Legislators / James A. Dunnigan
James A. Dunnigan
Republican · House District 36 · Speaker Pro Tempore
Hear from them directly
Contact Rep. James A. Dunnigan
- Email: jdunnigan@le.utah.gov
- Phone: 801-840-1800
- Office: 3105 W 5400 S STE 6, TAYLORSVILLE, UT, 84129
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.
James A. Dunnigan serves on:
- Criminal Justice Appropriations Subcommittee
- House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee
- House Political Subdivisions Committee
- Economic Development and Workforce Services Interim Committee
- Political Subdivisions Interim Committee
- Legislative Process Committee
What they've said
245 remarks on 49 billsH.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the Senate removed a growth development plan requirement for certain second class counties, adds Utah County and council-manager counties to the bill's provisions, and lets those counties change who they delegate accounting services to.
▶ Watch at 13:30Read what they said
Yes. Uh, Senate did a couple things. Uh, one thing is there was a, a portion in the bill that required second class counties bordering first class counties, which have been in Summit Illa to do a growth development plan that's been taken out. So that's no longer required since it passed the house. Utah County said they want in, uh, to the p provision for second class counties. So their city's contacted me and their county contacted me. So they're included in this inner city island, uh, annexation and then also for counties with a council manager form of government, which are Twila Summit and Wasatch. It allows them the ability to change who they delegate accounting services to. …
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says substitute four was never adopted and the notice language has not changed.
▶ Watch at 16:05Read what they said
We never adopted sub four. The language about notices and all that. There's no, that's still in there that was not changed. Sub four was never adopted.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says affected residents will receive mailed notice, the county must post notice, and officials will be notified before annexation occurs.
▶ Watch at 16:22Read what they said
Mr. Speaker. Everybody will receive it's impacted, will receive a notice to their mail. The, the county has to post it and they can notify the, the officials. So they'll they'll have notice before it happens and they can respond to it.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says residents can talk to county officials, who may choose not to annex an island after notice is given.
▶ Watch at 16:49Read what they said
Absolutely. They can talk to their county officials. And the county officials have the option to not incorporate any particular island if, you know, people don't wanna be incorporated After the notice has been given.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says residents can contact county leaders at any time and ask to opt out of annexation.
▶ Watch at 17:03Read what they said
Well they could, Mr Speaker, they can reach out if they know that they're an inner city in I City Island, they can reach out to their county leaders at any time. And Nassau County leaders that tell 'em they don't wanna opt in, that they wanna opt out.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says county commissioners make the decision, residents can speak with them, and commissioners can opt islands out.
▶ Watch at 17:41Read what they said
It'll be up to the, the county commissioners. They, they'll just like any notice, the uh, residents can go speak with their commissioners. The commissioners will make the decision, but the citizens will be notified of the proposed annexation. And again, if there's one or two or three islands that people don't want to, they tell the commissioners, commissioners have the ability to opt out or the Yeah. Of the opt those islands out.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Confirms that islands can be opted out after notice and notes that a map of the islands is available.
▶ Watch at 18:08Read what they said
Yes. Or they can. Okay. Thank You. I mean, we have a map. They, the islands are identified right now and we have a map that's available for anybody that's interested.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
In closing, says the sponsor worked with counties and cities on notice of proposed annexations and encourages support.
▶ Watch at 18:53Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the questions. So we have worked very carefully with the counties, with the cities to try to address uh, the concerns we put in the notice of, uh, proposed annexations so the public will be aware and I encourage your support.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Moves to suspend the rules so the bill can be considered read for first, second, and third time after the title changed.
▶ Watch at 19:27Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. So since the bill left the house, the title of the bill has changed. So just to be safe, I move the under suspension of the rules. We suspend the constitutional three readings requirement and consider the bill read for first, second, and third time.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says the change only affects the title and that the title is considered read three times out of caution.
▶ Watch at 19:46Read what they said
If we just change the title and out of a abundance of safety, we're gonna consider the title's been read three times.
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Dunnigan said the Senate amendments added an immediate effective date for the part that removes the Consumer Protection Division as a regulator.
▶ Watch at 26:29Read what they said
Yes. We added, uh, an immediate effective date for the part that removes the Consumer Protection Division as a regulator.
S.B. 201 Shelter Animal Euthanasia Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Speaks against the substitute motion, saying larger counties can easily do this.
▶ Watch at 1:43:42Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I speak against the substitute motion to amend, uh, the many people that I've talked to about this. I, I, I think these larger counties can easily do this. They're by far, they're the ones that are taking the most animals and numerous, whether it's the shelters or the animal control providers, uh, run by the government, they, they say that this makes sense, it can do it. So I'm speaking against the substitute motion to amend.
S.B. 78 Property Tax Relief Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Said seniors at his town halls liked not paying property taxes but disliked having to pay the tax when the property is transferred, and that they would prefer the current circuit breaker program.
▶ Watch at 2:28:27Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. So I, I had the opportunity last couple weeks to discuss this at my town halls, which we had a lot of seniors attend. And they really liked the idea of not having to pay property taxes. They get older based on their income. I said, there's only one thing when the property's transferred, transferred, you have to pay the property tax. They didn't like that part at all. And they said, well, we like the part where we don't have to pay it, but we don't have to want to pay it later either. I said, that's not the proposal. And so they said, well, then we'd rather have the current circuit breaker program. So …
H.B. 312 School Curriculum and Standards Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether the House amendment is substantially the same as the bill that failed in House committee.
▶ Watch at 1:44:14Read what they said
Is the substitute or the amendment that the house put into your bill to sub, is it substantially the same as what failed in the house committee?
H.B. 312 School Curriculum and Standards Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Raises concern that the bill adds about $60 million to current curriculum spending without guaranteed savings if local districts do not adopt it.
▶ Watch at 1:45:01Read what they said
Speaker, Mr. Speaker? Mr. Speaker, I'd like to recall my, my time. Thank you. I think the sponsor answered my question. Um, my concern with this is we're already spending a couple hundred million dollars, whatever it is on curriculum, this is another 60 million and if the LEAs don't adopt this, then we may be spending what we're currently spending plus the additional amount and not really having any, any savings. That's my concern. Thank you Mr. Speaker.
S.B. 150 Healthcare Providers Scope of Practice Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Explains that the bill creates a process for requests to study healthcare professions' scope of practice when new technologies or innovations arise, and gives examples of possible technologies.
▶ Watch at 1:57:32Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. So the purpose of Senate Bill one 50 is to let the market tell us the state what may be possible in the healthcare market instead of the state dictating to the market. So in that sense, what comes through this, the process is intended to provide better outcomes to those receiving healthcare. So we have a, an office, uh, ler and every 10 years they're charged with reviewing on a rolling scale professions. What this bill applies to is healthcare professions professionals. And it can allow, if somebody comes up with an idea and says, oh, we have some new technology or an innovation, how can we incorporate this into our practice? Then …
S.B. 150 Healthcare Providers Scope of Practice Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says the bill gives medical professionals and schools that teach them a process to request evaluation of scope of practice in light of new technology, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 2:01:54Read what they said
Uh, I think this has a real potential. It it provides a process for us for medical professionals and educational school that teaches medical professionals to come and say there's some new technology. Maybe we should evaluate the scope of practice or how this can lead to lower cost and better outcomes. So I encourage your support.
S.B. 313 Recidivism Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Asks whether there is a reason S.B. 313 cannot be placed on the consent calendar.
▶ Watch at 41:00Read what they said
That bill passes. Mr. Chair have a question. Is, is there a reason we cannot put this on consent? And have we been told we cannot add to consent?
S.B. 313 Recidivism Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Says he would support placing the bill on consent, and notes the timing deadline of day 41 has likely passed.
▶ Watch at 41:19Read what they said
Yeah, double check. But I, I'd support that. That'd be great. Thank you. That'll save you a Tyler Clancy speech. No, I'm just kidding. Has to be before day 41. What day are we on? Uh, we're too late. Alright. Okay, Try. Thank you though. Thank you.
S.B. 235 Governor Compensation Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Supports the motion and suggests setting the Attorney General's salary at 98 or 90 percent of the governor's, or at 50 percent.
▶ Watch at 1:12:20Read what they said
Thank you. I support the motion, although I would support the Attorney general being 98 or 90% of the governor's salary as well. I think that's, uh, would be a well deserved little bump. I think 50% of our salary.
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Supports the motion, saying the bill broadens the pool of licensed professionals for school positions.
▶ Watch at 1:27:34Read what they said
Thank you. So I, I too speak in favor of the motion. I I, I did have a concern when I first read this and saw an intern, but I know how difficult it's time at times to fill this space in a school and to represent Ballard's point. These are some licensed professionals that are, they're adding and broadening the pool. And, and this committee's generally been about lets people, you know, have the opportunity to do the skills that they're trained for. And you have already on the list, you have a school social worker or other social worker, and now we're adding these master level skills. Uh, and so I, I think it's a good thing to …
S.B. 148 General Oversight Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the amendment sets the oversight committee's bill limit at the same number as an interim committee, currently five, because the third substitute removed the earlier unlimited language.
▶ Watch at 37:02Read what they said
Yes. In the prior, a prior version, I think it was the second sub of the bill, it allowed the committee chairs to open unlimited number of committee bills. As I understand it, the third sub has stricken those lines. What this does is it, it says it doesn't, instead of just leaving it silent, it says that this oversight committee may open the same number of bills as an interim committee, which currently is five. That's, that's what it does.
S.B. 148 General Oversight Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the amendment states the oversight committee may open the same number of bills as an interim committee, currently five, in place of the earlier unlimited provision.
▶ Watch at 37:02Read what they said
Yes. In the prior, a prior version, I think it was the second sub of the bill, it allowed the committee chairs to open unlimited number of committee bills. As I understand it, the third sub has stricken those lines. What this does is it, it says it doesn't, instead of just leaving it silent, it says that this oversight committee may open the same number of bills as an interim committee, which currently is five. That's, that's what it does.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Presents H.B. 457, which requires automatic annexation by July 2027 of unincorporated islands fully surrounded by a city in second class counties, and introduces the county representative.
▶ Watch at 24:39Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chairman, committee members. So two years ago we passed legislation for counties with first class Salt Lake County. And what it addressed is mostly Metropolitan County, but within a city you have little islands of unincorporated areas. And so, um, we passed that and require an automatic annexation by July of 2027. So that's in state code. What this bill does is, does kind of a similar concept to second class counties. So in Weber, Davis and Utah counties, they have the same issues. This bill's a little narrower scope than what we did two years ago. They did all of the unincorporated parcels. This only addresses inner city islands. So that's a, a unincorporated parcel, …
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Describes owner notice requirements and the flexibility Utah County cities have to withhold certain parcels from annexation, noting the bill was developed with the counties and cities associations.
▶ Watch at 27:37Read what they said
Thank you. There, there's some criteria in there. As she said. Uh, any affected property owners have to be, uh, noticed, um, individually and on the city's or on the county's website. And in Utah County, which is included in this, the cities may opt to withhold certain parties or certain parcels from annexation Weaver and DA Davis. They don't really have that issue. And I'll go into more detail if you want, but in Utah County, they have a little more flexibility, which they've requested. We've worked very closely with the Association of Counties, with League of Cities and Towns. So that's what that part of the bill does.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Explains that the removed planning requirement was intended to have second class counties bordering a first class county plan for growth for their own use. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 29:32Read what they said
Of that part? Yeah. And not requir. So the purpose Requiring it, the purpose of that part was for second class counties that border a first class county. So that's gonna be be Twila and Summit. And the concern about that is those other counties are growing, right? They're filling in and all that, that part was, was gonna require that they do some planning for growth. Where are they gonna have housing? Where are they gonna have schools? Where are they gonna have roads and, and things like that is just required to do some plant, some overall planning that that's what that was for. Okay. It didn't, their own planners could do it. They just didn't have to …
S.B. 31 Office of Professional Licensure Review Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Said the list of tasks allowed under collaboration is not the same as the list allowed under physician direction.
▶ Watch at 45:02Read what they said
Okay. Thank you. So I see the list of all the things they can do under collaboration, but it's not that same list when they're under the direction of others. Okay. Thank you.
S.B. 31 Office of Professional Licensure Review Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Preferred to keep the 2000-hour requirement now and address the school issues later.
▶ Watch at 1:02:39Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, I agree with Representative Whyte. I think the underlying school issue needs to be looked at. However, I would prefer that we leave the 2000 hours in because we can implement that right away, and that will at least be a higher bar than where we are right now. If we take that out, we're not, the schools are not gonna be fixed, and we're gonna have lower hours this way. At least we have the higher hours until we can solve a broader underlying problem. So I prefer to leave the bill the way it is. Thank you.
H.B. 593 Bail Amendments · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says he supports the bill's goal, notes the Salt Lake County jail is full and overcrowded, and asks how the sponsor will avoid worsening that problem.
▶ Watch at 25:11Read what they said
I I want to thank the, uh, representative for meeting with the Salt Lake County jail leaders. They have the, by far, the largest jail. They've got 2200 or plus inmates that they're big, they're full. And I actually support what you're trying to do these, you know, frequent flyers and frequent releasers. Knowing the jail's full pretrial can become a very important service. I just, I, I listened to your comments, but it sounds like it's your intent to continue to work with the jail staff and try, try to find a, a policy that will work and not exasperate their overcrowding problem. Would you address that?
