Legislators / Kathleen A. Riebe
Kathleen A. Riebe
Democrat · Senate District 15
Hear from them directly
Contact Sen. Kathleen A. Riebe
- Email: kriebe@le.utah.gov
- Phone: 385-222-1742
- Office: 350 N State St., Ste 320, Salt Lake City, UT, 84114
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.
Kathleen A. Riebe serves on:
- Executive Appropriations Committee
- Higher Education Appropriations Subcommittee
- Transportation and Infrastructure Appropriations Subcommittee
- Education Interim Committee
- Transportation Interim Committee
- Senate Education Confirmation Committee
- Legislative Management Committee
- Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Confirmation Committee
- Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Confirmation Committee
- Senate Education Committee
- Senate Ethics Committee
- Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee
What they've said
440 remarks on 145 billsH.B. 334 Educator Organization Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Thanks the presiding officer and asks the sponsor to yield to questions.
▶ Watch at 1:03:58Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I mean, thank you Mr. President. Um, has the sponsor yield to questions? Yes. Senator Balderree, will you yield?
H.B. 334 Educator Organization Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks about the requirement in line 51 that at least one Senate member on the commission be from each political party, noting three parties are represented on the floor.
▶ Watch at 1:04:08Read what they said
Thank you. Um, when I look at line 51, it says three members of the Senate whom the president of the Senate appoints with at least one from each political party. So currently we have three political parties on the floor right now. Would that mean each party was represented?
H.B. 334 Educator Organization Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says the bill sets 15 commission members and asks that this be placed on the record.
▶ Watch at 1:05:09Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, it says that there's gonna be 15 members on this mission. Senator, you pull the mic around. I know that, uh, you're, you're, you're working on your computer, but I wanna make sure this is on the on record. Okay. Thank you. Oh, is that better? Sorry. Uh, there's 15 members on this commission.
H.B. 334 Educator Organization Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Argues the commission would have few classroom teachers and many political members, and states she cannot support the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:06:09Read what they said
So when we have 15 people on this board, we only have maybe two that have education experience in a classroom and the rest of them are political people. So a commission that's supposed to change how we're gonna teach in the classroom has no teachers on it and has one superintendent. Um, doesn't really seem like it would make good policy for how the classroom would work. So we have a school board that has 15 members on it and that struggles a lot sometimes to make a decision. And now we're gonna add another 15 commission with hardly any representation of teachers who are actually in the classroom. So this is a very big commission with lots of …
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks whether a professor would have to create multiple lessons if many students object to parts of a curriculum on conscience grounds.
▶ Watch at 1:07:04Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, we had a great conversation about this in committee. Uh, my concern was, and I don't see if it's addressed here, is that if a professor was, um, in a class and she had, or he had numerous people who were making conscientious objections to some curriculum, would that professor then be required to create multiple lessons?
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Restates the question of whether a professor must create multiple lessons when a student has several conscience objections.
▶ Watch at 1:07:37Read what they said
Yes. If, um, a teacher has numerous different types of conscious objections to a lesson, does that professor now need to make multiple lessons?
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks why a student who chose to sign up for a class would take a class that violates their conscience.
▶ Watch at 1:08:19Read what they said
So you would be actively signing up for a class because that's the class you wanted to take. And so if you're willingly signing up for a class that you wanna take, why would you take a class that violates your conscience?
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks whether changes to curriculum under the bill could jeopardize university or program accreditation.
▶ Watch at 1:08:44Read what they said
Thank you. Um, as we talked about this in our, um, committee, we also discussed if you are going to change curriculum or that jeopardize your ability to be accredited as a class accredited, as a university accredited, as a, um, accredited, as a, um, major would losing that ability to teach the class that you believed you should be teaching it, would that jeopardize your accreditation?
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says professors do not support the bill, argues that university autonomy and academic classrooms should be protected, raises concerns about a slippery slope and grading, and states opposition to the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:09:12Read what they said
Thank you. I I believe that our professors do not support this bill. I think that our, the beauty of higher ed is that it has autonomy and a lot of the bills that we're running this year, questioning the autonomy of what's happening in our universities actually jeopardizes the sanctity of a higher ed class. Um, I also would be curious what would happen if you were taking a class and you all, you weren't passing it, and then all of a sudden you're like, you know what? I need to have a different lesson because this is against my conscience. This opens up a lot of speculation for what's gonna happen in a university. If I was failing …
H.B. 420 Municipal Office Vacancy Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says she supports the bill and mentions that her husband won his city council seat by coin toss.
▶ Watch at 2:07:38Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. I, I support this bill, but I have a little remorse. My husband actually won his seat on the city council by a coin toss. So, uh, he'll be sad that that's no longer an option, but I support this bill.
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Raises a concern that the bill's language on pass-through payments appears to conflict with giving families money to pay the school, and asks the sponsor about it.
▶ Watch at 2:26:55Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, so on line 1 67 it says, private schools does not include an entity that distributes rebates or passes through to families any portion of enrollment funding. And then it almost seems like it does the reverse on lines 4 49 because now you're giving them money to the family to pay the school. That's not eligible. Senator Cullimore
H.B. 242 Initiative and Referendum Signature Gathering and Removal Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks why the minimum age for collecting signatures is 18 when the voting age is 16, and suggests 16-year-olds could take part.
▶ Watch at 2:44:13Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. I'm wondering why we chose the age of 18 to collect signatures when the voting age is 16. We talk about wanting to be civically engaged and I think it would be really exciting for kids that was 16 to be a part of this process. Is there a reason why we chose 18?
H.B. 408 Data Sharing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Supports the substitute, saying data sharing processes are not well understood and the bill should start over rather than add safe harbors.
▶ Watch at 19:24Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. You know, um, it's uh, kind of an odd day when I get up and I agree with Senator Johnson. I, I look at how all this data is being manipulated and moved around. And it's similar to some of these bills are passing in education. We really don't understand what's happening in these big companies, in these data sharing process. All these internal processes that actually work to make our, um, make our programs more robust. And so this substitute would actually bring us back to where we were back to the drawing board, back to where we needed to start. Instead of trying to piecemeal it back to where it should have been and …
H.B. 408 Data Sharing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether a company would be out of compliance if it could not select and transfer only user-selected portions of data.
▶ Watch at 27:16Read what they said
you. So I, I, I understand that we're trying to move in the right direction, but to the same extent, some of this stuff cannot be done. So when I look at line 44 that says users, user selected portion of data. So if you are asking for a section of data that's user selected, I don't know how you can get into all the bits and bytes of our data to pull out a bit and then skip a couple of bytes and then pick out a bit. So if a company doesn't do this, are they under vi are they in violation of not doing it properly? Because it, it doesn't really seem that you can pick and …
H.B. 408 Data Sharing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether the five-business-day deadline for transferring data has a safe harbor if it is not met.
▶ Watch at 28:35Read what they said
Yes, please. Thank You. So on line 91, it says within five business days. So the worldwide web is worldwide. And if you're gonna ask to have your personal specific, uh, user selected data moved from the whole worldwide web, and that's five days to get that done. That seems like a really short time. Um, once again, is there a safe harbor for this not happening?
H.B. 408 Data Sharing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks how companies could be required to remove reposted pictures of user data within five days when those pictures are not tagged or linked to a person.
▶ Watch at 29:34Read what they said
So it also says on line 30 that it's including when a user's personal data intended to be shared in response to another user's request. So if I take a picture of your data and I repost it just a picture, how would they be responsible for taking that picture down that hasn't been tagged or hasn't been associated with another person? Because that actually becomes quite troublesome. I don't really know how you would take a picture that maybe had been modified or crossed out and then say in five days you need to go find all those pictures that somebody already put online and take it down. How, how would that be required to happen in five days?
H.B. 408 Data Sharing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says the answers do not resolve concerns, that users willingly posted data, and that the parameters for companies to undo that data are concerning.
▶ Watch at 30:35Read what they said
Thank you. And, uh, I guess your answer sums it up pretty well for me. But we, we don't understand how some of this stuff works. We are, we are concerned about social media, how we use social media, how it's been prolific in our lives. And I think we all should be pulling it back from social media. But when we all agreeing and willingly put all this stuff online and thought it was cute and funny, and now we're gonna hold all these companies responsible for figuring out a way to pull it all off. I, I don't, I don't think that it's feasibly, I don't think it's feasible. I don't think that we should be holding people …
H.B. 188 Juvenile Justice Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether the bill means juvenile offenses carried into adulthood will harm young people's success.
▶ Watch at 38:33Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, as a sponsor, yield for questions? Yes. Senator Weiler, were You yield? Yes. So as we look at kids moving from, um, childhood to adulthood, carrying these offenses with them into adulthood, sometimes this has a negative impact on their success. I've been told that this is going to make them carry those offenses into adulthood. Uh, is that true?
H.B. 188 Juvenile Justice Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Expresses concern that carrying juvenile offenses into adulthood hinders young people's ability to move on, and states opposition to the bill.
▶ Watch at 39:34Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I, I, I have concerns with that. 'cause you know, our kids really are still developing their brains. That's why they're not allowed to drink and well, they shouldn't be drinking, but I, I, I have a problem with kids being treated like adults and then having those infractions carried with them for the rest of their lives. Um, it, it really has a negative impact of ability to move on. It's really fun when kids get to college and they get to reinvent themselves and this thinks like something that they would carry them be carried further. So I'm a no
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says she tried electronic gathering and found it impractical, supports the bill, will not run her amendment, and argues the change would help people with disabilities or mobility issues and give everyone equal access.
▶ Watch at 41:06Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I, I have actually tried to explore that electronic signature gathering, and it's really just a, uh, a nod to the technology, but really not a path to it. Uh, I, I, I am in the process of gathering signatures, uh, for full disclosure. And it's, it's time consuming. And it's also, as I mentioned last night, I think irresponsible that we have our, uh, constituents putting their PII on a piece of paper and having some random person carry it around. I know that there's been some stress about having outside influences or, um, creating, um, a path that might be, um, susceptible to nefarious activities. But I believe the path we have right …
H.B. 508 State Facilities Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Riebe asked whether the bill would limit local control of buildings and local workers, and whether contractors could appeal if DFCM disagrees with their work.
▶ Watch at 44:01Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Pro tem. Um, sponsors yield to questions? Yes. The sponsors yielded. So, um, I'm concerned when you mentioned clawback, uh, project from, um, an entity that's working on it, would this limit the ability for local agencies to have local control over their buildings and have local people building those buildings? I know places like, um, you know, uh, in our far corners they actually, this is, this is a lot of industry that comes to their part of their, their neck of the woods. And would this limit their ability to hire their local workers? Senator Ipson?
H.B. 508 State Facilities Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Riebe asked for a follow-up on whether there is an appeal process if DFCM and a contractor disagree about whether the work follows code, and Ipson said the bill follows code.
▶ Watch at 44:49Read what they said
One more follow up question Please. Please. Um, so I I I'm concerned about the definition of whether they think it's being responsibly built or there is some discrepancy between DFCM and the contractors. I see. Is there an appeal process where they can, um, work out that conversation? Because if you're in the middle of a project and DFCM comes in and says they think you're doing it poorly, that might be a, a big, um, a big hindrance for our contractors to wanna start working with our state offices. They follow ICC code and it, they know if it's not in following code, that's when they'll pull it clo back. So there's no appeal process? Pardon me? I …
H.B. 438 Artificial Intelligence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says the minor protections are beneficial but the broader provisions would affect interstate commerce and everyday chatbot uses, so she cannot support the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:53:43Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, when I look at this bill, uh, I think that the, the best part of this bill starts at line 4 46 that starts to protect minors. When I look at all the lines prior to that, um, on from lines four, uh, 3 77 down to 4 43, all those things are then ended with a user is a resident in Utah. So I think when we start interacting with our fellow humans in the world, we are going to have to have a sip, a different set of rules for all of our AI and all of our chat bot. And I mean, if I call Delta Airlines and I wanna change my …
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Discusses helmet use and responsible e-bike riding for children, and cautions against overreach.
▶ Watch at 46:49Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, you know, when I think about my children riding their bicycles and they're like, I don't wanna wear helmet, I said, it's a law you should put a helmet on. So it gave me some cover. And then, you know, if we can say that every kid shouldn't be looking at their cell phones during schools, we can actually tell kids that they should be wearing helmets and treating their e-bikes responsibly. So if you're saying that we shouldn't be doing overreach, then let's not do any overreach Burton's name.
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks whether school districts that opposed the bill have changed their position after the amendments.
