important thing and might distract from the, the key purpose. Uh, that's, but, uh, I'll leave it up to, uh, you to decide on, on that issue of model weights. My understanding is that this, the, the reason for running this bill at the state level is because we do not have a federal framework and standard for dealing with these safety measures. Uh, I, I would, uh, I think we understand the, the issue of federal preemption. I would like to see, even though it's understood, I think, how …
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Commended the sponsor and asked for an explanation of how nomination petition signatures are verified compared with initiative and referendum petitions.
▶ Watch at 1:04:29Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chair, I wanna commend the sponsor for her good work. She's been, uh, working very hard to, uh, work with others and try to find, uh, solutions to this. I have a couple of questions. Uh, three or four if we could have a, a little tag. Could, could you or could we ask someone to explain the difference in the way signatures are verified for a nomination petition compared to an initiative compared to a referenda? Do you feel comfortable?
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Said he has watched signature verification processes take place in two counties.
▶ Watch at 1:05:04Read what they said
and the process and where they're verified. So I've actually watched each of the processes happen. I've been, well, I've never done signatures for a candidate, but the other ones I have and I've sat and watched 'em actually be verified in, in two counties. And, but I don't know that I could speak to the exact that they're exactly the same on that.
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Stated his understanding that nomination petitions are verified centrally while referenda and initiatives may be verified locally.
▶ Watch at 1:05:25Read what they said
Is there a county clerk that could that's in here? I Juab just, I was more interested in, in making sure we all understand that nomination. My understanding is nomination petitions are, uh, verified centrally, whereas referenda and initiative petitions may be, uh, verified locally. Is that
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked how the order of counting is decided when a signature is submitted to two different county clerks.
▶ Watch at 1:06:18Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you. So next question, if we have a rule that says you can only sign one candidate's, um, nomination petition if theoretically, uh, you have one petition going to one packet going to the Carbon County clerk and one going to, uh, the Nebo County clerk and they both see those signatures. One may have happened before them, one may have happened after. How do, how do we decide which one gets counted? Which other ones verified first in Vista?
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked whether verified signatures are uploaded to the state system immediately or could be delayed.
▶ Watch at 1:07:01Read what they said
So when they verify the signature, is it automatically up upload it and, and in the state Vista system immediately? Or is could there be a delay where one could be verified first but another one uploaded
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked whether the bill changes the periods for certifying nomination petitions, noting a change from one day to seven days before the convention.
▶ Watch at 1:07:33Read what they said
So then there wouldn't be a conflict between different counties and if, if the for other things that we're working on together pass, then the whoever's verified first would get a text or an email notifying them, et cetera. The, uh, last question or, or two, two more questions. Does this, you, you've changed the periods for when uh, these nomination petitions can be, uh, certified? I, I believe does that shorten, there was one that was went from one day before the convention to seven days before the convention.
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked whether the change gives candidates more time or less time to submit signatures. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:09:00Read what they said
So, so it gives more time. So, Or less time. It gives them less time they have To submit. Is it less time to collect signatures so They can have more time before convention?
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked whether the change to the verification deadline shortens the time for gathering signatures or only the time for verifying them.
▶ Watch at 1:09:32Read what they said
So the accounting clerk found no later than the earlier 14 calendar days after the day on which the county clerk receives the signatures or seven calendar days before the day on which the qualified political party holds a convention. So to me that says we suddenly be before you basically had up to the convention to get your signatures verified and now you have to have them verified a week before. Does that change, does that mean less time for collecting signatures or just less time for verifying signatures?
H.B. 25 Candidate Petition Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Said the deadline issue could be handled later and that he doubts the sponsor intended to shorten the gathering period. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:10:46Read what they said
And, and this can be handled later, but it was a little, little confusing and mm-hmm. I I don't, it doesn't sound like it was a sponsor's intent to shorten the period for gathering signatures.
H.B. 78 Nuclear Regulatory Amendments · House floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for a follow-up question.
▶ Watch at 27:21Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanted to try out these new buttons with the sponsor yield to a follow up question. Representative Rey yield to a follow up.
H.B. 78 Nuclear Regulatory Amendments · House floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Asks whether fees charged to regulated businesses could cover some of the regulatory costs.
▶ Watch at 27:30Read what they said
Often when we have these, uh, uh, agencies who regulate, uh, businesses, the fees from the businesses can support some of the regulatory costs given the increase that we anticipate in people who, or businesses who want to, uh, uh, manufacture or participate in this, in these nuclear technologies. Could some of the costs of this be covered by the fees that, that, that will be charged to those they're regulating?