H.B. 593 Bail Amendments · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks whether the sponsor intends to amend or substitute the bill to add those pretrial tools.
▶ Watch at 26:46Read what they said
Thank you. And, and it's your intent to try to amend that or substitute that into this bill to give them those additional tools, is that correct?
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Explains that the bill creates a framework for an ambulance insurance company, expands Utah's jurisdiction to cover employees residing in Utah who work for outside employers above a 10% workforce threshold, and removes an additional long-term care continuing education requirement while keeping the overall continuing education requirement.
▶ Watch at 26:10Read what they said
That motion is in nor words like to speak to. Yeah, The bill does the change those a couple things. It provides a framework for an ambulance insurance company to operate in your Utah. What this would be is it's insurance company that pays for your ambulance ride and some other types of services. And then it also, uh, expands Utah's jurisdictions to include coverage issues outside of Utah when employees residing in Utah. If the employer outside Utah is more than 10% of their workforce in Utah and then it removes the additional long-term care continuing ed requirement, uh, that we placed in there a few years ago. But the still overall or continuing ed requirement remains in place. …
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Moved to adopt the third substitute to H.R. 7, which requires members presenting a bill in committee to sit at the presentation table, even if they sit on that committee, unless the chair excuses them.
▶ Watch at 1:04:17Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I move to adopt third substitute HR seven. Thank you representative. That motion is an order. Would you like to speak to it? Yes. What, what this does, it says when you're presenting a bill and committee, you need to sit at the presentation table. Even if you're a member of the committee, you need to be at the table. You can't stay on the committee dais. And you need to stay at the table unless the chair excuses you because he wants to load up the table with public commenters.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Explains that members presenting a bill in committee must present from the presentation table, even if they sit on the committee, and stay there unless the chair excuses them.
▶ Watch at 1:04:25Read what they said
Yes. What, what this does, it says when you're presenting a bill and committee, you need to sit at the presentation table. Even if you're a member of the committee, you need to be at the table. You can't stay on the committee dais. And you need to stay at the table unless the chair excuses you because he wants to load up the table with public commenters.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Answers that presenting from the dais is more common in the Senate and that the change is only a House rule affecting House committees.
▶ Watch at 1:05:03Read what they said
Yes. Yes. Representative. So 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.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Responded that the rule applies to House committees and requires House members to present from the presentation table.
▶ Watch at 1:05:29Read what they said
So, cleaning up the sediment rules as lifetime quest, we're not addressing that today. Uh, what, what this one does is in a house committee, doesn't matter if it's a representative or a center presenters, of course they wouldn't be on the committee at that point. But to answer your question, this is gonna apply to house committees. Representatives need to present from the presentation table.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Responds that the rule applies to House committees and House members must present from the presentation table.
▶ Watch at 1:05:29Read what they said
So, cleaning up the sediment rules as lifetime quest, we're not addressing that today. Uh, what, what this one does is in a house committee, doesn't matter if it's a representative or a center presenters, of course they wouldn't be on the committee at that point. But to answer your question, this is gonna apply to house committees. Representatives need to present from the presentation table.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Summarized the changes in the third substitute, noting the rest of the bill was discussed last week, and asked for support.
▶ Watch at 1:06:24Read what they said
Thank you speaker. Everything else in the bill we, we discussed last week when we adopted the second sub. So I've outlined the, the change and without encourage your support.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Says the other provisions were discussed last week when the second substitute was adopted and urges support.
▶ Watch at 1:06:24Read what they said
Thank you speaker. Everything else in the bill we, we discussed last week when we adopted the second sub. So I've outlined the, the change and without encourage your support.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Explained that all presenters, including committee members, should present from the same position and method, without special treatment.
▶ Watch at 1:07:01Read what they said
Yeah, there's a couple of reasons. One is regardless or irrespective if you're a committee member or not, you should have the same position and the same method. You shouldn't get any special treatment in my opinion. 'cause you're a member of the committee. You should go before the presenter's table, face the committee like every other presenter has to do.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Explains that committee members and other presenters should have the same position and method, with no special treatment for members.
▶ Watch at 1:07:01Read what they said
Yeah, there's a couple of reasons. One is regardless or irrespective if you're a committee member or not, you should have the same position and the same method. You shouldn't get any special treatment in my opinion. 'cause you're a member of the committee. You should go before the presenter's table, face the committee like every other presenter has to do.
H.B. 315 Human Development Instruction · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Spoke on the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:12:25Read what they said
Will the sponsor yield? Yes. And Peck, will you yield to a question? Yes. Representative.
H.B. 315 Human Development Instruction · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks which grade levels or school years the bill applies to, noting that a grade range appears to have been struck.
▶ Watch at 1:12:29Read what they said
It appears in the sub, the ages three through or three through 12 or, or, um, school year three through 12 is stricken. So what ages does it apply or what years of school does it apply to?
H.B. 315 Human Development Instruction · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks which ages or school years the bill applies to, since the grade range language appears to have been struck.
▶ Watch at 1:12:29Read what they said
It appears in the sub, the ages three through or three through 12 or, or, um, school year three through 12 is stricken. So what ages does it apply or what years of school does it apply to?
H.B. 315 Human Development Instruction · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks where the sub's language on this limit can be found.
▶ Watch at 1:12:54Read what they said
Thank you. Can you tell me where I can find that in the sub? Um, that's a really good question, but it should say just within the health classes, uh, is what it should say make available.
H.B. 315 Human Development Instruction · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Says he is having difficulty finding the wording, suggests amending it, and asks that the bill be circled to check the language. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:13:09Read what they said
Mm-hmm. Well, human development inside the Honduras, let's see, is supposed to say in the health classes might have asked a good question that I might have to look at. Anyway, that's what it's for. I'm looking for the, I'm sorry, I don't wanna take time, Mr. Speaker. Um, but that is what this is intended for, is for the health classes. And if we need to amend to put that, um, it, it says human development includes at a minimum. Um, I think it's in the existing language, which is why I'm having a hard time finding it. Mr. Speaker. Um, may I Oh yeah, I, I was wondering if somebody might circle this just for a minute and …
H.B. 315 Human Development Instruction · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Says he cannot yet locate the wording in the existing language and will look for it. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:13:09Read what they said
Mm-hmm. Well, human development inside the Honduras, let's see, is supposed to say in the health classes might have asked a good question that I might have to look at. Anyway, that's what it's for.
H.B. 315 Human Development Instruction · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks that the bill be circled so the needed wording can be confirmed.
▶ Watch at 1:14:10Read what they said
Mr. Speaker. Um, may I Oh yeah, I, I was wondering if somebody might circle this just for a minute and make sure that what we, the, the wording that we need and there's actually in there.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Presented H.B. 280, describing the existing consumer litigation financing registry, adding commercial lending to it, a 10-day contract rescission period, a ban on investment by foreign entities from certain nations, and recent audit findings.
▶ Watch at 1:39:34Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So six years ago we created a registry for Con Consumer, um, litigation financing. This in this involves, uh, a tort. So let's say you're injured or, or you have a claim and you think was time you can work out a better settlement with the insurance company, but you don't have enough money to pay your daily living expenses. So there are companies that will finance that. They'll give you your, uh, money to finance it so you can afford to continue on and, and, uh, wage your your case. And, and then they charge the course. The finance company charges an interest. So that's consumer lending. Larger cases in the commercial space are gonna …
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Responded about the status of a bill in another committee. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:41:42Read what they said
Dennis? Yes. Did that pass? Yes. Okay. We, we've got a bill together. Um, thank you.
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Presented HB 498 and the second substitute, which delays most implementation to May 2027 and makes the Consumer Protection Division's removal as regulator effective immediately; also described added provisions for emancipated or married minors and family accounts.
▶ Watch at 55:46Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. Committee members. This last year, Senator Wiley ran a bill to address the issue of apps, essentially contracting with minors, maybe providing inappropriate material to them. So we passed that bill, and this is a, an update to that Bill, bill does a few things. I'm, I'm speaking to the, the second sub and which needs to be adopted. What the second sub does is it delays the, the, or it makes a, an immediate effective date for parts of the bill. But, uh, lemme give you an overview of the bill. Other than that change in the second sub, it provides some additional consumer, uh, protections. It, after we passed the, the bill last year, …
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Explained that the second substitute delays implementation of most of the bill to May 2027, while removing the Consumer Protection Division as regulator takes immediate effect.
▶ Watch at 58:31Read what they said
Now you have a substituted bill, So I Thank you Mr. Chair. So the bill delays the implementation tape for much of it like the, the app stores when they go online to May of 2027. It gives us more time to learn from what's going on in other states and also one more legislative session in case there's some other adjustments that need to be made. But as I said earlier, there is an, would be an immediate effective date on the part that removes the division of consumer protection as a regulator. Thank you.
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asks whether a city with two open seats and eight candidates could choose not to hold a primary.
▶ Watch at 37:46Read what they said
What if, what if you have two open positions and you have eight candidates, and this municipality chooses not to have a primary, that would be their choice, right?
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asks whether a city with two seats and ten candidates could skip the primary.
▶ Watch at 39:09Read what they said
So thank you and good morning, Lanny. But let's say you have two open positions and you have 10 candidates, they wouldn't have to hold a primary,
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says that is not good policy and asks about five seats with 68 candidates.
▶ Watch at 39:20Read what they said
Election. So I don't think that's good policy. What if you had five open candidates or five open slots and you had 68 candidates, they still wouldn't have to do it.
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says the bill does not reflect that intent, recalls running for city council with 68 candidates for five seats before primaries, and says primaries have been a good thing.
▶ Watch at 39:43Read what they said
O okay. If that's the intent, that's what the bill should say. That's not what the bill says. When I ran for the city council, Utah had no primary law, five open positions, 68 candidates. Now that's extreme, but there's nothing that prohibits that from happening again. So since then we've implemented the primary and I think it's been a good thing. But you've, you've answered my question. Thank you.
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Suggests a three-times-the-seats threshold to avoid one-off primaries while still narrowing large fields, and asks the sponsor's view.
▶ Watch at 49:25Read what they said
I understand. I think what you're trying to do, and I'm sensitive to that, but we don't want to get, I don't think, what I went through with 68 candidates, people were desperate to stand out. So one, there was one woman who's a candidate, she dressed in a kangaroo costume on Redwood Road with her campaign signed, just told to somebody that she would stand out. I, I think it, for me, it's reasonable if you did maybe three times, you know, 'cause if you have this one-off, like Representative Ward said or something like that, that would eliminate those. But there's also a lot of fatigue if you've got a lot of candidates, you know, for limited number …
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says municipal elections differ from service district elections and may warrant a different standard.
▶ Watch at 50:40Read what they said
Thank you. I have one other comment. To me, there's a significant difference between service district elections and municipal elections. They can both have small turnout, but service districts can be extremely small and municipality and their elections, I, I think, are a different animal, have the potential to impact more lives in more ways. So I think it's reasonable to have a different standard for them. What do you think about that?
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Offers a substitute motion to strike line 311 and change 'twice' to 'three times,' saying cities should not be able to skip primaries with large fields.
▶ Watch at 57:56Read what they said
I offer a substitute motion. My motion is to strike line three 11. And then on line three 12, delete the word twice and insert three times the number of individuals needed to fill the office. May I speak to it? Yes, go ahead. And my intent, so for me, three 11 doesn't work at all because you could, you could have an, a large number of candidates and the, and the municipality say, we're still not gonna have an election. So I just don't think that's, I hope that's not where you're going because that, I don't think that works. But if you're comfortable with three times that it has to exceed three times, then that gives a, a …
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says he would leave special districts alone and change only the municipal provision.
▶ Watch at 59:31Read what they said
So, so I, I, I would leave the special districts alone and just do the municipal fix. I'm personally, I'm not that concerned about special districts. I mean, I love 'em, but I'm not that good. And, okay. So that's, that's my motion.
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Modifies his motion to change 'may' to 'shall' on line 310 so a primary is required when candidates exceed three times the seats.
▶ Watch at 1:01:22Read what they said
May I respond to that? Yes, I'd like to modify my motion. And on line three 10, delete the word may and insert shall, so it should read primary election for a particular municipal office shall be held. If take strike the word only shall be held. If and what that, the intent is, if they have more than three, not just three times, but more than three times, then they shall have a primary election.
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says that would be allowed because a primary would not be triggered until a fourth candidate filed. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:03:03Read what they said
Under, under the, under the substitute with that amendment, that would be Allowed. Yeah, because it wouldn't, it wouldn't get triggered until there was a fourth candidate, there was a fourth
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Replaces his motion to include changing 'authorized' to 'held' on line 314.
▶ Watch at 1:05:03Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to modify my withdraw and replace my motion. So I replaced the motion I just stated on line three 14. Switch out the, delete the word authorized and insert the word held so that we've on above. We've already on line three 11, we've proposed to strike the word authorized. So we need to change that. So it reads, if a primary election is not held, the candidates for the office are considered nominated.