▶ Watch at 1:15:08Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, I know our school districts took a position of opposition to this bill. Um, has that position changed with your amendments and your, and your changes? They Did kick one.
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Restates the question about whether school districts have changed their position of opposition.
▶ Watch at 1:15:43Read what they said
Yes. Thank you. Uh, the school districts took a position of opposition to this bill. Has the change, have the changes changed their position of opposition?
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks whether a word-generating tool used in classrooms, which may fall under the bill's AI definition, would be prohibited.
▶ Watch at 1:16:05Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. When I look on the line three 50 when it says, AI tool means software or system that generates outputs, predictions, or recommendations through machine learning or, uh, natural language processes and continues on. You know, we, um, we have AI in almost every tool we use, even though we don't really recognize it as ai. If I'm typing on a, um, a very clunky tool we have called Utah Compose, we type a word and it generates some words. They think it's going to be, that's ai. Would that be now prohibited from being used in a classroom?
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks how the limit on one-to-one devices in kindergarten through grade three would apply when state-mandated tests require students to use devices.
▶ Watch at 1:17:12Read what they said
Senator Riebe. Thank you. Online, 1 66. It says that we are going to prohibit a, um, we are going to, oh, I'm sorry. Um, it talks about in kindergarten, we are going to prohibit the mandate of having a one-to-one device. So if a school does have a one-to-one device in kindergarten, first, second, third grade, because we have mandated tests that our students are supposed to take, how, how would this deal with prohibiting a ma a one-to-one device, but requiring every kid to use a device to take a state mandated test from kindergarten to third grade?
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says the bill's restrictions and ambiguity could be hard to implement, and that many classroom tools already use AI features.
▶ Watch at 1:18:13Read what they said
Well, thank you. You know, um, that's what The intention you say is, but when I read this bill, it actually has a lot of restrictions that would create some stressors in our classrooms. Our classrooms are doing a lot of these things already. Without this law. This law actually creates some confusion about what we can use and what we cannot use. A lot of the tools we have in our classroom are efficiency tools. I mean, I, I've said this before, if we were not allowed to use AI or we were not allowed to use Efficiency Tools right now, we'd all be putting away our computers and have stacks of papers here. Our schools are using computers …
H.B. 290 Child Tax Credit Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks about the bill's $7.1 million fiscal note from the income tax fund and whether senators voted to cut the income tax, and asks the sponsor to yield to questions.
▶ Watch at 1:22:54Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President Pro Tem. Uh, I look at the fiscal note of this bill and it's $7.1 million that are taking out of the income tax fund. Um, did you vote to cut the income tax bill? Did you vote in favor of the income Tax bill? Senator, we yield to questions?
H.B. 290 Child Tax Credit Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says it is ironic to vote to cut the income tax while running bills that spend income tax revenue, and states she believes in child tax credits.
▶ Watch at 1:23:17Read what they said
Okay. Senator, my my question is, if you're voting to cut our income tax and then you're running bills to spend our income tax, I find that ironic. Uh, I look at some of these bills and the people that are voting to cut our income tax and yet they're spending it more than some of the people that voted to not cut our income tax. I believe in child tax credits. But I also believe that if we're going to cut our income tax, you should not be running bills that are spending our income tax. So, uh, that's what I wanted to go on record saying.
H.B. 241 Charter School Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks whether charter schools have the same first right of refusal requirement toward cities and school districts as neighborhood schools.
▶ Watch at 2:07:46Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, do charter schools have the same requirement as our neighborhood schools To have first right refusal to our cities and to our school districts
S.B. 78 Property Tax Relief Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Argues that deferring liens and penalties to the next generation could limit wealth-building and housing affordability, and urges support for lifelines for families.
▶ Watch at 2:49:57Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President Pro tem. I mean, thank you, Mr. President. Um, when I think about, um, this policy, I think about generational wealth and a lifetime to accumulate. When we defer the liens and the um, penalties to the next generation, we are actually preventing the next generation from succeeding at the same rate that maybe we have succeeded. Um, we are struggling with a housing shortage and we talk about that all the time. And we're struggling with the ability for people to afford housing by doing this. We are actually going to take another tool away from the young people in our lives to have that wealth passed on to them. Uh, when my parents passed …
H.B. 370 Sex Offender Oversight Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Raises a concern that the bill is not yet showing on the board or in the online listing, and asks whether it was read in properly.
▶ Watch at 3:03:06Read what they said
Mr. President? Um, right now we don't have the bill on the board, so I'm not sure if there, if there was a problem reading it in or and it's not listed in the online. I showed on my, on my board there. Here. Oh go. Thank you. Thank you.
H.B. 370 Sex Offender Oversight Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says the bill is in front of the body and that she wants to make sure there are no concerns about it before proceeding. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 3:03:23Read what they said
Re Yeah, thank you. Wanna make Sure the bill's in front of us, which it is. And if anyone wants me to slow it down, if they didn't, didn't see it. And I can hold on for just a second. Just speak now. Otherwise we'll, we'll proceed. I think, uh, it was all announced and everything and it being on the board isn't an issue but I just wanna make sure there's any concerns on it. Thank
H.B. 312 School Curriculum and Standards Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Asks whether the fiscal note of about $24 million is accurate given the fifth substitute.
▶ Watch at 3:26:56Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President Pro Tem. I'm so sorry. So sorry. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, you said that this fifth sub takes care of the fiscal note. Uh, it says it's still $24 million. Is that the accurate fiscal note, Mr. President? The fiscal note is, uh, is funded.
H.B. 312 School Curriculum and Standards Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says free online tools, including AI, can generate curriculum lesson plans, and asks what the $24 million would be used for.
▶ Watch at 3:27:28Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I, um, as a teacher I have used Edia, which is an open source that's free. I've used Nearpod, which is an open source that's free. You now can type in any curriculum into ai, school ai. You could use Gemini, you could use, um, copilot. And it provides you with a really robust lesson plan. You can say, I'd like it to have a language component. I'd like to have a math component and it all pops up for free. So I, I don't understand why we're asking our school district to make a curriculum that can be created in AI in seconds and for free. And this one's gonna cost $24 million. What would the …
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says she supports the bill but is concerned that petition packets with voters' personal information are carried around and sometimes left where others can see them, and asks for a different approach.
▶ Watch at 4:00:05Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. I, I support this bill. But you know, as I'm gathering signatures and I have those packets, this body is very, uh, cautious of our PII. We all have had conversations about personal identify identifiable information. When you sign that petition, you have your birth date on there, your name, your address, and your signature. And these packets are carried around and sometimes left where other people can see them. I, I just think in this day and age, we shouldn't be carrying around other people's personal identifiable information and leaving it around for other people to see. So I think that we need to start looking at something different because if I as a teacher …
H.B. 411 Human Trafficking Hotline Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Says she first leaned no but will vote yes because she wants to listen to and believe the people who testified.
▶ Watch at 1:07:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, um, I sit in a lot of committee hearings and we have lots of people that come up and speak to us. And I started out as a no because I think that this can happen without this vote, but it's important to listen to all the people that come up to speak to us and to believe them. 'cause sometimes I see that not happening here up at the Capitol. So I'm going to listen to the people that came up here. I'm gonna listen to the people that took time out of their day. I'm gonna listen to the people that are most aware of this situation and believe them. So that's …
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asked whether the Utah State Board of Education had weighed in on the bill and on the curriculum to be used.
▶ Watch at 1:19:00Read what they said
Yes. Thank you Mr. Chair. So I have a few questions, but I wonder, um, has USBE weighed in on this bill, Utah State School Board of Education and the curriculum they'll be using?
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asked whether USBE had voted to support the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:20:24Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, did the USBE take a vote on this bill saying that they support it?
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asked how much training and what certification a driver's education teacher currently needs.
▶ Watch at 1:20:32Read what they said
Um, how much training and what teacher certification is required of a driver's ed teacher that we're now gonna waive? So what does a driver's ed teacher need to do to become a driver's ed teacher?
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Moved to move the agenda and said she opposes the bill, citing safety concerns with parent instruction and the risk of misreported driving hours.
▶ Watch at 1:43:56Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to make a motion that we move the agenda. My driver's ed teacher told me emphatically that your car is a two ton killing machine on the highways in the roads. Farms are different than roads. Uh, the break on the passenger side makes it very important for kids that can't drive or struggling to drive that there's that safety mechanism. Parents don't have that. When I taught fifth grade, sixth grade, parents would lie on how many hours their kids had read just to get a sticker on a chart. So, uh, this is concerning for me. Also. I know our parents aren't all like that, but that they could misrepresent their …
H.B. 464 Parent Taught Driver Education Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Said she supports the motion to hold the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:46:48Read what they said
I can support that motion. I wanna put my families first, so I'd like to hold the Bill. Thank you. Okay.
H.B. 491 State Highway Designation Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Opposes the five-year waiting period, suggests a sunset on road names instead, and raises concerns that the selection committee could limit minority members' ability to advance names to the full body.
▶ Watch at 1:57:35Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I, I, I don't really like the five year waiting period because we have, uh, a street that's named Cody in West Valley that honored Brotherson Brotherson. Yeah. Um, and I, I think that that was a really nice way to honor him after he passed. And so I, I almost would wonder, could we put a five year Sunset on naming a road so that a road can be named for a while and then we can honor somebody else? Because I do understand stacking of the names, but, um, I've, I struggle with is this a remembrance of somebody or is this honoring somebody? So I guess you can look at this two …
H.B. 549 Energy Efficiency Rebate Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Commended the sponsor on the bill and noted that no one had spoken against it.
▶ Watch at 2:10:29Read what they said
There we go. Senator Riebe. I, I just Wanna compliment you on this bill because we searched everywhere to find somebody saying anything about this bill and it's silent. So congratulations. You ran an energy bill that nobody's talking about. So it's a wonder, oh wait, maybe not. Have I spoke to soon?
S.B. 2 Public Education Budget Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says she opposes the bill, citing cuts to digital teaching, educator salary adjustments, and other programs that school districts requested.
▶ Watch at 48:26Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, you know, um, every year we struggle with education funding and every year we're told that it's increased by bucket loads. And I look at this list that I get from my superintendents and my school districts and their boards, and I try to follow what they ask me on this list. This is the people that were elected in our local communities come together and make a list to try to support their schools. And as I look at this list, there's a couple of things that are really concerning for our school districts. We're cutting $18.3 million to digital teaching and learning something that our school districts support. We are cutting educator salary …
S.B. 2 Public Education Budget Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks how the change from 90% of available funds to all funds being distributed as needed will be decided.
▶ Watch at 58:42Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, my first question was to the budget. My next question is to the policy on line 5 35 to five 40. We're deleting those policy questions and now we're changing it to 5 41 where it says, um, distributed funds as needed. In the past it's been 90% of the available funds would be given, and now we're gonna take, and it used to be 10% as needed. Now all funds are going to be as needed. Um, how do we change that from saying this is 90% of the funds that are available and dedicated to now all of it being as needed. Would that be us coming up with our decisions for as …
S.B. 2 Public Education Budget Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says the state board's recent record and funding of certain programs do not reflect what school districts are asking for, and that she disagrees with the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:00:17Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you. Um, that has not been my experience with the state board recently. Uh, I know there's been a lot of contention with some of our board members, but you know, we have, um, I can look at $290 million that we have actually struggled to spend. We have $130 million going to the Utah fits all budget. That's right now in court we have $150 million School of Excellence where people, we can't even get people to go to, but we're still supporting that. And then we have SB one 19 for $16 million that is not supported by our school districts. So if were saying we're supporting our school districts and then I look at …
S.B. 262 Law Enforcement Usage of Unmarked Vehicles · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says the bill does not solve the impersonation problem and suggests alternatives such as a verification number or placard, and is torn on the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:11:41Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, my father was a police officer growing up and we frequently joked around the table, don't do the crime if you don't wanna do the time. And you know, this is one of those bills. If you are violating a law, then you should be prepared to be caught. Um, although the genesis of this bill was people impersonating police officers. So if we really wanna provide public with a procedure on how to feel safe when they're getting pulled over, then that's what this bill should be. It should be a number you can call. I mean, I don't know anybody that doesn't have a phone in their car right now. It should be …
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks how an appeal process would work if a local school district wants to keep an educator out of its schools even though the standard is not met, and whether appeals would go through the State Board of Education.
▶ Watch at 1:21:38Read what they said
Thank you. We had a bust conversation about this bill yesterday and, um, I'm curious as how the appeal process would work if a school district decided that even though they didn't meet the standard of egregious um, violations, they still didn't want their teachers working in their schools. Is there an appeal process that the local school district can follow so that they can do what they think is best for their students? That, That that would go through the State Board of Education?