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Supports the substitute, saying it sets a notice timeline so people flagged as possible non-citizens have time to respond and provide documentation.
▶ Watch at 34:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanna speak in favor of the substitute. Uh, the good sponsor worked with, um, some of us who were concerned that there was not a timeline when, uh, to, to ensure that folks are notified if they are not, if, if notified if they are a non-citizen. And I believe the substitute, my understanding is the substitute was solves that problem that people will be notified when plenty of time that they can cure or fix their, uh, provide documentation if they're notified that they're a non-citizen. Thank you.
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · House floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Asks whether the bill would discourage experimentation with floating solar installations.
▶ Watch at 47:09Read what they said
recently the water commission heard, my understanding is they heard some interesting information about floating solar, uh, installations that are often used in other places. Is there anything in this bill that would discourage experimentation with floating solar installations?
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · House floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Says he stands in support of the bill.
▶ Watch at 47:41Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. I stand in support. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Speaker.
H.B. 76 Data Center Water Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Supports the bill and questions whether the 180-day pre-construction reporting window is too long, asking why so much lead time is needed.
▶ Watch at 1:02:38Read what they said
Thank you for bringing this forward. I think it's a great, uh, uh, uh, important issue for us. There are many ty types of data centers. Most of our modern, many of our modern data centers use very little water compared to data centers that were built, uh, a number of years ago, which, uh, uh, I appreciate. And this will encourage folks to either upgrade their cooling systems or build to better standards, which I think is, is, is a, a great approach. My question for you is on line 180 about the 180 days requiring people to submit before they start construction to submit this request 180 days ahead of time. That's a very long time. Six months …
H.B. 76 Data Center Water Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Asks whether shortening the reporting window to 45 or 90 days would change the state engineer's reporting.
▶ Watch at 1:13:29Read what they said
Seeing, oh, Representative Cutler, I Have one more. There you go. Thank you. One more question for Mrs. Williamson. If, if, if that's okay. Uh, if, if, if the date when then they were required to report to the division, this information was 45 days before construction, or 90 days before construction instead of a hundred, would that make any difference to, to your reporting?
H.B. 76 Data Center Water Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Moves to adopt the first substitute of HB 76.
▶ Watch at 1:25:40Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, first of all, I'd like to move for substitute. Uh, I assume you'd like that since we're Yes, That's, thank you, Mr. Georgia. Uh, and then I have a proposed amendment after we move that, so, Okay. So that motion is to, uh, adopt, uh, first substitute of, uh, HB 76, um, discussion to that motion.
H.B. 76 Data Center Water Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Expresses concern that the 10,000 square foot threshold could affect smaller data centers and proposes changing the reporting window from 180 days to 90 days.
▶ Watch at 1:26:31Read what they said
Yes. I'd, I'd, uh, again, I, uh, uh, commend the, um, sponsor for and, and all the folks who have worked on this appreciate it. Given the change in size from 50,000 feet, which is a, a decent sized commercial building to 10,000 feet, which would actually be a pretty small commercial building, I think this opens it up for many more. Uh, if, if someone were to take even a retail location or other and turn it into a data center, which sometimes happens, sometimes it won't affect the big hyperscalers, but it would affect smaller data centers. I, I'd like to make sure we don't slow them down. So, I, I would like to propose an amendment on …
H.B. 76 Data Center Water Transparency Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Supports the bill as a step toward better water data and better policy decisions.
▶ Watch at 1:35:38Read what they said
I, I think this is a great step for Utah. It, it's adding transparency and we can't make good policy decisions if we don't have good data. And you are helping us get good data on water use, and based on getting data on water use, we can start to make better policy decisions. So I think this is a great step in the right, uh, direction and really appreciate the effort.
H.B. 199 Health Data Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Supports the bill, saying based on the audit it will improve security protections and data security.
▶ Watch at 2:36:52Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanna speak in favor of this. I'm supportive of it. I, I believe based on what OG found and based on the work, that this will actually improve security protections for our citizens and, uh, improve the, uh, security of, of, of data. That, that's my perception. And so I think reasonable people can disagree on that, and I respect, uh, uh, my distinguished colleagues' opinions, but I think this is a step in the right direction rather than in the wrong, wrong direction.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asked what the penalty is for failing to add a disclosure to an existing sign and who enforces it.