H.B. 548 Primary Election Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Moves to recommend HB 548 favorably as amended.
▶ Watch at 1:07:00Read what they said
Thank you Madam Chair. I move that we recommend favorably house Bill 5 48 as amended.
H.B. 544 County Land Use Authority Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Says he has a question about the amendment and will raise it when the amendment is considered.
▶ Watch at 1:13:42Read what they said
Oh, I have a question on the amendment, so I guess I'll wait till we come to the amendment.
H.B. 544 County Land Use Authority Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Moves to adopt Amendment #1 and asks the sponsor why conditional use is included on line 98 alongside permitted use.
▶ Watch at 1:24:21Read what they said
I move to adopt amendment number one. The motion is to adopt amendment number one. Is there discussion to that motion? May, may I speak To that? Okay. Um, yes. So when you go to the sponsor, I have a question for her. On line 98, it's says We're a single family dwellings permitted or conditional use. I'm just wondering why you are including conditional use. It seems like maybe I'm misreading conditional use. There may be some conditions that are appropriate to place on. It seems that this would be overriding that. So why are we including conditional use on that? And that's my question and my motion.
H.B. 544 County Land Use Authority Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Modifies his motion to delete the words or conditional from line 98, so that the bill reads permitted use.
▶ Watch at 1:25:45Read what they said
Okay. Make, okay. I Modifying my motion. Make, yes. I have a question if I may. Go ahead. Do you need the word conforming or is permitted use? I think, I think permitted is good. Permitted, I would say is equivalent to Conform. I'll modify my motion if I may, and to adopt amendment number one, but, uh, modifying on line 98, bottom line, deleting the word, uh, or conditional. So it'll just read a dwelling as a permitted use.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Says Davis County commissioners asked to be included, so he added them to the bill, and added a public notice requirement for affected property owners in the annexation.
▶ Watch at 40:52Read what they said
Yes. Uh, since this past committee, the commissioners from Davis County reached out, they want to be included in this bill. So I've added them. I've also put in a public notice for, uh, any property owners that may be involved in this annexation. They have to be noticed and there's additional notice and disclosure.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Says the Davis County commissioners asked to be included, so he added them, and added a public notice requirement for property owners affected by annexation.
▶ Watch at 40:52Read what they said
Yes. Uh, since this past committee, the commissioners from Davis County reached out, they want to be included in this bill. So I've added them. I've also put in a public notice for, uh, any property owners that may be involved in this annexation. They have to be noticed and there's additional notice and disclosure.
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Explains that the bill lets small unincorporated pockets under 55 acres surrounded by a city, in Weber and Davis counties, be annexed by July of next year with notice to property owners, changes the plat fee rule for aggregated parcels from a prior bill, and requires third-class counties to prepare growth plans.
▶ Watch at 41:37Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker representative. There's a handout. Looks like this if you're interested. So this impacts Weber and Davis County. So it's counties of the second class F population of less than 400,000. Those two qualify. This is the issue. They have, uh, cities that have little islands or pockets of UNC unincorporated land inside the city. So the city boundaries completely encompass these unincorporated pockets. And so the counties, you know, are supposed to provide municipal type services, snow plans. So they, they drive some miles, drop a plow for a little bit, then pull it up again and go. So what this bill does says is by July of next year, these, uh, small pockets of unincorporated …
H.B. 457 County Governance Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Explains that the bill would annex small unincorporated pockets surrounded by cities in Weber and Davis counties if under 55 acres with notice, lets counties aggregate plat filings to save fees, and requires growth plans for certain third class counties.
▶ Watch at 41:37Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker representative. There's a handout. Looks like this if you're interested. So this impacts Weber and Davis County. So it's counties of the second class F population of less than 400,000. Those two qualify. This is the issue. They have, uh, cities that have little islands or pockets of UNC unincorporated land inside the city. So the city boundaries completely encompass these unincorporated pockets. And so the counties, you know, are supposed to provide municipal type services, snow plans. So they, they drive some miles, drop a plow for a little bit, then pull it up again and go. So what this bill does says is by July of next year, these, uh, small pockets of unincorporated …
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Dunnigan explains HR 7's changes to House rules on motions in committee, word limits on amendments, consent calendar removal, reading statements, and props during personal privilege.
▶ Watch at 1:09:29Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. So first of HR seven does a couple of things regarding house rules On line 34 in committee, after you make a motion, it's our practice that you're allowed to speak and explain your motion. This just puts it in rule. It's been practice, not in rule. In line 45, it says in committee, if you place a substitute motion, you're also allowed to speak to that on line 1 0 7. Currently, when you're doing a an amendment in committee, you can do a verbal amendment not to exceed 15 words, but you can delete as much as you want. This, uh, provides on line 1 0 7 that you can reinstate an unlimited amount …
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Moves adoption of the second substitute for H.R. 7.
▶ Watch at 1:12:02Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I would like to move adoption of the second substitute. Thank
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Dunnigan offers a friendly amendment on the second substitute and supports the sponsor statement placement on legislators' own web pages.
▶ Watch at 1:14:00Read what they said
As a friendly amendment. And I appreciate, uh, representative from Provo. I like what he's doing as far as the bill sponsors declaration information. I, I think it's much better placed on our own, uh, under our own name on the website rather than maybe look like it's part of the official document. So I appreciate that and I support the rest of his, uh, bill.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Offers a friendly amendment supporting placing the sponsor statement information on legislators' own webpages rather than the bill, and says he supports the rest of the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:14:00Read what they said
As a friendly amendment. And I appreciate, uh, representative from Provo. I like what he's doing as far as the bill sponsors declaration information. I, I think it's much better placed on our own, uh, under our own name on the website rather than maybe look like it's part of the official document. So I appreciate that and I support the rest of his, uh, bill.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Dunnigan supports circling the bill so a final cleanup change can be made before it returns.
▶ Watch at 1:15:42Read what they said
So I support that motion. I appreciate the representative reminded me. There's one other cleanup we need to do, so let's circle it and get it fixed. We'll bring it back.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Supports circling the bill so a remaining cleanup change can be made before it returns.
▶ Watch at 1:15:42Read what they said
So I support that motion. I appreciate the representative reminded me. There's one other cleanup we need to do, so let's circle it and get it fixed. We'll bring it back.
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Presents H.B. 58 as technical corrections and updates to the insurance code, covering insurer examinations, expert hiring, ambulance membership plans, and dental billing and jurisdiction changes in the substitute.
▶ Watch at 1:20:20Read what they said
Uh, this bill is the technical corrections and other updates to the insurance code. And it does a number of things. And the substitute was actually an attempt to bring a couple of other insurance related issues that the department had been looking on and looking at in other bills and consolidating them into one bill so we can cut down the number of bills that we're running. Um, you know, it, the bill improves the process for examining insurers. Gives the department more power to collect cost of an examination from an examined insurer. Clarifies the process for hiring experts. Authorize rule making to preserve a title, insurance agency's record after it closes. There are a number of other …
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House Rules Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Presented H.R. 7, explaining changes on reading prepared speeches, using props during personal privilege, and the first substitute's provisions.
▶ Watch at 1:04:39Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Committee meeting. This affects the rules. Um, and committee, if you look at Lang 34, what it says is, after a committee member makes a motion, original motion, they're allowed to speak to the original motion. It's our practice. We do it, we realize it's not in roll. Look at line 4 45, if there's a substitute motion following the original motion, just as the same thing. It says, you actually get to speak to your emotion. Again, it's our practice. And then if you look on line 1 62, we're prohibited from re reading from a written prepared speech. However, it has been our practice, so it doesn't often happen very often where we can …
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House Rules Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said the first substitute lets the maker of a motion speak to it, on lines 34 and 45.
▶ Watch at 1:07:20Read what they said
the line numbers? Oh, I'm sorry. It's, uh, line 34 and 45 stipulate that the maker of the motion may speak to it.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House Rules Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Explained that a consent calendar bill may be reassigned to the third reading calendar by the presiding officer or by a House majority vote.
▶ Watch at 1:08:08Read what they said
Okay. So on line to Thank you Representative Wilcox. So on line 1 33, a bill that's been assigned to consent calendar may be reassigned to the third reading calendar by the presiding officer or by the majority of the house vote, we already have the option that six or more members can move it. This would allow the by majority vote, the house can do it, or the presiding officer could do it. And I can give you some examples of where, when that might be. Uh, good to do. But anyways, that's what it provides.
H.B. 442 Feminine Hygiene Products Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked the sponsor how manufacturers would know whether unintentionally absorbed lead or other chemicals are present in a product.
▶ Watch at 56:59Read what they said
You. So I wanna follow up on Representative Ivory's concern. My question, I guess for the sponsor is, so let's say you have cotton I in the natural organic way, it's growing, it absorbs some lead into it. It seems like this reads if there's lead in that they're supposed to disclose it. But how, if they're not intentionally adding it, how would, how will they, are they expected to know if it's got lead in it? There's testing that can be done to determine whether it's in there. That's how we know it's there. So it's your intent that they're gonna test for lead, the arsenic, cadium Academy, and these other things. Mm-hmm.
H.B. 442 Feminine Hygiene Products Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Said product manufacturing has not varied much over time and does not seem to require monthly or batch testing.
▶ Watch at 58:24Read what they said
So I'm just wondering how often they have to do that. I don't think that the way they make these products varies a lot over time. Like, maybe, maybe they change the style every once in a while. But, um, after years of using the products, I would say they're roughly the same as they were when I was a teenager. So I don't think, other than if the soil is changing that the things are growing in, or if there's something that's changing in the air, then yeah, maybe there's going to be some fluctuation. But I, I don't think it's something that needs to be tested like on a monthly basis or a batch basis or anything like …
H.B. 478 Residential Rental Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked what happens when a one-year lease renews with an agreed 20 percent increase.
▶ Watch at 1:09:18Read what they said
Oh, thank you, Mr. Chair. So if you have a, a lease with an escalation clause, so you have a one year lease mm-hmm. And it renews and you have an agreement that it's gonna go up 20%, what happens?
H.B. 478 Residential Rental Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked whether the word cost in the bill includes rent.
▶ Watch at 1:10:02Read what they said
Okay. But it goes on to say, including automatic increase in a cost fee assessment, it doesn't say rent. Does cost mean rent
H.B. 478 Residential Rental Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked whether, if no 60-day notice is given, the lease would expire and a rent increase would have to wait 60 days.
▶ Watch at 1:10:28Read what they said
Okay. And if you have a one year lease, if the, under this bill, if the landlord doesn't give a 60 day notice, then the lease would expire and you could do a new lease, but you would not, you'd have to wait 60 days before you increase that rent, is that right?
H.B. 478 Residential Rental Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked whether rent could increase on the first month of a month-to-month tenancy.
▶ Watch at 1:10:56Read what they said
So when it goes month to month, could you increase it at that time on the first month? Yeah.
H.B. 478 Residential Rental Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked about the timing of a rent increase after a lease ending March 1 converts to month-to-month, and whether a 15-day notice would apply.
▶ Watch at 1:11:04Read what they said
So if I, if I have a, a lease that is coming to an end, uh, March 1st and I go to a month to month, the, the next increase in that, that rental amount would be, um, May 1st I believe, or 60 days thereafter the, the end of our current lease. You could go month to month and give a 15 day notice. Is that right?
H.B. 414 Dental Hygienist Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Presented HB 414 to add hospitals to the public health settings where dental hygienists may work without a dentist's general supervision, so hygienists can provide dental cleaning to patients who stay long-term; said the Hospital Association supports the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:17:22Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So currently the dental hygienist can practice without the general supervision of a dentist in certain public health settings such as a, a school, a nursing home, an assisted living or community health center Concept of that is, these are areas that are probably underserved for a lot of dental care. So we allow the hygienists to go in and help people at least clean their teeth. So what this bill does is it adds one other category to a public health setting, and that would be a hospital. So a dental genist hygienists will be able to go into the hospital. Sometimes people in the hospital are there for weeks or months and they get …
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Presents H.B. 498 as a cleanup to last year's app store law: lets parents change content settings for family accounts, treats emancipated or married minors under 18 as adults, delays implementation to May 2027, removes the Consumer Protection Division as enforcer, and keeps a private right of action.
▶ Watch at 19:25Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So last year we passed the App Store Accountability Act bill, and it was to get at these, these apps that target minor, minor children and effectively have them sign a contract online, even though they're minors, and then send them on sort of a material. So we, we passed that. That's great. 20 other states now have model legislation that they're working on similar to ours. So what this bill is a little clean up to last year's bills does a few things, uh, addresses a, an an app that uses a family, and I'll give you an exa, a family app like Netflix. So the current law requires if you go into Netflix with …
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Says the bill is good for children and families and encourages support for it.
▶ Watch at 21:31Read what they said
Thank you. I think this, uh, is good for our, for our children. It's good for our, our, uh, families, and I encourage your support.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Moves to adopt the third substitute of H.B. 280.
▶ Watch at 1:30:46Read what they said
Representative Dunnigan. Thank You Mr. Speaker. I move to adopt third substitute house Bill two 80.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Sponsor moves to adopt the third substitute for H.B. 280.