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks whether the sponsor will yield to questions and then begins questioning the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 1:27:31Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Has the sponsor yield to questions? Senator Colmore, were you Yale? Sure. Senator Riebe.
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks whether the bill's clickstream data provisions would require canceling contracts with any software that uses clickstream data.
▶ Watch at 1:27:38Read what they said
Thank you. I appreciate all the changes that have been made to this bill, but one of my questions still concerns clickstream data. The definition of clickstream data is that anything that you click through, it kind of follows where you're going and kind of leads you in a different direction or to the direction that you need to. My concern is that everything seems like it would use clickstream data. And so would the unintended consequence of this bill be that we have to cancel our, uh, contracts with anything that used clickstream data?
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks whether the July 1, 2026 effective date would cancel existing school contracts and require restarting the process for the next year.
▶ Watch at 1:28:52Read what they said
Riebe. Thank you Mr. President. Um, I know this, uh, goes into effect, um, July 1st, 2026. So would that mean that every one of our contracts and all of our schools would be canceled and we would have to go through this process to start the next year?
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says the bill has unintended consequences that would make it hard for schools to implement and that she will note concerns.
▶ Watch at 1:29:31Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, I, I believe that this bill has some unintended consequences that'll make it really hard to implement for our schools. And so I'll have to be a note. Thank you.
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked why private school students receive higher amounts than homeschool students, whether the bill changes that, and whether it addresses accreditation.
▶ Watch at 52:36Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, this is one of the programs I get the most questions about. And, uh, they're mostly people are frustrated and I've had to defend this program saying that we put guardrails around it last year. And, um, it's still frustrates me that we now have homeschool parents contacting us nonstop saying that they feel like they have been left in the dark. Um, can, can, can you explain why we are prioritizing private schools with a higher pay? And does this bill change that at all? As I'm looking at it, it seems like we are talking about the accreditation of a school. If you look at the fourth sub, it doesn't have accreditation in …
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether the fourth substitute allows UFA students to participate in extracurricular activities.
▶ Watch at 54:48Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so then the other question is, allows UFA students to participate in next extracurricular activities that's new to this fourth sub?
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked about the 17-student threshold for private schools and how it relates to accreditation.
▶ Watch at 55:34Read what they said
Thank you. And then you mentioned accreditation. You can have a school with 17 kids. What, what, can you repeat that again for me? Oh, yeah, sure. So we don't have accreditation in this, but if you look at, um, when we're looking at private schools and trying to strike a balance on reimbursement for private school, then you could pick four of the five. And that's on that handout right here. Uh, you can see it, but it's one of the items could be documentation. The school has at least 17 students, if you look in code, we actually have micro schools defined in a separate section of code as 15 and less. And so that's why we were …
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked about the enrollment preference described on the handout.
▶ Watch at 56:40Read what they said
Okay. Then they would be in the four 6,000. And then, uh, it says enrollment preference on this handout that you said.
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether students who become no longer income-eligible keep the highest returning-student preference.
▶ Watch at 57:00Read what they said
Is that ongoing year after year? They have to be 300%, or, I'm glad you asked that. Wait, can I just finish my question? Yeah, thanks. So if they start out as a, as a, um, student that is 300% below poverty level, but their economic status changes, do they still get to be one of the returning students at the highest preference?
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked how athletic participation and GPA requirements apply to UFA students who want to join school teams.
▶ Watch at 1:03:20Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I forgot to ask this question too. On line eight 10 through line eight 18, it discusses how a student may not be denied, uh, access an opportunity to participate in athletics. Um, I know that in my schools that has been the most contentious thing is athletics and who has the ability to be a part of a team. Mm-hmm. So if I was a, uh, scholarship person and I wanted to play lacrosse at a division one sport, and um, it was already full or whatever, it's based on GPAs. Do you guys have a GPA in this homeschooling situation? So if you look at line eight 11 and eight 12 Yep. It says in …
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked what the basis would be for students to stay on a team if portfolios are used instead of GPAs.
▶ Watch at 1:04:36Read what they said
But you have a, um, portfolio system instead of a GPA system. So would that, what would be the basis for them to keep on the team if there's a GPA status for students?
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked how disputes would be handled and said the change gives UFA students an opportunity other students do not have.
▶ Watch at 1:05:02Read what they said
Okay. So, um, how would they dispute that if there was a problem with, uh, students? Uh, I, I just think this is giving them an opportunity that a student at the school doesn't get. How can you answer that que How would you answer that question? That's Not accurate. Because a student at an lea a I do Believe that's, it is Ac it is accurate. Okay. Well, I'll Disagree. Okay. Thank you. So,
H.B. 467 Utah Fits All Scholarship Program Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said the program reports on spending but not on student academic success, and that she wants to see outcome data before supporting it.
▶ Watch at 1:06:39Read what they said
I do, I have discussion to that motion. What, um, I have discussion to that motion still. Okay, go ahead. So, um, when we look at transparency with this program, we have transparency about how the money is being spent, but I'm not really seeing whether our students are being successful in their academic endeavors. Um, and that's part of my frustration too. This summer I spent some time looking at the, um, alliance, The American Legislative Exec Exchange Council, who really promotes this. And when I look at their report card, it doesn't have anything about how our students are achieving. It only looks at how our students are giving options to move around from system to system. So …
S.B. 322 Educational Technology Regulatory Sandbox · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Raised concern that the bill's alternative assessment provision is unclear, since many existing assessments and tools already use some form of AI.
▶ Watch at 1:23:18Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. So I, I like a lot in this bill. And so I just have one question that I wanna ask now and maybe some other questions later. But on line 6 7 6 77, it says, an alternative assessment here in the state, we have so much choice. We just heard about how much choice we have, and yet, every time we're in a brick and mortar neighborhood school, we have all these alternative assessments, alternative programs, alternative choices, alternative, um, reports. Um, this is the, this is the part that bothers me. Like an alternative assessment that has, doesn't have AI in it. Well, everything has AI in it. I mean, you literally type into …
S.B. 322 Educational Technology Regulatory Sandbox · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said the bill offers continuity in technology policy instead of yearly changes and supported the five-year pilot period.
▶ Watch at 1:25:10Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, the reason, part of the reason why I like the spill is it is whiplash. We need continuity in what's happening with our technology. I think this provides a better continuous experience. But we have whiplash every year. We come up here, we make a ton of laws. We have whole entire educational communities coming up here begging us not to do stuff. And so when we think about how we're gonna move forward, we have to move forward with more than a one year plan and changing it on a dime every year. Uh, I know right now we have, we've been pushing for years to have devices available for students that wanted to use them …
S.B. 322 Educational Technology Regulatory Sandbox · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Moved to send SB 322 with a favorable recommendation as the first substitute.
▶ Watch at 1:29:23Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to send Senate Bill 3 22 AI and education grant amendments out with favorable recommendation. Thank first substitute. Thank you. It's a team effort.
S.B. 326 School Board Election Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Moves to send the bill out of committee with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:34:10Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to send Senate Bill 3 26 school board election modifications out with a favorable recommendation.
H.B. 129 Education Board Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Moved that the committee send the bill out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:39:15Read what they said
I'd like to make a motion to send house bill 1 29 sub one out with a favorable recommendation education board amendments.
H.B. 394 Veterinary Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Moves to send the first substitute of HB 394 out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:41:55Read what they said
Thank you. I'd like to send hba 3 94 veterinary amendments out with a favorable recommendation. I love when people listen to the people in the field and follow their advice. It's like music to my ears as a teacher. So thank you. Thank You, thank you. So, uh, the motion is to send out, uh, first substitute HB 3 94 with a favorable recommendation, uh, discussion of the motion.
H.B. 394 Veterinary Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Notes the bill is a technical correction and asks that it be placed on consent if the vote is unanimous.
▶ Watch at 1:42:26Read what they said
And, um, if it is unanimous, I would like to request that this be placed on consent.
H.B. 219 Higher Education Civics Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Supports teaching these documents but questions why the bill sets minimum requirements in code, says the bill keeps flexibility for institutions, and plans to support moving it out of committee while hoping to work with opponents.
▶ Watch at 1:49:04Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Line eight. Um, I like, you know, allows institutions to voluntarily adopt, um, line nine establishes minimum requirements. Why is one voluntary? And then the other one's establishing minimum requirements. I mean, I like this bill. I think it can already be happen, but it, that makes me nervous that you're forcing people to create a minimum requirement for, for having people teach something. I think that's why instead of reading from the provisional highlights, I read directly from the bill that the bill requires the board to establish a policy. So this is rulemaking, this is not us determining what that is, um, of what would be included, but it does preserve the discretion of …
H.B. 393 Early Intervention for Dyslexia Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said the bill is good but expressed frustration that her own earlier-filed dyslexia bill was not heard, and noted that many children are identified in third grade.
▶ Watch at 2:53:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to just make a policy statement before we move on. Um, I have a dyslexia bill that was put on the agenda quite early, much earlier than this bill was. So it's frustrating that my bill did not get an opportunity to be heard in committee. My bill was put eight days before this bill was put on this agenda. So, um, just, you know, partisan frustrations with good bills coming forward. Uh, I think that this bill is great, but, uh, I just was reading a, uh, pamphlet about, or a peer review study that third grade is not just the end of when we should be screening. A lot of kids are …
H.B. 426 Online Education Service Provider Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said she can support the bill but asked whether it conflicts with other online education service provider bills; was told it does not and that it aligns with related bills. Also raised concern about the number of education bills this session and whether they will work together.
▶ Watch at 3:00:14Read what they said
So, um, I su I can support this bill, but I'm confused by how many bills we have that are dealing with online education service providers. Does this bill run in conflict with any of the six other bills we have with online providers? No, it does not. Um, I wanna be very clear what this bill does is it asks the LEAs that are contracting with online service providers, um, to take some of the resources that the state is allocating to them and make sure that we know how the students are progressing and, um, that we have some oversight at the LEA for those outcomes. But, but no, it does not overlap. So it does align. For …
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Noted that the amendment states business administrators are employees of the board and asked the sponsor to review it.
▶ Watch at 3:07:03Read what they said
Yes. Thank you. Um, you said that the board would have an opportunity to decide that contract on itself, but it's written that they are an Atwell employee here. Uh, please look at the fir please look at the amendment that was adopted. House amendment number one. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Okay. And then, um, thank you for clarifying that. I'm sorry, I didn't see that.
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether the state superintendent or the board would hire and fire the deputy superintendent of operations, and expressed concern that this could make the position more political.
▶ Watch at 3:07:38Read what they said
And then if the Deputy superintendent operations reports directly to the state superintendent, does the state superintendent have the ability to fire and hire them only, or does the board have the opportunity to fire and hire them? It depends on the board's contract with the de with, uh, that, uh, with the Deputy Superintendent of Operations. Um, so that concerns me a little bit because now it becomes more political about firing and hiring your superintendent of operations. Sometimes these positions become contentious. Sometimes our positions become, um, you're the person that has to report information that people don't like. And so when you make that position more political and at will to one person or to a group …
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked what problem the bill is meant to solve, given that education groups do not support it.
▶ Watch at 3:11:29Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I know that you work really hard to work with the education community, and the education community isn't supporting this bill. And so, um, I'm, I'm, I'm curious, what was the problem that you're trying to solve with this bill? Because if our school districts don't like it and don't want it to happen, what's, what's the remedy that you're seeing that they're not?
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Asked whether moving from a defined term to at-will employment could expose the financial officer to pressure.
▶ Watch at 3:12:22Read what they said
Thank you. I, I have just a few, uh, questions that, that I'm concerned about. So, so you're moving from a defined term to at will employee, right? If you look at the sub, or, sorry, if you look at the amendment, it gives the board discretion to enter into a contract or not if they choose. So it's at the, it's at the discretion of the board. Okay. So, um, is, is there a potential with this for the financial officer to be pressured?
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Expressed concern that the business administrator would report to the superintendent rather than the board.
▶ Watch at 3:13:42Read what they said
Yeah. I'm a, I, I'm a little bit concerned that that business administrator would report directly to the superintendent because of that, the things that I, I mean, normally they'd report to the board, right? Kinda like a
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said it would be unusual for a chief technology officer not to report to the CEO.
▶ Watch at 3:14:23Read what they said
Okay. It'd be, it would be highly unusual for the Chief Technology Officer not to report to the CEO.
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said public education is different from the private sector, worried the at-will change would make it hard to hire and would discourage honest reporting, and said she struggles with the bill.