▶ Watch at 45:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the good sponsor for all the work on this over the, uh, many months to years in the, if someone fails to put a disclosure, let's say they have an existing campaign sign, they fail to put a disclosure on that. What, what is the penalty and, and what is the, is it a complaint based who enforces
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asked whether a popular candidate's sign kept after an election and reused later would violate the new law.
▶ Watch at 47:19Read what they said
Thank you. That's very helpful. I was thinking of this scenario where you have someone like Representative Loubet, very popular people like his signs, they may take his sign and put it in their garage after an election and keep it, and then two years later they may put it back out again when he's running again. And he may not have had the opportunity to put the sticker on his sign. So that sign would be in violation of, of the new law.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Made a light remark about his own sign popularity and thanked the sponsor. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 47:53Read what they said
Oh, thank you. I don't, I don't have that problem. I'm not as popular as representative of today. But, uh,
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Commends registration improvements and asks how a dispute between county and state election officers over someone's citizenship would be resolved.
▶ Watch at 1:13:47Read what they said
Thank you. I have a, a couple of questions if you don't mind. Some of these might be able to be answered by the sponsor or by, uh, attorneys or by our election office. First, I wanted to say that I think the, there are some good improvements to the Regi voter registration process here, and I commend the sponsor for those improvements. The, it, it authorizes an election officer to determine if someone is a citizen or not. There are state election officers or Lieutenant Governor's office and county. What happens if there's a dispute between a county clerk, county election officer who says, uh, I don't see any evidence that this person is a citizen versus a state …
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks whether the voter registration database has a field indicating citizenship.
▶ Watch at 1:15:44Read what they said
Thank you. And a few follow ups, if I may, is, is there a field in our voter system today that indicates if someone is a citizen, a US citizen or not? Is there a field In, in our voter registration database that indicates who is a US citizen or who is not?
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Confirms his understanding that citizenship is proven once at registration, not every time a person votes.
▶ Watch at 1:16:07Read what they said
Thank you. Um, on, I I wanted to move to section, uh, line 12 73, 12 77 area. And you're in the sub. This Is in the sub. Thank you. I'm, I'm, I'm looking at the sub and, and thank you for the improvements you've made in the substitutes. I think, uh, my, my understanding just to be clear, is that this, when someone registers to vote, they prove they're a citizen. Uh, that after that they just show evidence of, of who they are and they can vote. This is not something that's gonna happen every time they vote.
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Raises concern that lines 1273-1277 could put the burden on existing voters to prove citizenship or receive a provisional ballot, rather than presuming long-registered voters are citizens.
▶ Watch at 1:16:43Read what they said
This, the, the language here on 12, Which, which lines are you on? Uh, 1273 when we're talking about a, a federal ballot or 1277, only a voter who has at the time of voter registration or before voted Pro provided documentary proof of United States citizen may cast a standard ballot. This otherwise is a provisional ballot. And there's similar language, uh, 1277 of the, they, they must prove, show that proof, otherwise they have a provisional balance ballot. Excuse me. So my, my question or document concern is this seems to put the burden of proof for our existing, uh, voters on the individual to show that not necessarily the clerk or an audit, to show that they …
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks for a legal opinion and says existing voters should be presumed citizens.
▶ Watch at 1:18:36Read what they said
I get that. Yeah. Okay. I I I would love a legal opinion on this is I I I would like to, to presume, if you're already a voter in the state of Utah, the presumption should be that, that you are a US citizen. Yeah. You are innocent until proven otherwise. Yeah. That's,
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Expresses concern the language could be used to require voters to prove citizenship and asks if others share the concern.
▶ Watch at 1:18:53Read what they said
I'm concerned that this language could be used by someone to say you're guilty unless you prove you're innocent. And is that maybe something we could, does anyone else share that concern?
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks how clerks will decide by default whether voters receive a federal-only or standard ballot when the citizenship field is not marked.
▶ Watch at 1:20:04Read what they said
Thank you. I I I, I, I agree with your intent. I'm concerned whether this meets, meets the intent, and maybe you could talk for a minute, or maybe our elections office could talk about how are county clerks and election officials going to decide if someone gets a federal ballot or a standard ballot? By default, everyone gets the standard, or if they do not have the US citizenship field in their voter's registration today, they would get only the federal ballot until they come in and prove that they're a US citizen.
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks whether a voter without the citizenship field checked is assumed to be a non-citizen.
▶ Watch at 1:21:00Read what they said
Thanks. I think the question is by, by default, are you, and unless if that field that says you're a citizen is not already checked in the database, are you assumed to be a non-US citizen or, or not? Are we gonna,
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Says he hopes officials will be proactive and looks forward to learning how the process works.