▶ Watch at 1:30:46Read what they said
Representative Dunnigan. Thank You Mr. Speaker. I move to adopt third substitute house Bill two 80.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Says the third substitute includes a coordination clause with a related Senate bill working in the same area.
▶ Watch at 1:30:55Read what they said
Yes. The third sub includes a coordination clause. There's a Senate bill that's also working in this space, and it provides a coordination clause with the Senate. Bill.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Sponsor says the third substitute includes a coordination clause, and that a related Senate bill also addresses this area and has a coordination clause with it.
▶ Watch at 1:30:55Read what they said
Yes. The third sub includes a coordination clause. There's a Senate bill that's also working in this space, and it provides a coordination clause with the Senate. Bill.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Explains that third-party litigation funding involves consumer and commercial lenders, and that the bill adds consumer protections, transparency, commercial lender registration, a five-to-ten-day rescission period, and a prohibition on funding from certain foreign countries.
▶ Watch at 1:31:29Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. So third party litigation gets involved as, let's say you're in an injury, let, you're waiting for a settlement, uh, and you, you have daily living expenses and maybe you feel like you need to settle because you can't hold out until the settlement comes in or until it goes through the legal process. So there are lenders out there that will kind of front you the money and say, we'll give you some daily living expenses so that you can, uh, continue on and let us fight the battle for you. It's done on both a consumer level and then a larger, if multiple people are involved or businesses involved, it's done on a commercial …
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Sponsor explains how third-party litigation funding works for consumers and commercial cases, and says the bill adds consumer protections, transparency, commercial lender registration, a five-to-10-day right to rescind, and a prohibition on certain foreign funding.
▶ Watch at 1:31:29Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. So third party litigation gets involved as, let's say you're in an injury, let, you're waiting for a settlement, uh, and you, you have daily living expenses and maybe you feel like you need to settle because you can't hold out until the settlement comes in or until it goes through the legal process. So there are lenders out there that will kind of front you the money and say, we'll give you some daily living expenses so that you can, uh, continue on and let us fight the battle for you. It's done on both a consumer level and then a larger, if multiple people are involved or businesses involved, it's done on a commercial …
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
In summation, says the bill has support from a national lender and legal funding associations and that it protects consumers and provides more transparency.
▶ Watch at 1:33:47Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We've been working with, uh, a variety of different parties for some time on this. Uh, supported one of the main national lenders. American Legal Finance Association, uh, supports it as well as the Alliance responsible consumer legal funding. It protects consumers, provides more transparency. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Sponsor says the bill was developed with various parties, lists groups that support it, and says it protects consumers and adds transparency.
▶ Watch at 1:33:47Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We've been working with, uh, a variety of different parties for some time on this. Uh, supported one of the main national lenders. American Legal Finance Association, uh, supports it as well as the Alliance responsible consumer legal funding. It protects consumers, provides more transparency. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 2:14:47Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. The sponsor will yield to some questions. Representative Lee will yield to a series of questions.
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks how the bill applies to benefits provided to public school children.
▶ Watch at 2:14:55Read what they said
Can you help me understand how this will apply in a public school setting as far as benefits provided to school children?
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Dunnigan asks how the bill applies to benefits provided to school children in public schools.
▶ Watch at 2:14:55Read what they said
Can you help me understand how this will apply in a public school setting as far as benefits provided to school children?
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks whether the health department could provide immunizations to people not here legally during a disease outbreak.
▶ Watch at 2:15:20Read what they said
That is correct. I I have a question on healthcare. If there's a disease outbreak or to prevent a disease outbreak, will the health department be able to provide immunizations to people who are not here legally?
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Dunnigan asks whether the health department could provide immunizations to people who are not legally here during a disease outbreak.
▶ Watch at 2:15:20Read what they said
That is correct. I I have a question on healthcare. If there's a disease outbreak or to prevent a disease outbreak, will the health department be able to provide immunizations to people who are not here legally?
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks whether immunizing some people can guarantee they will not pass on a disease.
▶ Watch at 2:15:50Read what they said
If we do not immunize somebody, can we be guaranteed that they will not pass a disease? So the rest of us,
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Dunnigan asks whether not immunizing someone could allow disease to spread to others.
▶ Watch at 2:15:50Read what they said
If we do not immunize somebody, can we be guaranteed that they will not pass a disease? So the rest of us,
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Says he supports border enforcement, legal immigration, and charity, and notes that public-private partnerships have helped people in the state.
▶ Watch at 2:16:06Read what they said
So I, I support, uh, enforcement of our borders and legal immigration and I support charity helping people. And our state le leads the country in that. But on many of the wonderful things that we've accomplished as a state is because of a public private partnership where we have helped people.
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Dunnigan says he supports border enforcement and charity, and that public-private partnerships have helped people in Utah.
▶ Watch at 2:16:06Read what they said
So I, I support, uh, enforcement of our borders and legal immigration and I support charity helping people. And our state le leads the country in that. But on many of the wonderful things that we've accomplished as a state is because of a public private partnership where we have helped people.
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks how the bill affects homeless shelters and whether people must sign a document to enter.
▶ Watch at 2:16:33Read what they said
One more question for the bill sponsor. How does this affect homeless shelters? Does somebody need to sign a, a document saying that they're legally allowed or here presence to go into homeless shelter?
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Dunnigan asks how the bill affects homeless shelters and whether people must sign a document to enter.
▶ Watch at 2:16:33Read what they said
One more question for the bill sponsor. How does this affect homeless shelters? Does somebody need to sign a, a document saying that they're legally allowed or here presence to go into homeless shelter?
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Says signing a statement is not simple for busy shelters, calls the bill unworkable in practice, and says government should partner with charities.
▶ Watch at 2:16:55Read what they said
I thank you. Uh, I disagree with that. It's not a simple thing. Homeless shelters are busy. They're overrun. People are going in and out all the time. And it's a challenge. And many of them just want to get in out of the elements. They have mental health illnesses. It's not that simple. So back to the public private partnership. I believe private donations, charity is a big part. I also believe that our government has a role to establish by policy, how we're gonna partner with charities, with food banks, with others to provide for the general welfare of our friends and neighbors. I think it's important. I'm very concerned about this bill. I think it's unworkable in …
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Dunnigan disagrees that signing is simple, says shelters are busy, and says he is very concerned the bill is unworkable.
▶ Watch at 2:16:55Read what they said
I thank you. Uh, I disagree with that. It's not a simple thing. Homeless shelters are busy. They're overrun. People are going in and out all the time. And it's a challenge. And many of them just want to get in out of the elements. They have mental health illnesses. It's not that simple. So back to the public private partnership. I believe private donations, charity is a big part. I also believe that our government has a role to establish by policy, how we're gonna partner with charities, with food banks, with others to provide for the general welfare of our friends and neighbors. I think it's important. I'm very concerned about this bill. I think it's unworkable in …
H.B. 433 Professional Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Expresses concern that organized groups could send many requests that take away from the office's other work, and asks why the bill is needed.
▶ Watch at 1:08:11Read what they said
Uh, Representative Dunnigan, Mr. Chair. So I appreciate the good work you do in your office. I am concerned. So to me, this seems like this is not a problem. The public can already go online, do the request, and I am concerned that certain professions or whomever could get organized and send you a hundred or whatever. I mean, I can easily see that with some of the issues that you're working on and knowing that they're gonna notify their legislator and that you will try to respond. I am concerned that it's gonna take away from your other work. I just help me understand why this is needed. We've had one request. Why, why is this needed? Uh,
H.B. 433 Professional Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Says that if professions organize, they could contact the office on a mass basis, and that form-letter responses could handle it.
▶ Watch at 1:10:08Read what they said
Thank you. I can think of a couple of the professions I've worked with. If they're aware of this, they will take the opportunity to communicate with you on a mass basis. I guess we'll see if that happens or not. In that scenario, I say we can communicate back in a mass response, um, if we had to, but I don't think there's, I mean, each one is not a unique case. If it's a, you know, like the form letters we get kind of a thing. I wouldn't expect that to be difficult to respond To. Thank you.
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks how the substitute addresses property already owned by one county within another county.
▶ Watch at 24:44Read what they said
In the sub, how does it address property that's already owned by a county, within another county?
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks how the substitute addresses property already owned by a county within another county.
▶ Watch at 24:44Read what they said
In the sub, how does it address property that's already owned by a county, within another county?
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks where that provision is found in the substitute.
▶ Watch at 25:11Read what they said
Are you able to share where that's found? Oh, I'm sorry. I asked you if you could share what, where it's found Mr. Speaker
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks where that provision is found in the substitute.
▶ Watch at 25:11Read what they said
Are you able to share where that's found? Oh, I'm sorry. I asked you if you could share what, where it's found Mr.
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks what happens after one year for counties that already own land in other counties.
▶ Watch at 26:37Read what they said
What happens after one year? We have some counties, the owner and you, you're aware of this representative that we have counties that own land in other counties. How is this gonna treat that? That's, that's, they already own the land.
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks what happens after one year for counties that own land in other counties.
▶ Watch at 26:37Read what they said
What happens after one year? We have some counties, the owner and you, you're aware of this representative that we have counties that own land in other counties. How is this gonna treat that?
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Says he cannot find the provision in the bill and would prefer the issue be resolved before a vote.
▶ Watch at 27:09Read what they said
So I think that's important. Mr. Speaker. We have counties that own property already and I'm not able to find it in the bill. That doesn't mean it's not in there. I just don't see anything that this is prospective and after one year, the counties have to come together. I'm not finding that in the bill. I'd really prefer that that be resolved before we vote on this.
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Says counties already own property and the provision cannot be found in the bill, and prefers the issue be resolved before a vote.
▶ Watch at 27:09Read what they said
So I think that's important. Mr. Speaker. We have counties that own property already and I'm not able to find it in the bill. That doesn't mean it's not in there. I just don't see anything that this is prospective and after one year, the counties have to come together. I'm not finding that in the bill. I'd really prefer that that be resolved before we vote on this.
H.B. 245 Construction Wage Standard Act · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Supports the bill, citing a past state highway project awarded to an out-of-state low bidder that ran over budget, and saying it sets a prevailing local wage.
▶ Watch at 57:44Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wanna have a little bit better balance here. I rise in support of the bill. Uh, I've been here for a while and I remember several years ago we built a Alpine highway and our state awarded the bid to an out-of-state contractor. That was the low bid. It was a nightmare. The bid was for 139 million. Poor workmanship, even with inspections, it got constructed and significant amounts had to be redone. It ended up costing over 170 million instead of 139. And it still has problems today. I like this bill 'cause it's not grasping some artificial wage or nebulous from the federal government or whatever. It goes into the county where the …
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Dunnigan moved a verbal amendment to change the date on line 478 from 2026 to 2029.
▶ Watch at 2:22:50Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I move to amend The Verbal amendment, Uh, verbal amendment on first substitute K, go ahead. Representative Dunnigan Line 4 78, changing the date from 2026 to 2029 on line 4 78 changing 2026 to 2029.
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Dunnigan said the amendment gives more time for people to prepare for the property tax change.
▶ Watch at 2:23:35Read what they said
Yes. So I appreciate the work the sponsor's done on this. This just gives a little more runway so people can prepare. It's gonna be a, property's gonna start to be taxed.
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Dunnigan said the concern is the retroactive application of the tax change to property a county bought under the earlier rules, and that the extra time allows the county to plan.
▶ Watch at 2:24:49Read what they said
Well, thank you for the question, Mr. Speaker. So this has a retroactive piece. I'm completely fine with the bill if it's prospective. The concern I have is the retroactive piece where the county went out, purchased property, uh, thinking in another county and because they owned it, they would not pay tax on it. And they made that decision. Now we're changing the laws say they're gonna start to pay tax on it. This was given as representative from Draper, Sandy, Cottonwood Heights, left tail, left tail. The rep Representative Sta stated this will give 'em a little time to decide if they want to, uh, sell the property or do something else with it, rather than putting a …
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Dunnigan said the amendment gives more time for planning on the retroactive provision.
▶ Watch at 2:26:02Read what they said
Seeing none back to your Representative Dunnigan on your motion to amend This discuss gives, um, a little more time to do some planning on the retroactive piece. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Presents H.B. 58, an annual insurance bill with technical amendments and policy changes covering financial examinations, title insurance records, the captive division spending cap, wire fraud reporting, escrow coverage, public adjusters, and risk retention groups.
▶ Watch at 1:01:28Read what they said
Uh, this is the, the annual insurance bill that we worked with the insurance agency on. Um, it started out as a committee bill. It had, there had been some modifications, so it's lost that moniker, but the bill contains technical amendments. Clarification. Policy changes to insurance code. Some of the highlights. It strengthens the Depen Department's ability to recover the cost of a financial examination from an insurer that refuses to pay pay according to law. It clarifies and streamlines the financial examination process for insurers. It authorizes the department to make rules. It will preserve homeowners title insurance records. After a title agency closes, it raises by $19,000 the statutory cap on the department captive division spending authority. …
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Presented HB 498, describing changes that delay the effective date to May 6, 2027, keep enforcement to a private right of action, let adults adjust content levels on subscription accounts, exclude married or emancipated minors, and cover pre-installed apps.