▶ Watch at 3:15:56Read what they said
Thanks. Uh, you know, I think that I'd like to point on the irony of performance pay. When you look at what's happening in Alpine School District and trying to create a new school district, no money, that would be a, a failure. But we're trying to work around it because sometimes education doesn't really fit every mole in the business model. Um, I, I worry that no one will want this job, and I worry that because it's an at will employee and that you won't have a contract, you won't be able to hire people. And also the people we have an example of, um, we had an office called USOR, I forgetting what the name of it …
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Said the bill would add to school culture concerns, that the at-will position could discourage candidates and honest reporting, and opposed the bill.
▶ Watch at 3:23:29Read what they said
Yes. To belabor a point, sorry. But, you know, we do have a culture issue in our schools, and we've created that cultural issue in the schools. Our bills change directions frequently. There's a punitive process in our schools where if you're not with the, if you're not in line, you are considered to be someone who's not a team player. When I worked in a school, I would ask the person that agreed with me, the person that didn't agree with me, and the squeakiest wheel in the school, and find out why these things weren't working. And we could have a dialogue. I'm afraid that this position will cause people to not want the job, and then also …
H.B. 524 Public Education Financial Officers · Senate Education Committee · Mar 2, 2026
Moved to adjourn the meeting.
▶ Watch at 3:28:43Read what they said
One more. Motion. Motion To adjourn. Non debatable. All in favor say aye. Aye. Oh, Wait. Aye.
S.B. 324 Outcome-based Investment Grant Pilot Framework · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks about the $9 million fiscal note, its transfer from the Uniform School Fund to the public education economic stabilization account, and why grant review costs that much.
▶ Watch at 36:17Read what they said
Thank you. I'm looking at the fiscal note and it has $9 million fiscal note that's coming from the Uniform School Fund being transferred to the public education economic stabilization restricted account. Um, how much do we have in the public education economic stabilization restricted account? And is this a fair use of our uniform school funds to go into that account to pay for this? And why is it $9 million to look at grants to see if they are, um, good or not? That just seems like a really high fiscal note.
S.B. 324 Outcome-based Investment Grant Pilot Framework · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Expresses concern about using uniform school funds and the education stabilization fund to pay for the grants, while saying she is generally okay with what the bill does.
▶ Watch at 37:46Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Mr. President Pro tem. Um, when I think about all the grants and I think about all the work that's been doing and all the measuring and assessing and reporting back to us, and then reevaluating, and then I think about $9 million. That's a significant amount. Money that could be used better in our classrooms. And I just, I struggle with all this money coming out of our uniform school funds and then also being taken out of our public education stabilization fund. When we think about those two funds, those two funds were created so that we could have more robust classrooms, smaller class sizes, resources in the class fund rooms. I don't believe that …
S.B. 97 Tax Revenue Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks whether the 45% residential exemption language in the substitute would negatively affect older residents in her community.
▶ Watch at 39:38Read what they said
Mr. President, before we circle that, I'm looking at line 1 61 that says 45% of count, uh, residential exemption equal to 45% of a calendar year of the residential property. Is that going to negatively impact some of the older people that live in my community? If they're prop
S.B. 97 Tax Revenue Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks for more information on the reasons behind the residential property percentage lines in the substitute.
▶ Watch at 40:12Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you. Um, I try to be appropriate. Uh, so I'm just curious about these, um, percentages about residential property. Uh, I know that this is something very concerning to me and my neighbors about how their property has taxes have increased. Can you give us a little bit more information on the catalyst or the impetus behind these lines from 1 61 down to 1 68?
S.B. 97 Tax Revenue Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks whether a rented apartment within a primary residence would still count as the primary residence.
▶ Watch at 42:25Read what they said
You. Um, I, I appreciate this policy. I am curious, if you were renting out, if you had like a mother-in-law apartment and you rented out the bottom, would you still be the primary? Would this still be your primary residence or would this be captured in there? Unin unintentionally.
H.B. 41 Construction and Fire Codes Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Asks where in the bill a property owner appeal process for changing a structure's wildfire liability designation appears, and asks for the line item.
▶ Watch at 50:42Read what they said
Mr. Thank you, Mr. President. You know, oddly enough, I live in Salt Lake County, but this question, this bill has been brought up to me numerous times. Um, you mentioned that a private owner could have an appeal process that would change the, um, liability of their structure. Um, can you explain that a little bit more? I, I, I'm trying to read that in the bill and I can't really see that. So could you show me what line item that is?
H.B. 41 Construction and Fire Codes Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Says she could not find the appeal process in the bill and thanks Senator Vickers for clarifying.
▶ Watch at 52:11Read what they said
Thank you. I couldn't find that in the bill, so I was curious as how that works. So thank you for clarifying that.
S.B. 174 Exercise of Religious Beliefs and Conscience Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks how the bill could affect licensure, board certification, federal grants, and reciprocity and interstate compacts.
▶ Watch at 1:01:33Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President Pro Tem. Um, when I think about some of the things mentioned in this bill on line 2 28, birds board certification lines 2 31 grants, and then lines 3 33 licensure, I think about how these indications span our state boundaries. And if we make a state law that would allow someone to gain board certification under their, um, conscious amendments, would that erode their trust in the institutions that are providing these board certifications? When I think about grants that we're gonna get from federal governments, can we say that you're not going to be a part of this conscious decision to move forward If you're gonna have a grant, if we're gonna have …
S.B. 174 Exercise of Religious Beliefs and Conscience Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks whether the bill would affect the state's ability to keep reciprocity, federal grants and interstate compacts.
▶ Watch at 1:03:16Read what they said
Yes. The question is, is this gonna erode our ability to provide healthcare? Thank you. My Response? No, no. My question is, if we are gonna have grants licenses and certifications that are federally identified, and we are going to change that level in this state, will that compromise our ability to have reciprocity with our certifications? Will that have the ability to compromise our ability to get grants federally and interstate? And will that compromise our ability to have board certifications if we're going to be interstate, uh, compacts? Senator Stratton?
S.B. 174 Exercise of Religious Beliefs and Conscience Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks how a license tied to an interstate compact could remain in Utah if the holder declines certain duties, and whether that would erode compacts.
▶ Watch at 1:04:55Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so that didn't really answer my question. On line 2 33, it said, adverse actions means denial, deprivation or disqualification of a licensure. How in the state of Utah can we take a license that might be in a compact with other states and say, all right, in this state you're gonna have a license even though you won't provide this, um, you won't adhere to the, the, the, the needs of that license. But then we're gonna be part of that compact. Would that erode our ability to have that license here in the state? And would that erode our compacts with other states if our license meant something different? 'cause I believe it would, What …
S.B. 174 Exercise of Religious Beliefs and Conscience Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks how the bill would prevent employees from refusing uncomfortable procedures and whether guardrails exist.
▶ Watch at 1:05:49Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so my second question is, what would, uh, if you decided that you, um, I mean we have nefarious employees sometimes and you know, there are some kind of, uh, events that we have in healthcare that are distasteful and these are things that people don't willingly wanna do, but that's part of your job. How would we deal with the fact that you could just say, well, that's against my conscience amendments to not provide, um, think of any type of procedure that's uncomfortable. And how would you prevent people from just increasingly saying that they didn't want to do that? Is there some way we can put guardrails around that?
S.B. 174 Exercise of Religious Beliefs and Conscience Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks for an example of what the bill is meant to protect against.
▶ Watch at 1:07:29Read what they said
Thank you. Can you give me an example of a, um, what was the catalyst for this law? Like gimme an example of something that a person would be required to do that would be against their conscience. Senator Stratton,
S.B. 174 Exercise of Religious Beliefs and Conscience Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks whether that example is currently allowed in Utah and asks for an example that occurs in the state.
▶ Watch at 1:08:30Read what they said
But that's not something that we can do in the state right now. Is that something we can do in the state right now? Terminate somebody's life. Senator Stratton, The, the question was, give me an example and I gave the example. Can you give me an example that happens in the state?
S.B. 174 Exercise of Religious Beliefs and Conscience Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Sen. Riebe says denying care based on a patient's identity or beliefs would be problematic and questions why the law is needed without a current example.
▶ Watch at 1:09:01Read what they said
Thank you. Um, the, the, if we don't have an example of something that you would not wanna do against your conscience. I, I, I can think of a couple of examples that just seem that it would be, um, problematic to say that I would deny somebody healthcare because of their stance on L-G-B-T-Q trans, um, race, religion. I mean, this could go to a circumcised person to be really glib about it. I don't believe that would be to the extent of this. But if we don't have an example of what we're trying to protect, I don't understand why we're running this law. Thank you.
S.B. 193 State Legal Holiday Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Says school district calendars vary and an added day off could complicate calendar planning, and indicates she will likely vote no.
▶ Watch at 1:11:56Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, you know, as we look across the state and we deal with all the districts, not every district wants to have the same week off. And, uh, it's actually been nice to have varying weekend weeks off the holidays. Um, I think a lot of our school districts would find this to be problematic for creating their calendar. Uh, I didn't really know that one of the most contentious committees you can be on in a school district is the calendar committee. Uh, everybody wants to come to school after Labor Day and be off of school before Memorial Day, but then still have 190 days of instruction before they have to end the year. …
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Notes opposition from many schools and asks how the bill would make due process more timely.
▶ Watch at 1:20:11Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. I'm noticing that, uh, many of our schools and, um, school representatives are against this bill. Uh, one of the things that was brought up in committee over and over again was that we have a, uh, problem with how long this process takes. So I I I'm empathetic to the, the fact that a student, a teacher, might have their license suspended and may be wait, may waiting a long time to receive resolution from this issue. But how would this remediate their ability to have due process in a more timely fashion, Senator Johnson?
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Says the bill would return suspended educators to schools too quickly and suggests the bill go to interim study.
▶ Watch at 1:21:26Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I feel like I'm living in a parallel universe right now because I, I agree with you that we have, um, punishments that are a little unfair. But I think most of our school districts wanna support the fact that a suspended teacher did provide risk to the environment of the school, the school district, and the students. And although I do support a more rapid, um, due process, I don't believe that this bill does that. Uh, there is a part of this bill where people who are suspended can no longer volunteer in schools. I would gladly work to find a resolution for a parent or a grandparent or an aunt to volunteer in a …
H.B. 492 Transportation, Infrastructure, and Housing Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Moves to pass H.B. 492 third substitute out favorably and shares concerns raised by constituents.
▶ Watch at 1:24:10Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd to send house bill 4 92 third. So about with favorable recommendation. Okay. Do we have discussion to that motion? Um, I do not see any, um, I did share some comments which I think were val valid and, uh, have, which have been shared with me by constituents.
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Said she supports the bill's intent but finds details that could create problems for schools and parents, and asked which platforms have been problematic.
▶ Watch at 43:10Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I do appreciate the intent of this bill, trying to make sure that we are doing what we can to keep our kids safe, but there's a lot of details in here that create problems for schools and, um, also for parents that really enjoy where their kids are going in schools. I mean, we've heard a lot about parents who are not happy with how this is working out, but we also have a lot of parents who enjoy their kids seeing the world through, um, virtual reality FET simulations, uh, using AI to process data at, um, a quick level. Um, when you say that AI is the wild west, and what, what, …
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked whether the sponsor was familiar with several AI programs.
▶ Watch at 44:30Read what they said
So we, have you ever used a program called CAMI School? AI Open? Ai Magic
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Said many AI tools are embedded in other programs and asked whether the bill would bar them.
▶ Watch at 44:53Read what they said
But there are many AI tools embedded into other programs. As this bill is written, you would not be allowed to use programs that have embedded AI in them.
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked the sponsor to change the language so tools with embedded AI can still be used.
▶ Watch at 45:09Read what they said
Well, I don't think it's incorrect because the way that it's written, you wouldn't be allowed to use certain programs that have AI embedded it. So would you be willing to change the language so that we could use tools that have AI embedded in it? Because almost all of our programs have AI embedded in it.
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Said school districts are not supporting the bill.
▶ Watch at 45:34Read what they said
Um, I pulled up your bill on our tracking sheet for our school districts. Our school districts are not supporting this bill.
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Asked which districts were consulted and how many have district technology policies.
▶ Watch at 45:56Read what they said
So you've talked to which school districts? 'cause I I work in a lot of school districts, and I know a lot of school districts have a policy on how we're using ai. And a lot of districts have it shut down for students unless it's embedded in a program that they're using. Yeah. So When you say that we don't have district policies for that, how many school districts do not have a district policy and how many school districts do have a district's policy?