▶ Watch at 1:21:35Read what they said
Uh, thank, thank you. I I hope it will be proactive. Oh, sorry about that. Yep, go ahead. I, I, I hope we'll be proactive in that process and look forward to learning more about how that process will work. Thank you.
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Cutler supported the motion, praising the registration system changes while saying he wants to work on presuming existing voters are eligible absent evidence otherwise.
▶ Watch at 1:58:11Read what they said
speak in favor of, of, uh, her motion to pass this out favorably. I think the additions to the registration system are very good. I still have a little bit of concern about the, I I, I agree with the intent. Uh, I, I want to work with the sponsor and the clerks to make sure that we assume that people are citizens unless there is evidence that there is, that they're not, uh, or, or that we assume that the existing voter database people are eligible to vote unless there is a good reason and evidence that, that, that we don't have that documentation. And I, I, uh, I commend the sponsor for his efforts there. I, so I …
H.B. 26 Voting Equipment Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Rep. Cutler presented the substitute bill, which would require voting equipment used in Utah to be on an approved list and to have no wireless communication capability, saying some counties had out-of-compliance older equipment; the substitute only corrected a code reference and a misspelled word, and the fiscal note is expected to remain zero.
▶ Watch at 53:16Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the opportunity to present and hopefully get a win on the first day as opposed to my last effort. Uh, I, uh, appreciate the rules Committee make, uh, substituting this in rules the substitute for your information. Uh, uh, it was substitute because there was a, a reference that was incorrect to a code and there was a misspelled word. The, you also note that the, the fiscal note on the original bill was zero. And we expect the fiscal note on this to also be zero since the only thing that was changed was the reference. This bill, this committee bill from the government Ops committee, uh, is very simple. There were a …
H.B. 29 Unfair and Deceptive Pricing Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and asks whether enforcement will be proactive or based on consumer complaints.
▶ Watch at 1:05:50Read what they said
Thank you for running this. I support this, uh, absolutely. In, in the bill. You give the, uh, consumer protection, the power of enforcement. Do you anticipate they will proactively look for, uh, these fees or this will be done on a complaint basis? Could you speak a little bit about the enforcement?
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Presents the bill, saying it was refined with stakeholders, lets unpaid utility bills be added to property tax bills, lowers the interest cap, and would lower costs for taxpayers.
▶ Watch at 1:28:13Read what they said
Mr. Speaker, this is a testament that things that die can live. Again. This bill, public subdivision liens, uh, due to lack of prioritization, died on the Senate floor, a tragic death. At the end of the session, the Interim Political Subdivisions Committee studied it again and brought it and recommended it unanimously. So, uh, last year, this was, uh, debated and refined significantly by stakeholders including the housing, uh, home Builders Association, who were very concerned about property rights. The, the league, the county's special districts. What is a public subdivision of a political subdivision lien? It's a tool that has been in the toolbox for some time that if, if somebody does not pay their utility bill for …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Explains the interest rate is capped at the property tax rate and that municipalities may charge an optional one-time penalty of up to 8 percent, which some may not charge.
▶ Watch at 1:31:38Read what they said
The, the interest rate is limited to what a, what is in state statute now, which is the, the max that a pro that can be attached to your property tax if you don't pay your property tax, which is between a maximum of seven to 10%. What what is anticipated is that municipalities who use this, if someone doesn't pay their bill, then they would have a one-time penalty of up to 8%. Or they can charge administrative costs, uh, I believe, which, which is ever less, but not more than it's anticipated. They would be the 8%, uh, penalty. So, so that 8% is just optional depending on the entity that's charging that. Correct. If they feel like …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says the existing statute allows up to 18 percent interest, which was lowered to the property tax rate of up to 10 percent, and thanks the questioner.
▶ Watch at 1:33:38Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you for that concern. The statute today allows these political subdivision liens to charge up to 18% interest. We thought that was excessive, and so we lowered it and made it the same rate as what's in our property tax statute if you don't pay your property tax bill, which is, uh, up to 10%. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Representative Christofferson.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says the property owner is already responsible for unpaid utility bills in a renter's name under current practice.
▶ Watch at 1:35:58Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My understanding is that is the scenario today as well. Uh, that if, if the renter does not pay their bill, it ultimately the property owner is notified today, even if it's in the renter's name, that that's a long-term obligation to the property owner.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says utilities are attached to the property and that turning delinquent accounts over to collections can damage personal credit.