▶ Watch at 40:10Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chairman, committee member. So, last year I worked with Senator Weiler on the App Store Accountability Act, and this is the 2026 version. We're making some cleanups doing a few adjustments, so I'll run through those. Uh, one thing we're developing or delaying, I should say, the effective date until May 6th, 2027. Um, this, there's a lot going on nationally, and we want the, the time to kind of see what the national landscape is and, and give providers time to adjust. So that's one change. Another change is, is it limits enforcement to a private right of action. It's currently in the bill that was the original intent, but, um, there'll be no other …
H.B. 498 Utah App Store Accountability Act Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said the bill has been explained and asked for the committee's support.
▶ Watch at 47:02Read what they said
I think I've explained it. I think the committee understands it. So thank you for your support.
H.B. 516 Landlord Communication Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Moves to hold the bill because it needs more work and he is not comfortable sending it to the floor.
▶ Watch at 1:41:32Read what they said
Thank you. So, I, I move to hold for all the reasons that our good chairman stated, there's some stuff in here. It, it needs more work and I'm not comfortable senate it to floor. Hopefully you can fix it, get it back on a committee. Probably won't diminish your chances are what they are at this point in the session, but I don't know, I'd like to see some more work on myself.
H.B. 304 Cash Payments Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asked how the bill defines a supplier, a government entity, and a physical point of sale, including for delivery services.
▶ Watch at 1:51:09Read what they said
Okay. Representative Dunnigan? Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I just need to have this clear. The bill says a supplier or a government entity. So to me it sounds like it's two different things. Talks about government also, and it defines a supplier. It's got at least a physical place of business, a physical point of service. So how is that defined? Is a Pizza hut sending out the delivery guy and they go up to the door and, you know, they say, oh, you gotta pay with cash. They say, no, it's gotta be credit. It has to be inside a brick and mortar building. Where does it say that? It says a physical point, but how do …
H.B. 304 Cash Payments Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said the definition needs work and that many businesses at festivals do not want employees handling cash for security reasons, so he finds the bill unworkable.
▶ Watch at 1:52:00Read what they said
We have a lot of mobile services now, you know, and so that's, I'm, I think that definition at the very least needs some work. Do you, but to represent Peterson's point, let's say that you've got a, a community festival and you've got physical points of sale. There are many businesses that they do not want their businesses or their employees handling cash for security reasons. They don't. There's pilfering, there's theft. Okay. Uh, could happen with credit, I think it's much less likely. So there are businesses that just don't take cash. I like cash. I, I just want you to know, I, I like cash a lot, but I'm a cash person. I have cash in my …
H.B. 304 Cash Payments Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said many employers do not want employees handling cash because of theft concerns and that digital payments feel more secure to them.
▶ Watch at 1:53:13Read what they said
Understand. That's not my point. Point is many employers now don't want their employees handling cash. They are worried about theft and rightfully so, in my opinion. Mm-hmm. They are much more confident than just taking digital payment. So I don't know if you wanna respond to that, but thank you.
H.B. 280 Third Party Litigation Funding Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Introduced H.B. 280 as an update to the 2020 litigation funding law that adds commercial litigation funders and transparency requirements, and turned time over to Ryan Andrus.
▶ Watch at 2:10:38Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee member. So, about five years ago, I sponsored legislation, uh, created the Maintenance Funding Practices Act. And this year's an update, uh, really to try to provide transparency for this, this industry, and this financing mechanism. And we're gonna keep this high level and then try to answer any questions. I'm gonna turn some time over to Ryan Andres.
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Presented HB 58, outlining policy changes on recovering financial exam costs, title agency requirements, and wire fraud reporting, and said Mr. Stringham would cover other items.
▶ Watch at 1:13:10Read what they said
Uh, Representative Dunnigan house Bill 58. First substitute and insurance code and modifications. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Committee members, uh, with me, I have read Stringham from the insurance department. This is the insurance department. Bill contains some clarifications, technical cleanup, and some policy changes. So we'll highlight, um, go through the policy changes. It strengthens the department's ability to recover the cost of a financial exam from an insurer that refuses to pay according to law. It streamlines a financial examination process for insurers. It authorizes the department to make rules that will preserve the homeowner's title. Insurance records after title agency encloses raises by $19,000, a statutory cap on the department's ca uh, captive division spending authority. And …
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said the National Association of Public Adjusters requested changes that were made, and that they support the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:19:30Read what they said
So thank you, uh, for your time. I, I will say that we have been working with the National Association of Public Adjusters. They've asked for some changes in the bill, which we've made, and they are supportive of the bill. Thank you. Okay.
H.B. 400 Landscaping Water Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks what was meant by the bill's lack of enforcement.
▶ Watch at 1:45:55Read what they said
You. You said that there's no enforcement or something like that. What were you alluding to by whom?
H.B. 400 Landscaping Water Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asks whether a municipality that adopts an ordinance could enforce it.
▶ Watch at 1:46:34Read what they said
Okay. So if the municipality comes up with an ordinance, so they could certainly enforce that.
H.B. 400 Landscaping Water Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says it would help to know whether the bill duplicates the earlier requirement, and that he does not know the answer.
▶ Watch at 1:46:47Read what they said
Helpful to know. I think Representative Peterson makes a good point. It'd be helpful, helpful to know whether we're doing a duplicative effort here or not with what was already required and from the prior, I mean, I see this list of people that are entities that aren't complying. I don't know. I don't know if we're saying a couple years ago, you have to do this, and now we're saying again, you have to do this, and it's very, very similar. I don't know the answer to that.
H.B. 422 Public Infrastructure Districts Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Offered a substitute motion to amend, to strike lines 922 through 936 and keep the definition.
▶ Watch at 2:05:35Read what they said
Thank you Madam Chair. I offer a substitute motion to amend substitute motion. Will strike lines 9 22 to 9 36.
H.B. 422 Public Infrastructure Districts Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Explained that committee rules require a substitute to strike an entire section, so he proposed keeping the definition and striking the rest.
▶ Watch at 2:05:54Read what they said
Yeah. So our rules say if we strike an entire section, it requires a substitute. We're unable to do that in committee I, so I like to leave the definition there. Strike the rest of it, is my proposal.
H.B. 240 Carbon Dioxide System Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Supports the bill for safety reasons, saying it lets fire marshals use other contractors or providers.
▶ Watch at 1:13:06Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'd like the concept of this bill for a couple of reasons for safety. So I support it and also it allows an option to extend the fire marshal's reach so they don't have to do it all. They can have other contractors or providers come in and I appreciate about the, about the bill. Thank you Mr. Speaker.
H.B. 470 Building Inspection Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Dunnigan asked whether a homeowner is charged a fee for a city inspection.
▶ Watch at 1:18:34Read what they said
Uh, Representative Dunnigan. Thank you. Resident Ward. If I'm doing a project and I have the city building official come out, do they charge me for that? Do they charge me an inspection fee?
H.B. 470 Building Inspection Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Dunnigan asked whether the city fee is still paid if a third party inspects.
▶ Watch at 1:18:59Read what they said
So if I have a third party inspector come inspect it, would I still pay that fee to the city?
H.B. 470 Building Inspection Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Dunnigan asked how it saves money if homeowners pay both the city and a private inspector.
▶ Watch at 1:19:14Read what they said
Properly. I'm just wondering how it saves the homeowner money. If I'm gonna pay the, the city and pay the private inspector,
H.B. 414 Dental Hygienist Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says the bill adds hospitals to the settings where dental hygienists can practice without general supervision of a dentist, so they can provide dental care in hospitals, and that the Utah Hospital Association supports it.
▶ Watch at 23:39Read what they said
Currently, dental hygienists can practice without the general supervision of a dentist in a public health setting, such as nursing homes, community health center assisted living. This bill does one thing. It adds hospitals to that list so they'll be able to do their, uh, provide dental care in a hospital. This is supported by the Utah Hospital Association. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says the conference committee report was adopted, that the bill now needs to pass, and that the changes were outlined in his presentation.
▶ Watch at 31:30Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. We adopted the conference committee report. Now we need to pass the bill and I've already outlined the changes in my presentation.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Presented H.B. 38, covering county seat petition signature and timing rules, website posting in place of newspaper notice, county recorder indexing and fee changes, subscription access to records, and surveyor fee collection.
▶ Watch at 35:52Read what they said
Morning, Mr. Chairman Committee members. So Title 17, which is the county government in state code, has not been reified for 50 years, and that's A rush. Yeah, Exactly. So over the last two years, the political subdivisions intern committee took this on as a project. Uh, one bill would've been over a thousand pages, which would've been enjoyable, but it was, we'd broken it down into smaller pieces. So last year in the special session, we passed five separate bills of reification and left a substantive policy issues for a sixth. Bill. This is the sixth bill. Been working carefully with the counties and with me. I have Katie Minor from uac, appreciate their good work on this. So …
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Gave closing summary that the bill is a multi-year project that lets counties do business legally in the way they already operate.
▶ Watch at 41:11Read what they said
Just this has been a multi-year project. The county's been terrific to work with. Part of this allows 'em to do business the way they currently are. They can now do it legally, which is always nice. Thank you.
H.B. 202 Acupuncturist Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
He agreed with Rep. Teuscher that the licensure review office should be involved to provide professional recommendations.
▶ Watch at 1:35:58Read what they said
So I was gonna say what Representative Teuscher said, I appreciate your work on this. This is actually a, uh, I think a good option to get LER involved and see if they can come back with some professional recommendations.
H.B. 414 Dental Hygienist Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Presented H.B. 414, which would let dental hygienists practice without general dentist supervision in public health settings and would add hospitals to those settings where hospitals choose to allow it.
▶ Watch at 1:45:41Read what they said
Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Committee members currently dental hygienists can PR practice in certain, uh, facilities without the general supervision of a dentist. These are public health settings. They include a nursing home, a school assisted living, community health center. Federally qualified health center concept is, many patients in those settings are not gonna get ridden regular dental care, but at least they can get a hygienist, go in and clean their teeth and help them have some, some dental care. All this bill does, it just says we're gonna allow them to go into a hospital. The hospitals don't have to allow them, but it's permissive that they can go in, in a public health setting that will …
H.B. 414 Dental Hygienist Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Said he would waive further comment and requested consideration on the consent calendar if the committee agrees. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:48:00Read what they said
All right. Uh, well, uh, Representative Dunnigan, I will waive and request consideration of consent if the committee chooses.
H.B. 385 Specialized Product Sales Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks the sponsor whether gas stations receive the same level of enforcement as these shops.
▶ Watch at 2:16:09Read what they said
Would you address a comment that gas stations are not being having the same level of enforcement or focus on them that you can get all this stuff in a gas station? Uh,
H.B. 385 Specialized Product Sales Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks the deputy chief whether police do any enforcement at gas stations and how it compares with smoke shops.
▶ Watch at 2:17:00Read what they said
To. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ask that question of the deputy Chief. Thank you. Do you do any enforcement in the gas stations? And how would you, if so, how would you contrast that with the, these smoke shops?
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks about contiguity and whether a new county could form from the remaining area, and raises concern about added layers of county government and cost.
▶ Watch at 44:31Read what they said
Uh, thank you. So Representative Teuscher, thanks for your work on this. I think the sub is better than the prior version and appreciate your listening to people. And the original version, it seemed like there was a requirement of, uh, contiguous. Is that same in this? Yes. Okay. And I want to just follow up on representative ward's question. So let's say that third of the people petition is approved by the county. They form a new county of a third, then subsequent to that, uh, the remaining two thirds, another county could form out of that. Is that correct? Hmm, that's correct. Okay. And, and I like that it goes through the voters of the entire county. One …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says a split would duplicate county offices and raise costs for the remaining county, and asks how the jail would work.
▶ Watch at 48:03Read what they said
You're gonna have two recorders, two auditors, two treasurers, two assessors. So you'll have that duplicative layer of government. Now, I guess the people can decide if they want to pay for it. Uh, but the people that are remaining in the existing county, their costs will go up somewhat because they have fewer people to pay for their, they're not gonna lose their recorder, their assessor, all their, who knows if the county layer of bureaucracy will even shrink, could diminish, couldn't know. But another question I have is, what about the jail? How does that work?
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says Salt Lake County's jail costs about $120 million a year and expresses concern about that cost.
▶ Watch at 50:03Read what they said
Oh, thank you. So in Salt Lake County, the jail costs county $120 million a year. That's a lot of money. And so that's, that's my concern. You know, it's, jails are very expensive and we need more capacity in our county, but that's just a concern.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks whether a single city with a third of the county's population could split off on its own.
▶ Watch at 55:06Read what they said
Representative Walters, so could, a city could do it by themselves, right? If that city had a population of population, a third of the county, So to his point of Salt Lake City grew to where they had a third of the population, they could split and create their own county, potentially.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Expresses concern that existing indebtedness is not resolved and says it should be addressed before the bill passes.
▶ Watch at 58:49Read what they said
Thank you. So I have, uh, to, to representative Balder's point. I'm concerned about the existing indebtedness and I understand that under the petition process currently, that's not really resolved, but I think this path forward makes it more likely that it could happen. And I would like to see that resolved. And, and I, I think you need to address that. I don't think it's fair for a new county to create themselves and say to the old one, good luck with all that indebtedness that you took for us. So I'm personally, I'm not comfortable using the existing statutory language because I think the path that you're coming up with, and you've done some good work here, you …
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks why the proposal goes down to the lieutenant level and suggests captain instead.