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Said English language learners use language programs that she believes the bill would prohibit in grades K-3.
▶ Watch at 46:54Read what they said
Um, so I also, when you say that K through three shouldn't be using this on this assessment, we have lots of kids who are ELL learners and they use programs that help them learn the language when they're like, we have one school district that has like 48 languages being spoken. Mm-hmm. So this is a tool that we use a lot in K through three to help us mitigate, you know, 43 different languages that would be prohibited under this bill.
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Said she understands the intent but finds the language far reaching and cannot support the bill until it is changed.
▶ Watch at 48:21Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so I, I'm a digital teaching and learning teacher. I've been teaching for 25 years. I've been in schools for 25 years. I now have a job that brings me up to rural schools and into charter schools. And so, um, when I look at this bill, I understand the intent of where you'd like to go, but I've actually called people that have asked me to support some of these bills. And I've asked them, what, what is, what is the sticking point? What's the problem? What's the, what's the non-starter? And a lot of them, um, really struggle with some of the basic platforms that we deal with in schools. And so for someone who's …
H.B. 273 Classroom Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Said the bill's intent is good but its language would disrupt technology use, including tools that give immediate feedback, and asked for a responsible rewrite.
▶ Watch at 1:16:26Read what they said
Thank you Ms. Madam Chair. Um, everyone in this, in this room would agree that we definitely want our kids learning from our computers. We want them learning from their devices. We want them to have a positive experience. We want our students to enjoy school. No one is disputing that. The problem with this bill is that it's written in a way that causes us to have unintended negative outcomes with the platforms we are using, with the devices we are using, with the software we've purchased. And so we are, I am asking that this bill be written in a responsible way that captures the essence of what you're describing right now. This bill has language in it …
H.B. 36 Gold Medal Schools Pilot Program · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Raises a question that the bill's county eligibility language would exclude her counties, and says she plans to work toward a similar program for all schools.
▶ Watch at 1:25:54Read what they said
Thank you. I have a question that somebody just brought to me. On line 1 36, it says, is located in a county third, fourth, fifth, and sixth class. That means my counties would not be allowed to be a part of this, Um, for, just because the rural Health transformation funds are earmarked for rural counties right now. But again, that's why I did that HCR 11, because my plan is that we get this in all, we get something like this in all the schools and I will be working towards that over the next couple of years to try to do that.
H.B. 36 Gold Medal Schools Pilot Program · Senate Education Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Moves that HB 36 substitute one be passed out of committee with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:26:45Read what they said
Yes, please. Okay. I would like to move that HB 36 sub one, move out with a favorable recommendation.
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Presents S.B. 105, saying it restores a justification hearing, follows a practice in 23 other states, and does not address a specific past incident, then opens the floor to questions.
▶ Watch at 47:15Read what they said
to me from an incident that happened this summer on June 14th. We had a tragedy at a No Kings rally on December 3rd, uh, was when the charges were brought to give all parties a path forward. Instead of waiting for six month, we'll have a, have a clearer path forward with this bill. Uh, when we first introduced this bill, we eliminated the hearing for justification and as we discussed this bill with the Salt Lake City da, we decided to add that hearing for justification back in. So, um, this bill would actually provide a path forward. It is, uh, something that we do in 23 other states. Uh, we are silent on how we'd move forward …
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Explains that the substitute is a clarification that fixes a grammatical error in section two.
▶ Watch at 48:49Read what they said
Yeah, it's just a clarification. Oh, thank you. Uh, the substitute is just a grammatical error that they wanted to fix on line 39 from section two section. Thank you. Sorry. I was surprised by that.
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Asks whether the affirmative defense would still apply if a vehicle with a sound design later develops defects during operation.
▶ Watch at 1:35:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, when I'm looking at line 3 78 and it says affirmative defense and it's protecting against a defective design, if we had a, um, design that was intact and then spent the day going through its business and started to incur defects to it, that wouldn't be a defective design, but it would actually be a defect in the operations of the autonomous vehicle. Would the affirmative defense still be in play during the whole entire life of that autonomous vehicle if it was not designed defectively, but then became defective Senator Kalimore?
H.B. 118 Driver Training Schools for Commercial Driver License Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Asks whether the goal is safety or penalizing people who do not speak English, notes English proficiency is a federal requirement, and suggests reporting failures by school when a common pattern appears.
▶ Watch at 43:27Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, when I look at the sub to the sub, my question is, are we trying to keep people safe or are we trying to, um, do a gotcha moment for people that don't speak English? So that's the part that is a, a little concerning. Uh, I do agree. This is a federal program. Um, I did have a CDL at one point. You don't have to read a lot once you start driving a truck, but getting the test, getting through the test can be difficult. Um, so if we are trying to capture bad actors, then we can just say they failed the test and maybe not failed the Right. The language proficiency …
H.B. 118 Driver Training Schools for Commercial Driver License Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Says truck driving is a gateway job, that English may not be needed much for driving because of phone translation tools, and says she will support the bill and hopes to work with the sponsor on wording.
▶ Watch at 49:56Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, um, when I think of truck driving, it's actually a gateway job for people to get outta poverty, to improve their lives, to improve their family's lives. I mean, when I drove a dump truck, it was literally the highest paying job I could get without a lot of, um, um, education. I mean, I, I did have a college degree, but that wasn't part of it. But I mean, it's a really great job. It's a high paying job that provides a lot of stability to families. And so, when I first look at this bill, I, I thought it was something that was, um, something other than protecting people from bad actors …
H.B. 228 Vehicle Sales Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Moves to send House Bill 228 Second Substitute out of committee with a favorable recommendation, and says she recently bought a vehicle that had hail damage, knowing about it.
▶ Watch at 56:22Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I would like to send out House Bill 2 28, sub two with a favorable recommendation. I too have a golf ball car that we just bought because it was cheaper, but we did know that it was hail damage. So thank you.
H.B. 276 Artificial Intelligence Modifications · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Supports the work but is concerned about lawsuits and the need for tight laws, and will vote yes while hoping concerns are addressed.
▶ Watch at 1:36:18Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I, I really do support what you're doing here. Um, but a lot of the questions that were brought up leave me concerned with, um, lawsuits and chaos in the AI world. When we do not have tight laws, we actually create problems. So, uh, I will support this now, but I hope that you can work with some of the concerns that were brought up with some of these speakers. So thank you for the work you're doing and I hope you can continue.
H.B. 357 Amendments to Motor Vehicle Data Privacy · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Asked whether the bill would limit access to vehicles available on the market, comparing it to past technology bills that affected phone tools.
▶ Watch at 1:43:13Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, would this enactment prevent us from having full access to all the vehicles available on the market if we are the only state leading out on this kind of, I don't believe so. Okay. We have had bills like this with, um, technology on our phones, and it's created quite the excitement because then that would prevent us from having access to certain tools and phones here in this state. So I'm just wondering if this would follow that same
H.B. 54 Boating Safety Education · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Relayed concern that a yearly requirement is burdensome and asked whether it could be changed to every three or four years.
▶ Watch at 1:51:40Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. On line 39, it says, we're gonna do this every year. That was the pushback that most of the people provided with me. Um, we do it ethics training every year after the third year, you're like, are you kidding me? I can don't even have to read the questions anymore. I just answer it. It's kind of cumbersome. It's annoying. I I don't take a driver's test every year. Um, there's lots of things I do that require some sign of certification that isn't required every year. So that was the biggest concern I've heard. Can you change it to every three years, every four years?
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Says the bill's state-approved software list would be hard to maintain and could limit schools' ability to use new tools, raises questions about how clickstream data is defined, and says school districts are willing to work with the sponsor while supporting student safety.
▶ Watch at 25:24Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, the good sponsor, and I have spoke about this bill a little bit. Um, my job when I'm not up here is to work with digital teaching and learning, uh, venues. And when we think about what we're using in our schools, we are all trying really hard to make sure we're using academic instructional learning tools to the best of their ability. And our students have figured out ways to get around that as quickly as possible. Um, when we were listening to testimony in the committee, many parents expressed frustration with Chromebooks, which this isn't part of the bill. They expressed frustration with, um, getting access to pornography, which is a little bit …
H.B. 97 Medical Waste Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Raises a point of information that the Senate lacks a quorum, stating that 15 senators are present including herself.
▶ Watch at 39:23Read what they said
Point of information We don't have a quorum right now. We are barely hanging on with 14.
S.B. 229 State Employee Benefits Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Asks whether the sponsor will work on grandfathering employees who prefer the current PTO accrual, citing concerns from the Utah Public Employees Association about losing two hours per pay period.
▶ Watch at 1:16:55Read what they said
Thank you. Um, this, um, benefits package, uh, has a lot of positives to it, but I know that the Utah Public Employees Association is not supporting this bill because they are concerned that they are losing two hours of PTO that they used to acquire. Uh, I know that I have spoken to you about a sub that would possibly grandfather people in with this policy that they preferred. And, um, I was trying to run an amendment but it wasn't ready yet. I was wondering if there's any appetite for working with the people that believe that they are losing two hours every pay period to this new policy. Uh, I, I, I, I think there's a lot …
S.B. 229 State Employee Benefits Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Says the state's payroll systems could likely handle different policies for different groups and that she is listening to employees who asked for this change.
▶ Watch at 1:21:44Read what they said
Yes, thank you, Mr. President pro tem. You know, uh, I, I understand your point of view. I, I personally think there's a lot of attractive parts to this new package. Um, I, as a state employee, left many hours on the table when I left a job to come to another job, but that's really not for me to decide what I think is better for somebody else. And I look around the room at state employees and I wouldn't like to, um, impose what I think is best for my family onto somebody else's family. So I'm listening to the employees that are reaching out to me and asking me to ask for this, uh, change. And, um, …
S.B. 85 Excellence in Education and Leadership Supplement Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Asked which school districts worked on the bill and whether school districts support it.
▶ Watch at 1:38:46Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, sponsors yield to questions. Oh, maybe Senator Fillmore? Sure. Go ahead. Senator Eby. Thank you. Um, can you tell me, um, which school districts, uh, you worked with to create this bill and, uh, have school districts supported this bill?
S.B. 85 Excellence in Education and Leadership Supplement Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Said the expansion suggests the pilot is not succeeding, argued leftover pilot funds should be cut, and said she will vote no.
▶ Watch at 1:39:34Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, when we have talked about how money is tight this year and how we are trying to squeak every viable dollar into our budgets, uh, this expansion is kind of an indication that, uh, a pilot isn't successful. And some of the times I talk about pilots, we always say pilots are frustrating because we make them into policies. And so I I, I applaud pilot, pilot programs, but when they aren't working, we should actually start to defund them. And when our school districts aren't supporting this, we should actually consider defunding it. And so I I'm a no thank you.
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Expressed concern that the bill could bypass the PAC process and asked why a suspended teacher would return to school.
▶ Watch at 1:05:23Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, so I spoke briefly with you before we came here, and I'm concerned about some of the unintended consequences of this bill and how this would usurp or circumnavigate pac. Um, why would we suspend a teacher and then just put it right back or him right back into the school? It just concerns me. So what, what would PAC weigh in on this anymore? Or would it just be going around pac
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said the bill is well-intended but has unintended consequences, and asked whether the LEA or PAC would suspend a teacher in cases such as misuse of funds.
▶ Watch at 1:06:17Read what they said
lots of different, um, issues that we can have in schools that this really doesn't understand. It's kind of like an unintended consequence of something that I believe is a good, what you're trying to do, I believe has some merit, but there's also a lot of other reasons why, um, we would want to stay with the process we have. So, um, if a teacher was suspended through pac right? Or they would just be suspended by the LEA, who's suspending the teacher PAC or the LEA? Well, the suspension or revocation has to come from pac. Okay. Um, but if they're stealing money or they were making political statements, or they were, um, not following an IEP, you …
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asked about due process and whether a teacher could return to the classroom without a hearing.
▶ Watch at 1:07:08Read what they said
Well, there's due process, right. But you'd be saying that we'd circumnavigate to process and put them back into the classroom as long as there wasn't a person that was a victim,
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asked whether PAC would decide cases before a teacher is restricted.
▶ Watch at 1:07:21Read what they said
Right. Okay. The, the difference though is that if, if a, if a teacher is, is called before you back, PAC decides to take the case.
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said there is work to do on the bill and that she cannot support it as written, and suggested discussing it further with the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 1:07:53Read what they said
So Thank you. Um, I, I, I think there's some work that we can do on this bill. So, as it is right now, I can't support it. But, um, I, maybe you and I can discuss it more at length, because I'm a little confused in some of my people that I work with are confused why you would take away that process if it was something that was happening bad in the school. So, um, and that could be a whole bunch of things. So maybe you and I should just
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said she wants to protect both teachers and students and remains concerned about the reasons for suspensions.