▶ Watch at 1:37:11Read what they said
Thank you for the question representative. Uh, my understanding is for utilities, those utilities are attached to the property. Uh, so the, the, if, if, if somebody leaves or sells the property, that that is attached to the property, water, sewer, storm drain. These city utilities are, my understanding is they're attached to the property, but this, this can be a better mechanism because when it's, uh, if you turn a person over to a collections agency, than that shows up on their personal credit, uh, and can, can ruin their personal credit.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says special districts already use this lien power widely and efficiently, appearing on property tax bills.
▶ Watch at 1:38:09Read what they said
Thank you for the question. This is already a power that special districts have and use regularly. As mentioned, uh, almost all the special districts in the state use this. They find it, uh, very efficient, very friendly. People like it because it, it, uh, it shows up on their property tax bills. So at the end of the year, if they've forgotten something, it's there. Uh, and it's an efficient way to take care of this, of a utility. So it's being used today by, uh, in thousands of cases.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says the change lets cities without their own water service, such as Millcreek, collect delinquent bills through the lien process.
▶ Watch at 1:38:57Read what they said
So the substantive change, thank you for that clarification. There are, uh, cities and especially there's a, some cities in Salt Lake County that do not have their own water companies. For example, the city of Millcreek, their water is provided by another service. So if someone doesn't pay their sewer bill or their storm drain utility, they can't turn off. They have no way to enforce that. And so this is a way that instead of using a collection agency every time, uh, that, that those bills could be, uh, taken care of through this process, just like the special service districts are doing.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says the purpose is to keep delinquent bills from being paid by other taxpayers, noting collection agencies have low recovery rates.
▶ Watch at 1:39:39Read what they said
It, it is a no. There, there, they, there's a very low collection rate when you go to a collection agency. So the purpose for this is so that other taxpayers don't have to pick up the bill for deadbeats and delinquents. Uh, yes, they can turn it over to collection agencies and have them pursue it, and they get a very low, uh, a relatively low collection rate. Uh, this process has worked very well and, uh, it's a, it's a more efficient, uh, effective way and doesn't ruin people's credit. Uh, no foreclosure, uh, fewer lawsuits, uh, and, and a lower cost for taxpayers in those municipalities.
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Describes a notice process with multiple notices over about two months and then a 60-day period before a lien, and says notice is sent to the customer in the usual way.
▶ Watch at 1:41:50Read what they said
Thank you for the question. So on line 1 38, uh, the customer of the past due service fee must be, they have to notify them nowhere. They give them at least 60 days after, after they've been notified of the past due service fee, uh, notifying the, uh, so they, they, they have their regular period, then they notify them after 60 days, and then they notify them again that, uh, no earlier than 10 days after that. That if you don't pay this, this is usually gonna be the fourth or fifth or sixth notification because it's been two months than another 60 days. Uh, uh, then they let them know, okay, we're gonna sub, uh, file a …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says special districts have not reported enforcement actions or foreclosures using this lien, and that the 8 percent penalty is meant to cover costs.
▶ Watch at 1:45:12Read what they said
Uh, thank you for the question. My understanding is that currently there, I I'm not aware of any enforcement actions that the special services districts which have this power have been any extraordinary efforts they have been making. Typically, the these are paid off when property taxes are paid off, and they're at a very high rate. Uh, there, there could be some cases where they, uh, someone is, is delinquent after this case. But I haven't heard of any enforcement. The the mess, the information I got is that they have never foreclosed on a property because of this, because of a political subdivision lien. It's not, it's usually the banks and, uh, that are concerned about this, that …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says the amounts are small, districts can remove erroneous liens, liens must be removed when paid, and he welcomes suggestions.
▶ Watch at 1:47:11Read what they said
Mr. Speaker? My understanding is these are very small amounts, hundreds of dollars. Uh, and this is not shown to be a problem. If there's a problem with the liens, the service district or municipality, uh, have the ability to remove those. And when they, when the bill is paid, the bill, the the law requires them to be removed immediately. Uh, typically there, there are some cases where they have gone years, uh, but when the property is sold, it's paid off just like the property taxes are paid off when a property is sold and the issues are, have been resolved. Um, so I I I recognize that theoretically there could be a problem here. I don't see …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Welcomes the motion to circle so he can address concerns and explain the process and taxpayer savings.
▶ Watch at 1:48:31Read what they said
I'd. I'd appreciate that. I'd appreciate the opportunity to resolve any concerns, um, and help people understand the process that's being used to and how it's saving taxpayers money.
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.