▶ Watch at 1:23:13Read what they said
And Corey, why are you going down to lieutenants? So I'm thinking of the lieutenants that I interact with and, and they often seem like more lying workers, you know, they, and maybe they should be still be protected. Have you thought about going down to captain and not lieutenant?
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says lieutenants often perform more line-level work and may need merit protection, and that captain and above makes sense.
▶ Watch at 1:23:54Read what they said
I work with the folks at Salt Lake County Jail, and I'm just thinking, I think probably lieutenants may need to be, have that merit protection. Uh, I do see you get captain and above. I see. It makes sense. I'm just struggling a little bit with lieutenant. Thanks.
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asks whether Salt Lake County could define command level as captain and above.
▶ Watch at 1:26:13Read what they said
That helps. Okay. So if I just wanna clarify. So in Salt Lake County, could they say captain and above?
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says each sheriff being able to decide the command level is a good answer.
▶ Watch at 1:26:19Read what they said
That's important because I'm thinking, you know, we've got a sheriff, an undersheriff, a chief deputy, a deputy chief captains, lieutenants, um, all over the place. Well, my lieutenants do a lot of the roles of the, the captains and the assistant chiefs, if you will. Okay. As long as, and I think you mentioned that in your presentation, as long as each sheriff can decide, and that's good answer.
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Agrees with Rep. Gwynn's point and asks the sponsor whether the request can be met.
▶ Watch at 1:30:05Read what they said
Y yes. Chair Dungan. So I think reps m Gwen raises a fair point. Y you are compacted, you know? Right. You're like here. And so what's your pleasure? Do you think you have a way that you could meet Representative Gwynn's request? At least there's someone on the committee that would like to see that. Do you understand what he was asking for? I do. You look like you have heartburn, so,
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Suggests working with Rep. Gwynn on language that gives flexibility while meeting the sheriff's needs.
▶ Watch at 1:31:48Read what they said
Well, uh, I'm wondering if, uh, we could get with Representative Gwynn and just work out some language that that works with him and, and give some flexibility, but still accomplishes what, uh, uh, sheriff Arban needs and, you know, uh, so whatever you'd like to do there.
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Supports the motion and suggests the sponsor and Rep. Gwynn meet to work out language before tomorrow afternoon's meeting.
▶ Watch at 1:34:18Read what they said
So I support that motion. We have a committee meeting tomorrow afternoon, so if you wanna work on it, I'd say suggest get together. I understand what you're saying and I'm sensitive to that. Maybe get together, Representative Gwynn work something out. You can be back on tomorrow afternoon. Great, thank you very much.
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asked whether land currently owned by a county in another county would start being taxed.
▶ Watch at 1:47:19Read what they said
So thank you for your work on this. Let's talk about land that's currently owned by county in another county. This means they would start paying tax on that, is that correct?
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asked whether building a hotel on greenbelt land would trigger both the new commercial value and a retroactive rollback tax.
▶ Watch at 1:49:05Read what they said
Does that make sense? I follow that. Go ahead. So I, I, I see on, you know, line 4 85, it's talking about the rollback tax. Mm-hmm. Is that essentially, okay, so let's say you have a green belt and you go and build a hotel on it. Okay? They lose the agriculture, agriculture, the greenbelt exemption. Does that mean going forward they'll pay the value of that hotel plus a is a rollback a retro tax?
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asked whether a county buying land in another county is exempt from that county's land use requirements.
▶ Watch at 1:49:45Read what they said
Okay. And then as long as you're here, I have one more question. I think Representative Strong, or maybe his witness said that if a county goes and buys property in another county mm-hmm. Are they exempt from the other county's land use requirements?
H.B. 445 County Government Land Purchasing · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asked why Summit County acquired land in an adjacent county.
▶ Watch at 2:00:13Read what they said
Thank you. Would you like to share why you acquired land in an adjacent county?
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Moves that the House refuse to concur with the Senate amendments to H.J.R. 1 and request a conference committee.
▶ Watch at 24:48Read what they said
Thank you. I move that the house refused to concur with the Senate amendments. It's an easy, easy, easy crowd here this morning and request that they receive from their amendments.
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Says there are additional fixes needed in the joint rules, so the resolution should go to a conference committee.
▶ Watch at 25:08Read what they said
Yes. There's some, uh, additional fixes we need to do in the joint rules, so we need to take it to a conference committee so we can accomplish it.
H.B. 387 Kratom Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Asked how Sen. Vickers' bill addresses synthetics.
▶ Watch at 1:23:52Read what they said
Thank you. So I know that we're not debating your bill too much. Yeah. But how does your bill address the synthetic
H.B. 387 Kratom Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Raised a point of order that the maker of a motion should have an opportunity to speak.
▶ Watch at 1:47:36Read what they said
Order, Mr. Chairman? Yes, go ahead. Uh, A motion should have an opportunity to speak.
H.B. 240 Carbon Dioxide System Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Suggests changing the effective date to January 1, 2027, by amendment rather than substitute, and says staff is working on it.
▶ Watch at 2:20:04Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So similar comment, if we change the effective date requires a substitute trying to work on an amendment that says something like on or after January 1st, 2027, which I think we could do by an amendment rather than a sub. And so I think staff's working on that.
H.B. 240 Carbon Dioxide System Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Moves to adopt Amendment #1 to HB 240, which changes the effective date to on or after January 1, 2027.
▶ Watch at 2:27:21Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move to amend. Okay. We have a motion to amend. Would you like to speak to that? Yes, I move to adopt amendment number one in house Bill two 40. Okay. We have a motion to amend in your name to, uh, HB two 40. The, uh, amendment is public
H.B. 245 Construction Wage Standard Act · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Moved to pass the first substitute of H.B. 245 with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 3:04:37Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chairman and I move that we recommend favorably for substitute house bill 2 45.
H.B. 245 Construction Wage Standard Act · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Supported the bill, saying the prevailing wage survey does not distinguish public from private work, citing the low-bid Flatiron freeway project that had to be redone, and saying the bill targets out-of-state firms that underpay and skip workers' comp and payroll taxes.
▶ Watch at 3:04:55Read what they said
Uh, so Representative Clancy, I appreciate your work on this and trying to get the stakeholders together. You know, a couple of comments. It was mentioned that this prevailing wage might kind of seesaw as I, if I understood the comment from the witness, the public sector versus the private, but as private. But as I read the bill, it just says that the commission shall survey the county for the prevailing. It doesn't distinguish that I read in the language between public and private. It's just whatever the prevailing wage is. So I don't see that that's gonna drive one up or not. It's also brought up by, uh, a colleague correctly that Speaker Lockhart kind of pointed to …
H.B. 245 Construction Wage Standard Act · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Said the committee has long dealt with employers who skip workers' comp and payroll taxes, that the bill will help though it is not a full solution, and that paying prevailing wage improves the chance of quality work.
▶ Watch at 3:11:34Read what they said
Thank, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the work and, and the comments here. Employers coming in and not doing pain workers' comp or the payroll taxes, paying under the table, paying in cash, doing shoddy work has been worked on by this committee for many, many years. And it's, it is an ongoing problem. I don't think this is the solution, but I think it will help. And to use the technical term, crappy work. Well, I, I don't know if, if we do pay more, I think we stand a better chance of getting quality and better trained workers. And look at the Flat Iron Project. Okay? You had inspectors, whatever, they didn't catch it, that cost us …
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Moves to circle the bill and says a few cleanup items for the joint rules will be brought back before the body.
▶ Watch at 12:10Read what they said
You Mr. Speaker. I move to circle, Uh, that motion is an order as I speak to it. Yes. There's a couple of other cleanup things we want to include in the joint rules, so we'll bring that back before the body.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Moves to adopt the third substitute of H.B. 38.
▶ Watch at 43:47Read what they said
Representative Dunnigan. Thank You Mr. Speaker. I move to adopt third substitute house bill 38, Representative Dunnigan.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says the substitute moves language on IDs from Title 17B to Title 17D with PIDs without changing policy.
▶ Watch at 43:59Read what they said
Yes. The third substitute moves language governing IDs to the same to from title 17 B to 17 D, which is where PIDs are. Think it's a, a good fit to have IDs and PIs together. We're not changing any policy, we're just moving the language from Title 17 B for IDs and adding it to 17 D with PIDs.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says the third substitute moves language on IDs from Title 17B to Title 17D with PIDs, without changing policy.
▶ Watch at 43:59Read what they said
Yes. The third substitute moves language governing IDs to the same to from title 17 B to 17 D, which is where PIDs are. Think it's a, a good fit to have IDs and PIs together. We're not changing any policy, we're just moving the language from Title 17 B for IDs and adding it to 17 D with PIDs.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Presents the bill, which updates county law in Title 17 and includes policy changes on county seat petitions, recorder fees, surveys, merit appeals, and finance officer duties, and says the Utah Association of Counties supports it.
▶ Watch at 45:11Read what they said
for, uh, presentation. Thank You, Mr. Speaker. Title 17, which is, uh, affects county law has not been reified for 50 years. So the political subdivision's interim committee took a two year project, and in the special session last year, we adopted five bills to update and re codified and replaced and language and, and made technical changes. The policy changes were reserved for this bill and why? These are generally consensus items. We want to high, we want to highlight them in a separate bill. I should say that these changes are supported by the Utah Association of Counties. So one, one of the changes it says is it clarifies a petition to move a county seat from the …
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Explains the bill completes a multi-year county law recodification and includes policy changes on county seat and consolidation petitions, audit notices, recorder indexing and fees, subscriptions, surveyor fees, merit appeals, and finance officer duties; says it is supported by the Utah Association of Counties.
▶ Watch at 45:12Read what they said
You, Mr. Speaker. Title 17, which is, uh, affects county law has not been reified for 50 years. So the political subdivision's interim committee took a two year project, and in the special session last year, we adopted five bills to update and re codified and replaced and language and, and made technical changes. The policy changes were reserved for this bill and why? These are generally consensus items. We want to high, we want to highlight them in a separate bill. I should say that these changes are supported by the Utah Association of Counties. So one, one of the changes it says is it clarifies a petition to move a county seat from the criteria being the, the …
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Explains the bill was split into parts and that moving ID provisions into the chapter with PIDs is a housekeeping change.
▶ Watch at 50:21Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker for the question. So as I said at the beginning, this is a two and a half year project. Now the bill was originally a thousand pages, and so we have split it up into six bills. The five bills that you passed in the special session last year were mostly the technical changes this year. It's additional technical changes and policy changes. The service sticks. Districts requested that IDs, which is in the chapter with them and can be confusing with them, be moved to the chapter with PIDs. There are no policy changes. It's just putting it where a better home for it's currently. Where PIs are, if you're familiar with IS and PS …
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Explains the bill was split from a thousand-page draft into six bills and that moving the ID language to the PID chapter was requested by districts, with no policy changes.
▶ Watch at 50:21Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker for the question. So as I said at the beginning, this is a two and a half year project. Now the bill was originally a thousand pages, and so we have split it up into six bills. The five bills that you passed in the special session last year were mostly the technical changes this year. It's additional technical changes and policy changes. The service sticks. Districts requested that IDs, which is in the chapter with them and can be confusing with them, be moved to the chapter with PIDs. There are no policy changes. It's just putting it where a better home for it's currently. Where PIs are, if you're familiar with IS and PS …
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says there are no policy changes to IDs or PIDs, only language moved to a new location in the code.
▶ Watch at 52:09Read what they said
There are no policy changes to ps There are no policy changes to IDs. We're just taking the language from one area of the code. It's in service districts Title 17 B and moving it to 17 D. So it will be in there with PIs. There's not one iota of policy change in that area.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says there are no policy changes to IDs or PIDs; the language is only moved from Title 17B to 17D.
▶ Watch at 52:09Read what they said
There are no policy changes to ps There are no policy changes to IDs. We're just taking the language from one area of the code. It's in service districts Title 17 B and moving it to 17 D. So it will be in there with PIs. There's not one iota of policy change in that area.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Asks Rep. Shepherd to repeat the question.
▶ Watch at 53:01Read what they said
Uh, Mr. Speaker, what was the part of the first question? Would I explain what?
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Asks for the question to be restated. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 53:01Read what they said
Uh, Mr. Speaker, what was the part of the first question? Would I explain what?
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Explains some counties combine the finance officer and auditor roles and the change gives them flexibility to do what they already do.
▶ Watch at 53:27Read what they said
Some counties like to their auditor to be the finance officer and some don't. So it's giving them flexibility. Some counties have a separate finance officer and some have a separate auditor. Some counties combine them there and they're already doing this. So this just says, okay, you can legally do what you're doing. It can provide a checks and balances to have a separate finance officer. But frankly, some of the smaller counties can't afford that or they don't wanna do it, and their finance officer can be their auditor.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says some counties use the auditor as finance officer and some do not, and the change gives counties flexibility to do what they already do.