▶ Watch at 1:08:41Read what they said
Thank you. I, I, I thank you. I wanna protect our teachers, but also I wanna protect the kids. And I'm not sure understanding all the different possibilities why we might suspend a teacher, so, right. Just concerned about that. Thank you.
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
As temporary chair, said the bill sets a tiered framework to protect children from genuine harm while avoiding permanent removal of educators for minor violations, and cited State Board data.
▶ Watch at 1:08:56Read what they said
Uh, as a committee member myself, who's temporarily chairing, I'd also like to make a comment, and, and that is to say that the safety of our children and the integrity of the teaching profession are not mutually exclusive. And there are two sides of the same coin. So this bill creates a common sense tiered framework that protects our children from genuine harm, while also ensuring that our educators are not permanently sidelined by minor non-safety related violations. This is due process and, you know, innocent until proven guilty, current law can sometimes be all or nothing, making it difficult to apply proportional discipline, or on the other hand, fast tracking restrictions in high risk cases. Um, so there's …
S.B. 312 Educator License Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said PAC needs work but that she does not support the bill, preferring to wait for the audit to guide changes.
▶ Watch at 1:30:19Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I am an educator. I was on the state school board. I was the vice president of my association, and now I'm a legislator. I can tell you that there are some things PAC needs to work on, but I disagree that we rubber stamp PAC's decisions. Uh, we have created an environment in schools where parents are exercising their right to bring up concerns with their teachers. And that's something that we should address. We should be doing something in a more timely fashion. We should be dedicating more money to pac. But I taking teachers that are being suspended, whether a parent believes something is wrong, or a teacher believes something is wrong, …
H.B. 145 School Excused Absence Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said the 2.0 requirement is hard on struggling students and that the decision to keep a student in sports should be left to parents' discretion.
▶ Watch at 1:44:51Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I know we're all laughing about that 1.0, but, um, you know, when I think about kids that are struggling, and I think about kids that really need to show up to school sometimes the only reason they're showing up to school is to play sports. Uh, I, I, I did, uh, I have personal experience with this 2.0 and, uh, I know that it was crushing for some of the friends and families that I've had that had to leave their sports because they weren't at a 2.0. And, uh, when we think about two, uh, uh, superintendent Horsley's point, having kids in school is so important. And if the, really, the only reason …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asks whether the bill's May 2026 effective date gives the State Board of Education enough time to develop the curriculum.
▶ Watch at 2:09:06Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm looking at line 2 48 says this bill takes effect on May 6th, 2026. Um, I know that, uh, from my time on the state school board to create a curriculum, it takes a little while. Um, and if you've ever been to a school board meeting that lasts a couple of hours, just the slightest word could be a really long conversation. So I'm wondering, um, would this timeframe give the board enough time to come up with this curriculum and change the curriculum as a current stance?
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Moves to send the substitute H.B. 218 out of committee with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 2:17:14Read what they said
I'll make a motion. Okay. Go ahead. Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to, um, send out HB two 18 digital skills amendments out with a favorable recommendation for substitute Substitute one.
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asks whether Wilson is paid or a staff member of the Senate and whether she lives in Utah.
▶ Watch at 2:35:48Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, you mentioned your title as a consultant to the Senate. Uh, is this as a paid capacity, or I don't, I've I've never met you before. I've never seen you before. Do you live in the state of Utah?
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asks whether the consultant title is an official position.
▶ Watch at 2:36:33Read what they said
Okay. So that's just a title you have called yourself. So that's not like an official title, is that 'cause you're not paid and you're not part of our staff?
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asks about the fiscal note and who would prepare extra curriculum for students who object.
▶ Watch at 2:36:53Read what they said
Okay, thank you. So, um, I'm looking at the fiscal note for this bill, and it's zero, um, as we are writing two curriculums now, instead of one curriculum for every classroom, who would be making up all this extra work and all this extra, um, curriculum that you would have to have available for any student that decided that this was not part of their conscience?
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Disagrees and argues that many students could request separate lessons, raising questions about the time and cost to professors.
▶ Watch at 2:38:06Read what they said
I, I disagree. I mean, I think if I was in a school and I was failing a class and I wanted to create some speed bumps in my failing grade, I could actually just say, this is against my conscience. Can you provide me with an alternative lesson? And imagine if you had four people in a class of a hundred that did that, you'd have four different lessons because each conscience could be something different. So, I mean, I could be opposed to this for a Catholic reason, and someone could be opposed to it for a Jewish reason, and then someone could be opposed to it for a vegan reason. And now you'd have four different lessons …
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Asks whether students who object could get a refund and whether changing accredited course requirements would compromise a degree.
▶ Watch at 2:38:48Read what they said
I, I, I disagree. Um, and I have one more question. I'm sorry. Go ahead. Um, thank you. When we, um, think about going to higher ed, we, we pay money, we choose our classes. And so why would I choose a cla Like, so maybe we could do something where you could get out of a class and get your money back if you felt your conscience was being violated. Um, I mean, I could maybe support that, but you choose classes based on the major that you wanna get. So if I see that there's a point that says you can't change it, because that would, um, not be in full, uh, accreditation of your class. But that …
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Says the fundamental alteration standard is subjective, that the bill could add stress and integrity concerns for universities, and that she cannot support it.
▶ Watch at 2:40:42Read what they said
Thank you. Um, yeah, I, I, I, I struggle with what people would determine fundamental. I mean, that, that has some subjectivity to it. I would, um, argue that this would create a lot of, um, stress in our professors' lives, having to maybe come up with multiple lessons, and then also thinking about, um, oh, I just lost it. Thinking about how we are, um, going to remain a university with integrity and autonomy and the ability to teach a class to the needs of our students. Once we start inserting ourselves into our universities with curriculum, it really becomes problematic. And every, this year and last year, I continually see us trying to insert ourselves into curriculum classes …
H.B. 204 Higher Education Student Belief Accommodation · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Opposes the bill, saying exposure to differing views aids learning, and arguing that the Feltner case shows a lawsuit would likely fail, so she will vote no.
▶ Watch at 3:01:33Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, you know, being a part of a conversation that you don't agree with everyone is a hard place to be. As an atheist up here, I can tell you that I hear lots of things that I disagree with, but you know what? I welcome those conversations because it opens my mind, it gives me insight to other people. And, uh, I was raised a Catholic and changed my opinions about that. Um, so I I, I don't really understand how we are going to start changing our curriculum so that we're not hearing divergent thoughts by saying, that's against my conscience. Sometimes having two illustrate somebody else's point of view builds …
H.B. 174 Sex Characteristic Change Treatment Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Says the decision is difficult, relays family friends' accounts that treatment saved their children's lives, and says she will vote no.
▶ Watch at 31:37Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, this is, um, this procedure is something that I'm confused by I don't understand sometimes. And, um, I act cautiously when I don't understand something. And I have family friends who have come to me and said, without this type of treatment, my child would've committed suicide. And so I find it hard for us to make decisions about other people's kids and about other people's welfare. Uh, I I never met somebody that transitioned growing up, but in my last recent years, I've met numerous people who have transitioned and their lives have been so much more enriched and they've been so much happier and I've actually seen them change. And so, uh, as, …
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Votes no, saying the listed topics can already be taught and that a shorter list would let schools teach what fits their curriculum.
▶ Watch at 1:17:47Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President ProAm, I'd like to explain my vote. I I'm a no because all of these things can be taught already in school. All these things are already taught in school and when we create a list of things that we may teach, we actually emphasize things that might not be organically, um, presenting themselves in schools. So this list is comprehensive but it also leaves out a lot of things. And when you create a list that you leave out things for, you actually create a situation where people think they can't teach something. So I think a shorter list is better where people can actually teach whatever works with their curriculum and however that works. …
S.B. 232 Regulatory Impacts on Families · Senate floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Asks what the phrase measurable negative impact means, says it is subjective across districts, and asks what steps the bill takes once an impact is judged negative.
▶ Watch at 1:43:03Read what they said
Thank you. On line 5 99, it says a measurable negative impact. Um, I understand what's going on in this bill, but when I think about regulatory impacts on families and what each different district and county has in their population, I, I struggle with what one person might think is negative and another person might not find negative. So I find that this is a subjective language about a negative impact. Um, what kind of policies would we be considering that we would stop and once we decided they were negative, what's, what are the steps that we take in this bill that stops that behavior or that stops that impact?
S.B. 232 Regulatory Impacts on Families · Senate floor debate (day 36) · Feb 25, 2026
Argues the bill is more like a resolution than a bill because it has little effect on daily life and gives no way to act on a negative impact, and questions whether it merits floor time.
▶ Watch at 1:44:50Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President Pro Tem. You know, when I think, when I think about how many bills we pass and how many conversations we have on this floor about really weighty subjects, this bill seems like it should have been a resolution since it has no impact on people's daily life. And there's really nothing you can do if you decide that it is a negative impact. So when we think about a body that was running 1500 bills and passes, maybe 600, I think we all need to start looking at what we're working on and whether it's really a benefit to our community and is providing help. So, uh, I I ran for office to help people …
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asks whether the bill's transit facility provisions would allow leasing of parts of the gravel pit mobility hub.
▶ Watch at 47:00Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, on lines 1 74, 2 1 76, it talks about public transit facilities and services that serve Cottonwood Canyons area and Salt Lake City. Salt Lake County. Um, I heard you mention that that would be part of a, the, the terminal that they're putting at Big Cottonwood Canyon, but we wanna make sure that this doesn't create any type of, um, provision to lease parts of the gravel pit mobility hub. Would this open up that gravel pit?
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Confirms the facility would be a transportation hub and introduces Carlos Braceras to answer questions.
▶ Watch at 47:45Read what they said
Okay. So it'd just be like a transportation hub. Right. Okay. And then, um, also when we, we are looking to provide leasing, where would that, uh, when the, um, the generated revenue, where would that revenue be directed to? Would that go to the, um, 72 dash one dash 2 0 1, or would that go to the 72 dash two dash one thirty five, which is, I'm gonna phone a friend. Okay. Thanks. Oh, you brought out The big friend Here. Yeah. Director Carlos. I'd say tall, lean, stealthy, stocky. Big guy, not big heavyweight.
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asks whether revenue from the mobility hub would stay in its region or be available statewide.
▶ Watch at 48:59Read what they said
May I have a follow up? Yes. Um, so if it's generated in that Mobility Hub, would it stay in that region or would it be opened up for every region? It would be just going into the transportation fund and then during the appropriation process, you determine where that's allocated to. Okay. We're May, I, may I, Mr. Go ahead, Mr. Chairman.
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asks how the usage charge rate and the annual registration fee compare for an electric vehicle owner if the implementation date is moved up.
▶ Watch at 55:12Read what they said
Yes. Thank you. I'm sorry to take a second bite of the apple, but my colleague here brings up some good points. So if I was going to, I'm trying to do the math in my head, and it's Juab not math for me. If you bought a electric car and you wanted to take advantage of this, um, first rate with a usage charge rate of $1.10 25 cents per mile, and then that, oh, you didn't wanna use that, you wanted to use this, um, annual registration, would one of them be more expensive than the other? That would kind of be surprising. Someone who invested in a car thinking that they'd use this program for longer. Because …
H.B. 481 Transportation Modifications · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Says she understood the bill would push drivers to one option and now understands that drivers keep their choice, with one option starting sooner.
▶ Watch at 56:38Read what they said
I actually was reading it differently in my head. I thought that this was like going to push them to one or the other, but they still have the choice. One just starts sooner now. Right? Right. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked to send out the bill with a favorable recommendation and to adopt the amendment first.
▶ Watch at 1:24:25Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to send out HB three 80 ones third sub with a favorable recommendation. Could You adopt First Amendment? Oh, can we adopt And, um, sorry. Yeah, we, we probably need back up. We need to yeah. Adopt his amendment. Okay on that.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Made a motion to adopt the amendment.
▶ Watch at 1:24:40Read what they said
Thank you. Can I do that instead then make that Motion? Yeah, let's do that first.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Moved to pass the bill out favorably as amended.
▶ Watch at 1:25:03Read what they said
You. I'd like to send HB 3 81 electric mobility device amendments out with a sub three with a favorable recommendation as amend. Okay. As amended.
H.B. 381 Electric Mobility Device Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Said the behavior of young riders is concerning and that the bill is a step in the right direction.