▶ Watch at 53:27Read what they said
Some counties like to their auditor to be the finance officer and some don't. So it's giving them flexibility. Some counties have a separate finance officer and some have a separate auditor. Some counties combine them there and they're already doing this. So this just says, okay, you can legally do what you're doing. It can provide a checks and balances to have a separate finance officer. But frankly, some of the smaller counties can't afford that or they don't wanna do it, and their finance officer can be their auditor.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says the same words were moved to a different location in the bill.
▶ Watch at 54:24Read what they said
It is just replaced. The same words are replaced to a different spot in the bill, which we feel fit in, uh, better at that location.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says counties have not been enforcing the penalty and asked for it to be removed.
▶ Watch at 55:27Read what they said
So this is, uh, thank you for the question, Mr. Speaker. The, the counties have not been enforcing this. Nobody's enforcing it. And they said we'd like you to jet us in it because we never enforce it.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says counties have not been enforcing the penalty and asked that it be removed.
▶ Watch at 55:27Read what they said
So this is, uh, thank you for the question, Mr. Speaker. The, the counties have not been enforcing this. Nobody's enforcing it. And they said we'd like you to jet us in it because we never enforce it.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Summarizes the bill as technical cleanup with some policy changes, supported by counties, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 56:11Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the questions. We have carefully tried to parse out strictly technical cleanup, which we did in the bills last year. This bill has some policy, but we've had all the counties as stakeholders and this is strongly supported by the Utah Association of Counties. I encourage your support.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Summarizes that the bill carefully separates technical cleanup from some policy, was developed with counties as stakeholders, is supported by the Utah Association of Counties, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 56:11Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the questions. We have carefully tried to parse out strictly technical cleanup, which we did in the bills last year. This bill has some policy, but we've had all the counties as stakeholders and this is strongly supported by the Utah Association of Counties. I encourage your support.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Asks whether signers must show a driver's license or other qualifying ID to sign a petition.
▶ Watch at 1:04:55Read what they said
So under this, uh, process, somebody comes to the door and I wanna sign the petition. I'll have to show them my driver's licenses or other qualifying id. Is that the idea?
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Asks whether a person collecting signatures at the door would require the signer to show a driver license or other qualifying ID.
▶ Watch at 1:04:55Read what they said
So under this, uh, process, somebody comes to the door and I wanna sign the petition. I'll have to show them my driver's licenses or other qualifying id. Is that the idea?
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Expresses concern that requiring ID to sign petitions makes participation harder and removes the option of signing manually.
▶ Watch at 1:05:17Read what they said
Mr. Speaker, I have serious concerns with this. Uh, right now we have the ability to gather signature electronically. Many people don't want to do it. They don't want to. If somebody comes to the door, they have no desire to show their driver's license to them to show their ID to them. And so it, I believe it curtails, it makes it much more difficult to engage in the, in the process, whether it be a, you know, petition or a referenda or whatever. So I'm very concerned that instead of having an option now where we can do electronically or we can do manually, we're taking the manual way and gonna require everybody to pull out their driver's …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Expresses concern that requiring ID to sign may make it harder for people to take part in petition processes.
▶ Watch at 1:05:17Read what they said
Mr. Speaker, I have serious concerns with this. Uh, right now we have the ability to gather signature electronically. Many people don't want to do it. They don't want to. If somebody comes to the door, they have no desire to show their driver's license to them to show their ID to them. And so it, I believe it curtails, it makes it much more difficult to engage in the, in the process, whether it be a, you know, petition or a referenda or whatever. So I'm very concerned that instead of having an option now where we can do electronically or we can do manually, we're taking the manual way and gonna require everybody to pull out their driver's …
H.B. 436 Moderate Income Housing Infrastructure Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Said a built-out pass-through community may struggle to meet the growth metric despite significant transportation needs.
▶ Watch at 2:36:59Read what they said
So I, I applaud you for using carrots and not sticks. I, I like that. Uh, but for municipalities that are built out and they're just gonna be extremely difficult, they're not gonna be able to hit this metric. So I'm thinking of a community that I live in and it definitely, we're a pass through community. Okay. We have a ton of traffic that's going to get somewhere else like you've described. Mm-hmm. And yet we're not gonna hit this metric and yet we have, uh, significant transportation needs. So that's just a comment. Okay.
H.B. 230 Offender Amendments · House floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Moves to encircle First Substitute H.B. 58, Insurance Code Amendments.
▶ Watch at 56:02Read what they said
You Mr. Speaker, I move to encircle First substitute house bill 58 Insurance code amendments.
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Presents H.B. 58, the Insurance Department's annual bill, describing technical changes and policy changes on financial exam cost recovery, title records, captive division spending, wire fraud reporting, escrow and insurance coverage requirements, consumer protections, public adjuster compensation caps, and risk retention groups.
▶ Watch at 56:21Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This bill's the insurance, uh, department annual bill has a number of technical amendments, sought clarifications and some policy changes. So I'm gonna hit the highlights of the policy changes. It strengthens the department's ability to recover the cost of the financial exam from an insurer who refuses to pay according to law. So by law, they're required to pay for the financial exam. We have some insurers are refusing to. This gives the, the department some additional tools to recover that money that they is owed. It also clarifies and streamlines the financial examination process for insurers. It authorizes the department to make rules that will preserve homeowners title insurance records after a title agency …
H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · House floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Asks what happens if a provider does not respond to the insurance department letter and does not update their information.
▶ Watch at 20:27Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker with the sponsor yield. Yes. Representative Monson Elon. Yes, that Representative Dunnigan. So, Mr. Speakers, I understand that there's significant new requirements put on the health plans to make an effort that their directories are kept up to date, which I applaud. My question for the the sponsor is, if the provider does not respond to a query from the health plan trying to update their information, they get a letter from the insurance department. What happens if they don't respond to that letter and don't provide the updated information?
H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · House floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Asks what happens if a provider does not respond to the insurance department letter and does not update their information.
▶ Watch at 20:33Read what they said
So, Mr. Speakers, I understand that there's significant new requirements put on the health plans to make an effort that their directories are kept up to date, which I applaud. My question for the the sponsor is, if the provider does not respond to a query from the health plan trying to update their information, they get a letter from the insurance department. What happens if they don't respond to that letter and don't provide the updated information?
H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · House floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Expresses concern that the bill has no enforcement against providers who do not respond, and asks the sponsor to better balance requirements on health plans and providers.
▶ Watch at 22:14Read what they said
Thank, thank you Mr. Speaker. So I do have a little concern with this bill. There's significant requirements on the help plans to have a, a robust and accurate provider directory. I think that's great, but many times that's dependent on the providers responding and giving correct information. So it can go in the directory and there's really no enforcement or there's no consequences. The providers don't respond. They can get a letter from the insurance department, but there's no teeth. It's like getting a pocket ticket and you know, there's no fine, you just stuff your, well, I don't do it, but you could stuff it in your, uh, glove box 'cause there's no consequence. So, and I understand …
H.B. 71 Health Provider Directory and Access Amendments · House floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Expresses concern that the bill has no enforcement against providers who do not respond and asks the sponsor to better balance requirements.
▶ Watch at 22:14Read what they said
Thank, thank you Mr. Speaker. So I do have a little concern with this bill. There's significant requirements on the help plans to have a, a robust and accurate provider directory. I think that's great, but many times that's dependent on the providers responding and giving correct information. So it can go in the directory and there's really no enforcement or there's no consequences. The providers don't respond. They can get a letter from the insurance department, but there's no teeth. It's like getting a pocket ticket and you know, there's no fine, you just stuff your, well, I don't do it, but you could stuff it in your, uh, glove box 'cause there's no consequence. So, and I understand …
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · House floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Moves to circle H.B. 58 and says a tutorial on the bill will be held the next day in the caucus room.
▶ Watch at 27:50Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I move to circle Our motion is an orderable. May I Speak to that? Please speak to that. Yes. Representative. So The reason I'm circling is we're going to have a tutorial on this bill tomorrow, one 30 in the caucus room. It will be the highlight of your session and so I hope you come and join us. Thank you Mr. Speaker.
S.B. 117 Occupational and Professional Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Moved to recommend favorable passage of second substitute S.B. 117 and declined to speak further on it.
▶ Watch at 41:06Read what they said
Representative Dunnigan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that we recommend favorably second substitute Senate bill oh one 17 That's in. Or would you like to speak to it? No, thanks. Okay.
S.B. 33 Office of Professional Licensure Review Sunrise Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Raised a question about a house rule on sunrise reviews and whether it would still apply to House bills but not Senate bills, and said the rules should be consistent.
▶ Watch at 20:24Read what they said
So I'm invited my colleagues to help me. It seems like Representative Ballard had a, a statute or a bill to firmly require this will say it can't leave rules until it has had this. Do you Remember? Yeah. Yes, we did that. We're taking it. He, he, our Senator Vickers taking it out of statute and we now have it in rules. Both of them are bad or both of the rule was bad, but I'm glad the Senator Vickers doing this. Both Of them are bad, Bad. This one's good, but I'm glad. So that's why I'm glad he's taking it out. I, so my question on that is, that's a house rule, so it's still going to, …
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate Rules Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Presents HJR 1, which amends the joint rules to change draft journal wording, define the minority party and leader, allow automatic companion bills, permit cosponsoring bills from the other chamber, and clarify that legislators attending committees they do not serve on are not paid.
▶ Watch at 0:41Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chairman. So I'm speaking to the second sub, which is adopted. Just so you know, that's the version I'm addressing. So this changes, yeah. Is, it doesn't sound like you hold it a little bit closer. Maybe It, is it on? Yeah, But my, I mean here the volume seems like it's up. It must be the I'm pretty close to it. Yeah, go on. Okay. So this amends the joint rules, so it impacts both the House and the Senate. And I'll walk you through it. On line 53, it changes. It says published a journal daily, we're saying a draft journal. 'cause even after they keep a journal every day, but they go and …
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate Rules Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Says legislators are paid only for approved official legislative meetings, not for constituent events or ribbon cuttings. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 5:05Read what they said
And can I just add Yes, Senator Cullimore, we, if, if we get invited to a constituents house, house or to go to a ribbon cutting or a thousand other things that aren't meetings of the legislature, we don't get paid for those either. We only get paid for for official meetings when the legislatures or approved meetings. So thank you.
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate Rules Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Explains that the second substitute would combine the Sunset-related bills into one bill reflecting the committee's actions after they pass the second body's favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 6:18Read what they said
It was changing the house, So it should be on the system. We adopted it. Yeah. So what the second sub does, if I may, is we have all these Sunset bills, you know, 30 of 'em. Yep. And they go through the process and, and most of 'em will pass, either extend the Sunset or modify whatever. So what this bill does is it, after it passes the second body's favorable recommendation from the committee, it will then go to rules of that final body and it'll be aggregated into one bill. So instead of having 30 Sunset bills will have one bill reflecting the committee's actions. Thank you.
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate Rules Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Says the modification lets legislative management bring workload changes without its approval, calls the calendar placement concern a valid point, and says he is open to fixing it.
▶ Watch at 8:54Read what they said
Uh, I believe the modification in this bill kind of stipulates that if the workload change comes from legislative management, they don't have to get legislative management to approve it. You know, that's, doesn't make it, you don't need that. Uh, we did talk about, and Senator, help me remember our legislative process committee. I think we had some discussion about maybe a little more transparency in this. I think that's actually a valid point. If you're saying that you have ability to take it through the process. Normally it'd go to the board to be heard. Now it goes back to, to wait to see if it's approved under the workload and then it goes to the bottom of …
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate Rules Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Says he and the House Rules chair agreed to move the internal work deadline earlier so workload bills can move sooner, around day 40.
▶ Watch at 10:49Read what they said
Yeah. Internal, uh, from a process standpoint, that's not in rule. The house rules chair and I who oversee this have agreed to move that deadline up to address this issue. I mean, it's not really a deadline, but to move our work process up so that we can do that work earlier and get the bills moving that, that, that are approved. So, so that we're not waiting till day 44 making. But to answer your question, I think it's can capacity By day 40 or Whatever. It's a good point. And if Senator wants
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Explains that the bill is the policy part of a two-year county code recodification process and introduces Katie Minor of the Utah Association of Counties.
▶ Watch at 51:42Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, there we go. Thank you Madam Chair. I was speaking to the second substitute. So this bill's a reserve of result of a two year process from the political subdivision's Interim Committee and re codifying Title 17. You may remember that the county code had not been reified for 50 years, and during the special session last year, we had five bills that kind of took the non policy issues and updated the code. And then we said we'd have a, a sixth bill that addresses the policy issues. And that is the bill that is before you. So there, there are a number of changes in here and replacement of language, but most of …
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says Rep. Teuscher's 2023 standards board made recommendations and that the fee change came from the counties' cleanup process.
▶ Watch at 1:14:30Read what they said
a comment on that Katie. Add. So in 2023, Representative Teuscher did that, uh, board that you're talking about and what it says in the statute that they may do this, they made recommendations, uh, that board's made up of I think three recorders and the rest are non recorders, which is fine. So, so they've, they've met, but, but this issue is, is driven from the Association of Counties as part of the reification codification cleanup, as well as addressing the, the recorder issue of not having enough funds to cover their expenses. And I'll let Katie add to that.
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Offers to have staff address the auditor question raised by the prior public witness. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:15:32Read what they said
Sure. And then do you want me to answer the Auditor? Madam Chair? May we address the auditor question from the prior witness?
H.B. 38 Local Government Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Thanks the committee and stakeholders and says Utah County's increased fee will apply once its surplus is used.
▶ Watch at 1:17:08Read what they said
I appreciate the motion in my close. I will just say this has been a lot of work over, over two years now, and our staff and the counties have been terrific to work with, and we've had a lot of input from various stakeholders. I think we've landed in a good spot. I really appreciate the context from Utah County. I think that's some good history on that. And they do have a surplus at some point. Uh, maybe as they open their satellite office and so forth, that surplus will be depleted. When that happens, then this increased fee will apply to them and they'll need it, but they'll get it. But for right now, when they have …
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House floor debate (day 9) · Jan 28, 2026
Explains that Sunset bills would go through the regular process, then be combined into a single Sunset bill at the end.
▶ Watch at 50:56Read what they said
It provides that all the Sunset bills that go through the system will go through the, the regular process. But at the end, those that successfully pass the, this final committee and the other body will be held, they'll be aggregated together and then we will present one Sunset bill instead of 20 or 30 Sunset bills to the legislature.
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House floor debate (day 9) · Jan 28, 2026
Describes the resolution's changes to the joint rules, including draft journals, minority party definition, constitutional bill files, co-sponsoring Senate bills, and committee pay for attending non-member committees.
▶ Watch at 51:40Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This resolution will modify our, some of our joint rules. So this impacts both the House and the Senate. I'll run through them quickly. On line 53, it uh, changes the wording so that it stipulates that a draft journal for each day of the legislative session will be published by the clerk. Line 1 51 and 53, uh, do the same language that we did in the house rule that we did last week. It defines what the Minority party is and the minority party, the political party in the legislature with the second most members on line 3 83 to 3 86. It says if you open a a bill file to change the …
H.B. 202 Acupuncturist Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Supported holding the bill so remaining questions are resolved in committee rather than on the House floor.
▶ Watch at 1:39:16Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I support the motion to hold. There are still questions in my opinion, we do not want to continue this debate on the house floor. We just don't, let's finish it up in here and get it ready.
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Presents H.B. 58, describing technical amendments and policy changes on financial examination payment, title records, and captive division spending.
▶ Watch at 1:42:24Read what they said
Thank you. Chairman Malloy. So, house Bill 58 is the insurance department bill. It contains a variety of technical amendments, clarifications, and some policy changes. The commissioner and I will hit the highlights of the policy changes. So the, the department goes out and does financial examinations of insurers, and we have some in, and their insurers are supposed to pay for that financial exam. We have occasionally an insurer who, insurer, who refuses to pay for the exam. And so what this bill would allow is the department to take the payment for the exam out of the reserves. That has to be held with the department, and then the insurer would be required to, uh, restore the reserve. …
H.B. 58 Insurance Code Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Notes that his answer applies to the first substitute, in which the cost provision was removed.
▶ Watch at 1:46:15Read what they said
I, I neglected to say, I'm speaking to the first sub, the first substitute. We took that out. So I appreciate Representative Burton. That piece has been taken out, so, uh, understood. I apologize. I was speaking to the first sub. Excellent. Thank you. I even wrote myself speak to the first sub. I didn't read it. It's okay.
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 8) · Jan 27, 2026
Asks the sponsor which county assessor he consulted about how rental properties are determined to be eligible for the residential exemption.
▶ Watch at 38:18Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield? Yes. Representative Shelley, will you yield? Yes. Representative Dunnigan, you mentioned that you talked to the county assessor about how the determine if the rental property should get the residential exemption. Which count or which assessor I should say, which assessor was that?
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 8) · Jan 27, 2026
Asks how eligibility for the residential exemption is determined when an owner with a primary residence also rents out another home.
▶ Watch at 38:43Read what they said
Okay. And follow up Mr. Speaker, if I may. So if the A person owns a primary residence and they're living in a, they own a rental home and they're renting it out, how will it be determined then if it is eligible for the residential exemption?
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 8) · Jan 27, 2026
Says Sanpete County uses the form process but Salt Lake County does not, because of its large number of properties, and that Salt Lake County presumes eligibility unless a complaint is filed.
▶ Watch at 39:15Read what they said
Okay, thank you for the information. So colleagues, just to be aware, that's how it works in sand Pink County, it doesn't work that way. In Salt Lake County, which is the largest county in the state, they don't use that form. They've got tens of thousands of properties and it's not realistic to expect every rental property owner to submit it. So in Salt Lake County, they assume if you have a, a home that it's eligible for the residential exemption. They do not use that form. And one of the, I understand the concern in Sanpete County where they have, you know, vacation homes and they're not really living there, but they're taking the residential exemption. The challenge …
H.B. 211 Real Property Recording Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and asks how a RET is defined.
▶ Watch at 1:07:29Read what they said
That thank you for bringing this to us. Uh, would you define what a RET is?
H.B. 211 Real Property Recording Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Says he had to look up the term and thanks the sponsor for bringing the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:07:41Read what they said
Okay, so an oath of faithfulness, right? Yes, Uhhuh. Okay. I had to look it up, so, oh, I'm come across it very often. Yeah, I, I think this makes a lot of sense. So from my viewpoint, thank you for bringing it. Well, Thank before us. Well, thank you. We appreciate it.
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield to a question.
▶ Watch at 55:45Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield? Kelly, will you yield two question? I will, yes.
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Asks whether the bill affects a single-family home rented out as a rental property that currently receives the 45% residential exemption.
▶ Watch at 55:51Read what they said
Similar question as a representative before, if you have a single family residence home that you're renting out as a rental property, does this do and currently that property will get the 45% residential exemption? Does this impact that?
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Says that removing the residential exemption from rental homes would be a significant policy change and asks for a response.
▶ Watch at 56:34Read what they said
If that means that the these in these homes will no longer receive a residential exemption, this is a significant policy change. And that's my question. This needs to be clarified 'cause it's more than just accessing the driver's license information. This is a huge policy shift. If you're going to tax rental homes that are currently qualifying for the residential exemption and you're taking that exemption away from them, would you like to respond to that?
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Says he has concerns, finds the answer unclear, and prefers more clarity on this policy before the bill advances.
▶ Watch at 57:26Read what they said
Alright, well I have concerns with this. I appreciate the answer. I don't think that's clear. Uh, normally a rental property owner doesn't have to go to the county assessor and declare this is a rental, this is a purple personal residence. That does not happen. I, I'd prefer greater clarity on this policy issue before we pass it forward.
H.B. 85 State Sovereignty Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Dunnigan said the bill neither hurts nor helps much, since local officials could still declare emergencies on other grounds and nothing requires consulting local experts.
▶ Watch at 50:36Read what they said
So, and Shepherd, I don't think this bill hurts anybody. I don't think it helps anybody. Uh, because if a local government wants to say, okay, the UN or the, some international organization or whatever declared an emergency, they would just have to say, well, I think we have a an problem here and I'm gonna declare an emergency not based on that. But they could go ahead and do it. 'cause it says exclusively based on that. Right. I don't see anything where it says they have to consult with any of their local people. I understand your intent. I, I, I don't think it, if this does something, I'm happy for you, but I don't think it does …
H.R. 1 House Rules Resolution - Amendments to House Rules · House Rules Committee · Jan 20, 2026
Presents the first substitute to HR 1, explaining that it would remove the requirement to keep minutes when the committee meets as a sifting committee and would change the order of speakers on motions to recommend favorably.
▶ Watch at 31:30Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chairman Committee. I'm excited to be part of the first standing committee, uh, on HR one. I'm just gonna walk through it. If you go to line 59, uh, this adds that when the house can convene or the house shall convene and it adds that when the speaker convenes the house into an extraordinary session, we're adding that as a time that we can meet on line 54. Backing up a little bit defines the minority leaders of the house, but I'm gonna, I'm gonna wait and get to that, uh, in a moment. Okay. If you'll go to line 96, currently your committee, when you are meeting as a sifting committee, not a standing committee, …
H.R. 1 House Rules Resolution - Amendments to House Rules · House Rules Committee · Jan 20, 2026
Confirms that he is speaking to the first substitute of HR 1.
▶ Watch at 33:44Read what they said
That correct? Thank you. I I should know that, but, uh, I am speaking to the first substitute. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yeah,
H.R. 1 House Rules Resolution - Amendments to House Rules · House Rules Committee · Jan 20, 2026
Explains the proposed change to the order of debate on the bill, so that for a motion to recommend favorably the committee debates before returning to the sponsor, and defines the minority party as the party with the second most members.
▶ Watch at 33:54Read what they said
Okay, so I think that's everything on that, and then let's go over to the definition on line 1 38. Majority minority leader, minority party. So for most of the time, all the time I've been here, we had two parties. Now we have more than two. So who is the minority party? And what this rule does, it, it really refers to, uh, the joint rule, which we're gonna get in a minute. But, so on the joint rule, it says the minority party means the political party in the legislature with the second most members. So if there are more than two parties, which we have today, the minority party will be the one with the second most …
H.R. 1 House Rules Resolution - Amendments to House Rules · House Rules Committee · Jan 20, 2026
Responds that the chair has discretion to let the sponsor respond to public comment during or after it, and that this can be done by a committee member asking questions.
▶ Watch at 38:48Read what they said
Well, for sure, and I'm gonna go to Megan this for this, but, so the, the presenter's not gonna say, but is there anything that prohibits the chair from saying, would you like to, you know, a public comment, let's say it's over, or even during public comment, they could always go to the chair. Is that true or not? I mean, to the presenter, that's correct. There, there's, I, we kinda have this thing that during public comment, we have to sit on our hands or close our mouth. But maybe somebody has a question. It's really up to the chair. The chair. And somebody I could, representative Peter can say, you know, I have a question for this …
H.R. 1 House Rules Resolution - Amendments to House Rules · House Rules Committee · Jan 20, 2026
Says the chair should use discretion in letting sponsors respond to public comment, and notes that the rules already include majority and minority leader roles.
▶ Watch at 46:45Read what they said
I, I want to just reiterate, thank you that Peterson, that you can question a witness in the public, but the chair needs to use discretion. You probably don't wanna go back tit for tat to every public. You, you may keep a list and then go back to the bill sponsor and some, a member of the committee say, may I ask this bill sponsor question? Sure. But you probably don't wanna do that after every witness, and it'll just bog down. But you do have access and the bill sponsor does have access to respond absent this bill, as you said, political party. And we have a majority leader and a minority leader. It's all ingrained in our …
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House Rules Committee · Jan 20, 2026
Presented HJR 1, explaining the constitutional joint resolution process, allowing co-sponsorship from the opposite house, and the compensation rule for legislators attending committees they are not appointed to.
▶ Watch at 48:43Read what they said
Uh, we'll go back to Representative Dunnigan. Thank You, Mr. Chairman. I was speaking to the first substitute, and if you go online 1 48, you'll just see that and well, in 1 46 we're defining minority leader, minority part. What we just did was for house rules. Now we're doing the same thing for joint roles. And then if you'll go to line 3 78, So let's say that a legislator wants to change the constitution, it requires a constitutional joint resolution, and so it passes current practices. LRGC then needs to contact because to, to affect that, then you're gonna have to have a statute, okay. Has to pass by two thirds of resolution, but then you have …
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · House Rules Committee · Jan 20, 2026
Summarized that legislators may sit in on committee meetings but are not paid for it unless appointed, and concluded the presentation.
▶ Watch at 51:46Read what they said
Thank you. So, you know, as a legislator you can sit in on committee meetings, but if it, unless you're appointed to that, you won't get paid for it. That's what this says. And that I conclude.
H.R. 1 House Rules Resolution - Amendments to House Rules · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Rep. Dunnigan explained H.R. 1, which allows the Speaker to call extraordinary sessions, removes the minutes requirement for Rules Committee sifting meetings, skips the second sponsor summation after a motion to favorably recommend a bill, and defines the minority party as the party with the second most members.
▶ Watch at 34:50Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. First steps two. HR one modifies amends the house rules. I'm just gonna walk through the changes on line 59. Uh, currently the speaker can call the house into session for certain. On certain occasions we're added to that an occasion to an or extraordinary session. So we're just saying he can also do an extraordinary session. He can call us into session. Then the next change is found on, on and around line 96. So currently the House Rules Committee meets as two different types of committees. One is a standing committee and that's the committee that met today. They consider bills and resolutions and then debate and vote on them just like you do …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Supports the bill, saying it gives cities that lack special districts the same property tax lien tool many already have.
▶ Watch at 1:40:26Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So I stand in support of this bill. It's, it's a good bill. As a landlord, if you have a tenant that's not paying their water bill, the water company's gonna attach that. If the tenant leaves and they haven't paid, it's already gonna be attached on your property tax bill. They can do it as a special district. So this is already being done in numerous places. But what if the city doesn't have, doesn't contract or doesn't have a special district to do the water and sewer. They don't have that same ability to attach this to the property tax. It's a good way to make sure it gets paid, but …
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.