▶ Watch at 1:25:29Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I, we're not trying to harsh anybody's joy as they say, but this is really problematic. Our kids are everywhere. They are just doing really scary behavior and, um, I think this is a step in the right direction. So thanks for bringing this forward.
H.B. 136 Unlicensed Driver Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asks for a demographic breakdown of the people in the crash statistics, raises concerns about racial profiling in reasonable-suspicion stops, and will vote no.
▶ Watch at 2:04:29Read what they said
Yes, please. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I appreciate the statistics you just mentioned, but I'd also like to know, know the demographic breakdown of who exactly was getting in those car crashes. I, I wanna support our police. I want them to have all the tools they need, but there is a lot of research that shows that our minorities are being pulled over at a higher rate than our non-minority peers. So when we think about reasonable determination, that's something that makes me cautious about just pulling over anybody. So, um, I know that all of this can be done, I know back and forth, but it just makes me a little cautious about racial profiling. So I'll …
H.B. 293 Public Education Student Athlete Protections · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Moves to send the first substitute of HB 293 out favorably as amended.
▶ Watch at 46:03Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to send out house bill 2 93 sub one out with a favorable recommendation As amended. As amended by as amended Sub one. Isn't that the same thing? Okay. So the motion is to, uh, send out first substitute HB 2 93 as amended. Uh, any discussion of that motion? Seeing none.
H.B. 293 Public Education Student Athlete Protections · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and stakeholders for listening to constituents and working on the bill.
▶ Watch at 46:31Read what they said
Thank you. I just like to, uh, thank you for working with so many agencies and organizations and listening to what people needed. It's really important that we listen to our constituents when we're trying to create legislation, and that's when it really works well. So, thank you for all the work you've done to make this the best way you can. Thank You.
H.C.R. 11 Resolution Urging Healthy Activities in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asked which part of the curriculum would be removed to allow 60 minutes of daily physical activity, noting concerns about testing and instruction time.
▶ Watch at 50:11Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate, um, this bill, uh, when it says here that we are going to, um, who participates in a minimum of 60 minutes of physical activity each day, um, what part of our curriculum would you like, like to delete so that we can spend 60 minutes exercising? I mean, I, I'm all for it, quite honestly. I would love to see this happen, but our kids can't read. We have to do math, we have to do alexio, we have to do rise testing. I mean, we have micromanaged schools to the umpteenth degree, and then we're saying 60 minutes of physical education. So what, which part of the curriculum do you wanna delete …
H.C.R. 11 Resolution Urging Healthy Activities in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Raised food production, farming exposure and healthy eating in schools, and asked whether any bill would change school diets.
▶ Watch at 51:18Read what they said
Thank you. I, I just, I just wanna kind of, uh, also bring up like vital food production, economic stability. Um, how are we going to expose our kids to farming and food preparation and healthy eating habits right here? Is there some bill that we have that's going to change our diet in our schools? And I'm just trying to illustrate some points of what's happening in our schools right now. No,
H.C.R. 11 Resolution Urging Healthy Activities in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Said many elementary schools already take field trips to farms and that not all schools do so. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 52:03Read what they said
Most of the schools do that already. I don't know of one, any, any of the, our elementary schools that don't go on a field trip to a farm or something like that. Oh. And so, yeah, I didn't, a lot of schools that don't go to farms.
H.C.R. 11 Resolution Urging Healthy Activities in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Supported the resolution but said it needs funding, citing past field trip cuts, lack of food, PE teachers, nurses and librarians, and urged the body to act on school tracking sheets.
▶ Watch at 52:30Read what they said
I support this resolution tremendously, but when I look at some of these language in here, it's platitudes unless we're gonna fund it. So when I started school teaching here 25 years ago, we actually got to go on a couple of field trips a day where funding has been cut so much that we barely get one field trip a year. We, uh, are trying really hard to get food into every classroom. And yet we resistant to passing bills that actually fund food in our classrooms. We wanna have 60 minutes of physical education, but we don't have, we just got PE teachers and they shared, we don't have nurses, we don't have librarians. I mean, this is …
H.B. 150 School-based Speech-language Pathologist Funding Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Sen. Riebe moved to send second substitute HB 150 out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:02:10Read what they said
Chair. I'd like to send out HB one 50 school-based speech language pathologist funding amendments with a favorable recommendation as amended or substituted or whatever one we're looking at right now. Okay. So the motion is to, uh, send out second substitute HB one 50 with a favorable recommendation. Any, uh, comments on the motion?
H.B. 150 School-based Speech-language Pathologist Funding Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Sen. Riebe said students with speech impediments can become withdrawn, and she supported the bill for helping students communicate.
▶ Watch at 1:02:41Read what they said
Thank you. I appreciate this bill. You know when you are in schools and you see kids get quieter and quieter and quieter, and you recognize that they really just have a speech impediment, it causes them to not participate. So it's really important that our kids feel comfortable, safe, and they're able to articulate their needs in a well-formed way. So thank you for bringing this bill.
H.B. 150 School-based Speech-language Pathologist Funding Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Sen. Riebe restated the motion to send the substitute bill out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:03:02Read what they said
So the motion is to send out a second substitute HB one 50 with favorable recommendation.
H.B. 448 Utah Schools for the Deaf and Blind Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asks whether any Democratic legislators served on the work group.
▶ Watch at 1:10:23Read what they said
Thank you. I know the Democrats in the state of Utah are very supportive education. Did you have any Democrat legislators on that web work group?
H.B. 448 Utah Schools for the Deaf and Blind Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Asks whether the state can provide hearing devices and other assistive equipment to students at no cost to families, rather than relying on the school for the deaf and blind.
▶ Watch at 1:10:40Read what they said
Thanks. I know my democratic peers really vote with education every chance they get. We support you tremendously. So I find it odd that you wouldn't include a bipartisan group of educators, I mean, not legislators. Um, my second question is, when I look at, uh, how we're supporting our deaf and blind across the state, um, I feel like the school for the Deaf and the Blind was something that we relied on much heavily, much more heavily in the past before we had the ability to have, um, um, enhanced hearing devices and, um, tools for education like big, um, monitors and larger keyboards, which I have gotten from kids in my schools. Are we working more to …
H.B. 448 Utah Schools for the Deaf and Blind Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Says gaps remain in services for families who struggle with access, and that more work is needed to get services to children quickly.
▶ Watch at 1:13:25Read what they said
Okay. I, I have not always seen that. So, uh, that's something that I think maybe we should look in enrichment activities, because if a kid doesn't have a hearing aid, I think that's enrichment. So, um, I, I think the school for the deaf and the blind does great things, but there are some gaps that we need to start addressing. And, you know, your family did a great job. They had the resources to do that. But some of our families that really struggle and are mobile, there's a lot, there's sometimes quite a few hoops we have to jump through. And if our kid is moving quickly, those hoops have to be fast and we need to …
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asked whether current law prohibits teaching these topics, and put the question to the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 1:01:35Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, is there anything in the law right now that says we cannot teach these things? Senator Weiler?
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asked whether a State School Board meeting and curriculum study would be required before the material could be added.
▶ Watch at 1:02:03Read what they said
Thank you. Um, would we have to have a USB board meeting and curriculum study to change the social studies curriculum before we were allowed to enter this into our curriculum?
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Said teachers can already teach these topics, and that adding them to the curriculum would bypass State School Board vetting; announced opposition to the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:02:21Read what they said
Okay. Thank you. Senator Riebe. Thank you, Mr. President. I believe that we can teach all these things. I believe that putting specific things into the curriculum actually creates a, um, a curriculum that hasn't been vetted by the State School Board. So I'm going to be opposing this bill. Thank you.
S.B. 284 Local Land and Water Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asks which other bill was combined with this one.
▶ Watch at 1:34:23Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, I know that you said these are two bills that are together and I'm sorry I missed the one that you mentioned. Uh, can you tell me which bill it was that you combined this with again? Um,
S.B. 284 Local Land and Water Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Asks where the Utah League of Cities and Towns stands on the bill, noting its position is listed as pending.
▶ Watch at 1:34:50Read what they said
Within that, uh, I see that the Utah League of Cities and Towns is watching this bill or position pending. And then I noticed that, uh, a few of those bills that the sponsor you mentioned, they are neutral supporting and watching also. So I'm wondering where the League of Cities and towns are with this bill.
S.B. 176 Landscaping Procurement Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 35) · Feb 24, 2026
Supports the bill, citing a Department of Air Quality presentation and saying the amended bill gives latitude while encouraging electric equipment.
▶ Watch at 1:44:22Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, you know, I rise in support of this bill. We had a presentation from the Department of Air Quality, and this was one of the three things that they said would be something we could move in the right direction of people moving, started moving to electric, um, maintenance equipment. And I understand, um, the, the amendment that was put in actually brings some, um, latitude in whether we adopt these electric devices, but as a state with, um, the efforts we've made to improve our air quality and the, and the steps forward we've made, I think this is another great step in the right direction. And it's not, uh, it's not forcing people …
S.B. 238 Property Tax Adjustments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks whether the bill would make it easier or harder for elderly constituents who are not computer savvy to appeal property taxes.
▶ Watch at 54:34Read what they said
Thank you. Um, my two neighbors are elderly couples and they have expressed a lot of frustration with the increase in property tax. Would this make it easier or more difficult for them if they were not computer savvy to appeal their property tax, um, concerns?
S.B. 238 Property Tax Adjustments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks whether people without computer access would still have the same appeal access as before.
▶ Watch at 55:10Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so if they do not have access to a computer or if they do not really work well with computers, would they still have the similar access as they had before?
S.B. 54 Carson Smith Opportunity Scholarship Program Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks about a multiplier figure on line 204 of the bill and whether the change increases or decreases the amount students receive.
▶ Watch at 1:16:28Read what they said
Thank you. On line, uh, 2 0 4, it says that the amount given is gonna be 2.5 multiplied by 2.5%. Uh, weighted people unit is gonna be multiplied by 2.5. Excuse me. Um, is that an increase to how much these people are getting or is that a, um, decrease? I couldn't really understand
S.B. 54 Carson Smith Opportunity Scholarship Program Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks about a weighted unit of 0.5 for part-time enrollment and whether a Carson Smith student can be a part-time enrollee.
▶ Watch at 1:17:01Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you. And my second question is about line two 15. Um, it says for a part-time enrollment, the value of the weighted people unit is 0.5. So a Carson Smith person can be a part-time enrollee of that program. That's my question.
S.B. 225 Public Corporation Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Says organizations asked that the same water-use caps be extended statewide to benefit the Great Salt Lake, and asks whether there is appetite to require every municipality and county to have the same cap.
▶ Watch at 1:28:08Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President Pro Tem. I've been approached by numerous organizations asking that we, uh, look to extend the same restrictions on water across the state. Um, we, they feel like this would be, uh, beneficial to the Great Salt Lake and, um, are just really concerned that if a, uh, another agency doesn't have a cap, that that would be a negative impact on the Great Salt Lake. Um, is there any appetite for changing the requirement for every, uh, municipality and, um, county to have the same cap on their water uses?
S.B. 241 Early Literacy · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Says her districts like the bill and will support it, but asks whether English language learners at WIDA levels one and two could be unintentionally retained.
▶ Watch at 1:57:04Read what they said
Yes, I'm, go ahead. Senator Riebe. Thank you, Mr. President pro tem. Um, my school districts like this bill and I'm going to support it, but I do have some questions that I'd like to ask, uh, similar to what the questions are just asked online. 5 38 when we talk about our individualized reading plan. This, when we look at the science of reading, I mean, when we look at the data across the state, we, we see some patterns of who is not successful in our school districts. And usually it's students on five oh fours, IEPs, and then multi-language learners. So when we think about a, uh, a language learner, we give them a WIDA test and …
S.B. 241 Early Literacy · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Asks about students with IEPs or 504 plans and processing or speech issues, and asks whether the benchmark is green or blue DIBELS level.
▶ Watch at 2:00:24Read what they said
Yes, thank you, Mr. President Pro Tem. Uh, my other question is similar lines about the five oh fours and the IEPs. Now, a student that has a processing era, um, processing issue really will never process at the same rate as other students. And a student that has a speech issue will not be as fluent as other students regardless of how much support we give them. And once again, you know, working in Title one schools, working with families in trauma, the families that sometimes fall into these categories really are not at the best level of capacity to receive the waiver of being taken out, of being retention. And I feel like this would almost be more …
S.B. 241 Early Literacy · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Raises concern that individualized reading plans could take teacher time and money away from students, and asks districts to be lenient on the plans.
▶ Watch at 2:05:03Read what they said
Yes. Uh, I'd just like to say one more thing in closing. You know, this is $16 million that really we wanna be dedicating towards our students and getting them ahead. And one of the concerns that my teachers brought up is this individualized reading plan. You know, as a teacher, we have the best intentions of, you know, we're gonna make a plan. We're gonna fill out a bunch of paperwork, we're gonna talk to each other. And while we're filling out those pieces of paper and doing those plans, we actually aren't doing what we intended on doing and is spending every one of those dollars on the students that needed it the most. So, uh, a few …
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Says no school districts or education groups support the bill, citing tracking sheets, and votes no.
▶ Watch at 3:11:24Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to say that no school districts support this bill. No one in, uh, the education community supports this bill. This is, um, be careful. Go ahead. I'm looking at the tracking sheets. The JLC doesn't support This URSA doesn't support this. And, um, UEA doesn't support this, so I'm a no.
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Riebe says the bill was presented at the last meeting and notes that a substitute is on the system.
▶ Watch at 1:29:22Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. We presented this bill. Um, Let me clarify something really quick. Sure. There is a sub on the system. Yeah.
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Riebe says the bill aims to bring closure and predictability after a bystander was killed in a June shooting at a rally, and introduces an amendment adding a justification hearing.
▶ Watch at 1:29:46Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, I appreciate your time today. This bill is a, um, we discussed it at length, uh, the last time I was here. So I think I'll just talk to some of the changes. Uh, we discussed that this is Bill that is going to, the intent of this bill is to bring closure and predictability to, um, an event that happened this summer at Nose Kings rally. So, um, an innocent by bystander was, um, unfortunately killed during a shooting. And so when we think about that person having that experience on June 14th, and then having to wait till December 3rd to, um, get some answers, I thought that there should be a better process. So …
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Riebe says the substitute adds clarity and that the incidents discussed would be clearer under it. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:40:16Read what they said
Um, briefly, I think that this just makes more clarity. I think that it, um, all the incidents that we just mentioned would actually provide better clarity instead of more confusion. So that's the intent of this bill, and I think it serves that purpose. Well,
S.J.R. 7 Joint Resolution Regarding Utah's Protection and Advocacy Agency · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Asks whether the governor has been asked about re-designating the agency and whose job it is to request that.
▶ Watch at 1:47:30Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, my, my question is, has the, um, has the governor asked whether they needed to be res re-designated, or did the, whose job is it to ask for that re-designation? Because maybe that's just an oversight that they didn't realize they needed to ask for that re-designation. Senator
S.J.R. 7 Joint Resolution Regarding Utah's Protection and Advocacy Agency · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Says deciding whether to re-designate the agency should come first, and asks whether any state reports are required for the federal funding.
▶ Watch at 1:48:29Read what they said
Thank you for clarifying that. Um, I think the first step would us to be seeing if we wanted to re-designate them as the agency that does this. Um, I think to say that they haven't been re designated without being told they needed to, or asked or however that process went. I think that's something that we should address as well. Um, with the federal funding, are there any state reports that required for us to receive from this federal funding that goes to this Disability Law Center?
H.B. 64 School and Institutional Trust Lands Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Requests a personal privilege to thank a highway patrol officer in the gallery named Roger.
▶ Watch at 3:07:49Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Thank you Mr. President Prote. May I have a personal privilege? Uh, granted, Uh, I'd like to thank the, uh, highway patrolman up in the, uh, gallery. His name is Roger and he keeps all the people
S.B. 295 Intellectual Diversity in Education and Government · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Said she appreciates the bill as a correction to an overcorrection and as a step toward a more neutral setting for clubs, debates, panels and forums.
▶ Watch at 53:37Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I appreciate this bill as a correction to an overcorrection. Um, but honestly, some of these issues were brought up when this bill was ran. And so, um, I I, when we say that we blame the legislature, it's not really a, a blame game. It's more of the kind of atmosphere we created and trying to un-create that atmosphere. So, um, I appreciate this bill. I appreciate the work that you've done to, um, make it a more neutral setting. Uh, as somebody in education, I can say that, uh, this is a step in the right direction. And, um, the, the premise that we were rapidly indoctrinating people still kind of hurts us …
S.B. 295 Intellectual Diversity in Education and Government · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Moved to pass SB 295 as amended out of committee with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:08:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. P. Uh, thank you Mr. Uh, thank you Chair. I'm the chairman right now. Mr. President Chair. There You go. Rancher. Cool guy. Um, I would like to send Senate Bill 1 95 intellectual diversities and education and government out with a favorable recommendation.
S.B. 295 Intellectual Diversity in Education and Government · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Summarized the bill as setting rules that allow discussion of any idea while barring government from compelling belief or treating people differently based on identity, and said civil liberties protect dissenting views.
▶ Watch at 1:09:08Read what they said
I, I, I I'll just sum briefly, uh, SB 2 95 establishes a simple rule for public institutions, teach any idea, debate, any viewpoint, compel none, treat every individual equally. Nothing in this spill bans discussion. Nothing limits academic inquiry. Nothing prevents support for students who need help to succeed. What it does prevent is something far narrower and far more serious. The use of government authority to require ideological belief or to treat people differently because of identity, those are not partisan concerns. Those are constitutional boundaries throughout our history. Civil liberties protections have mattered most not when they protect protected popular views, but when they protected dissenting ones. And that is ultimately what this bill safeguards the student …
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Asked how hard agreement changes would be for students and whether classroom virtual reality activities could count as clickstream data.
▶ Watch at 1:24:07Read what they said
Thank you. That, I wonder how hard that would be to change that for all students. I know we signed it at the beginning of the year, so I'm curious about that one. And then clickstream data, um, would that be something like, um, so what I do a Nearpod with my kids, I'll bring in, um, virtual reality, um, activities where the kids can go someplace and stand in the middle of the records room in Washington DC and look around. Would, would, would that be a clickstream data if they're monitoring their use of how they're engaging with this virtual reality experience? Like at a museum or something? Or, yeah, if they brought it into the class.
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Raised concern that the bill may capture some educational tools and wants more details.
▶ Watch at 1:25:03Read what they said
What was a third party. So I'm not sure about that one. 'cause that wouldn't be a software, but that might be a third party that we're actually using it just, um, like I said, I appreciate this, but I think it captures some things that might be kind of, um, not what you wanna capture. I mean, it is really exciting when you think about a computer as being a window to the world. If you can actually give your kids options of standing in a field in Italy and looking at the Alps. I mean, we've done that with virtual reality, which is really cool. Okay. And, um, things like that concern me, so I'd like to just …
S.B. 267 Software in Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Says the bill limits rather than removes classroom technology, describes tools that help teachers, and says she will vote no until her questions are answered.
▶ Watch at 1:43:15Read what they said
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, your concerns are valid and I, I, I understand your concerns about this bill. Um, this bill does not take technology out of the classroom, but just limits it. Um, as a person who's worked for 25 years in schools, I can tell you that in my classroom, I've maybe had two or three kids that I've had to take off their computers. And, um, we have something called land school where I put all the kids' computers on a screen up front. And I know that you're shaking your head and that's not your experience, but a lot of people are having experiences that are different. I just wanna share with you some …
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Sen. Riebe moves to replace the bill text with the first substitute.
▶ Watch at 1:50:55Read what they said
So moved. Okay. So, uh, the motion is to delete entitled body SB 2 97 and replace it with first substitute second SB 2 97 substitute.
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Sen. Riebe moves to substitute the first substitute for the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:54:26Read what they said
Thank you. We, are we looking for a motion or just Yeah. Or, okay. Uh, I would like to send out senate bill 2 97 as a substitute two. One. It's one. Okay. So let's move. I was wrong. Let's, let's move sub substitute one. One. Yeah, it was one. I was wrong.
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Sen. Riebe moves to send the first substitute out with a favorable recommendation and thanks the committee for its support.
▶ Watch at 1:55:24Read what they said
Thank you. I'd like to make a motion to send Senate bill 2 97 sub one Social work school social worker amendments out with favorable recommendation. Okay, so that motion is appropriate. Any discussion of that motion? Seeing none. We're gonna come back to you to some, Um, I would just like to conclude by thanking you for your time and, um, respectfully ask for your support.
H.B. 126 Micro-Education Entity Facility Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Asked whether the bill would require cities to create zoning for micro schools.
▶ Watch at 1:58:12Read what they said
Thank you. So this is going to clarify where a school of a hundred kids could be. That's what we're gonna, we're gonna ask cities to create zoning for that.
H.B. 177 ROTC Resident Student Status · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Moves to adopt Amendment #2 to HB 177, with the procedure for withdrawing and restating the motion discussed.
▶ Watch at 2:16:49Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd like to send HB 1 77 ROTC resident student status out with a favorable recommendation. There is an amendment too. So as amended, let's go. We might have to do the amendment, the amendment first. We need to Withdraw that motion to withdraw That. And then we'll do amendment Two. Okay. So withdraw that and then make a motion to, uh, adopt amendment two. Thank you. I'd like to amend the motion that I just had. No, I'm sorry. Uh, I'd like to make a motion to, uh, adopt the amendment. Okay. So the motion is to adopt amendment two on HB 1 77.
H.B. 177 ROTC Resident Student Status · Senate Education Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Moves to send HB 177 out favorably as amended with Amendment #2.
▶ Watch at 2:17:56Read what they said
Thank you. I would like to send HB 1 77 ROT resident student status out with as amended as without, with a favorable recommendation. Okay. So the motion is to send out P 1 77 as amendment with amendment as, amendment as amended with amendment two with a favorable recommendation.
H.B. 56 Vehicle Registration Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether the bill requires a bill of sale and asks Senator McCay to yield for a question.
▶ Watch at 50:43Read what they said
Thank you. Mr. President Pro Tem. Does this require a bill of sale? I couldn't see that on the bill. Senator McKay, will you yield?
H.B. 56 Vehicle Registration Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Raises concern that people might cancel registrations halfway through the year to avoid fees, and asks whether adding a bill of sale would address that.
▶ Watch at 51:01Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, I, I know that many people are cheating is word we used a lot in our committee, so I just wanna make sure that people that have a recreational vehicle wouldn't be canceling their registration halfway through the year to save that little bit of money. Do you think it would be, um, do you think this would capture that kind of nefarious activity if we added a bill of sale to it?
H.B. 238 Utah Energy Generation and Transmission Planning · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Supports the bill, saying it preserves the Community Renewable Energy program that affects cities she represents and should lower costs and increase clean energy; raises concern about Rocky Mountain Power's decision to sell Northwest assets and asks for future legislative consideration.
▶ Watch at 59:18Read what they said
I, Senator Blue into the bill. Thank You President. Uh, yeah, I just want to say appreciate the work that was done to preserve the Community Renewable Energy program. That was a, a big concern when this came to committee and, uh, we heard from a lot of folks and it seems like this has resolved the issue. So that will protect the program in, in several cities that I represent. Uh, I think this is a great underlying bill, so I'm happy to see that happen. Uh, I do wanna say, I think, uh, we are going to lose out on some of the benefits that we could get through this bill through the, uh, the decision by Rocky …
H.B. 230 Offender Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks Senator Brammer to confirm that the code at line 444 is not new code but existing code inserted into another section. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:25:37Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, I just have a clarifying question on line 444, that is not new code, that's just code inserted into this section of code. Senator Brammer, will you yield?
H.B. 230 Offender Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether lines 444 to 473 change existing code, and says she wants to make sure the section is original code moved into a different part of the code. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:25:58Read what they said
Was there a question in that? Yes. Uh, line 444 down to line 473. I just wanna make sure that we're not changing any code here 'cause I like this bill, but I just wanna make sure that this is original code inserted into a different part of code.
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether the bill runs parallel to or in conflict with federal regulations.
▶ Watch at 1:27:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President pro tem. Um, the previous senator asked a question about federal regulations regarding state regulat re uh, regulations. Would this run in conflict with, I didn't really get the answer from his, um, statement. Does this run parallel or does it run in, um, contrast with federal regulations?
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Raises concern that the bill could be used to harass women who do not fit gender expectations, citing sports examples, and describes her struggle with the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:28:26Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I, I am very sensitive to all the conversations and I'm, I struggle with everything that's been said and um, you know, I think back to that young lady that was playing basketball for Cottonwood High and, um, she was a really strong person. And we can also look at the rugby player, that one gold where she was told that she was too big, she was too manly, and they demanded to, um, understand her gender better. I understand we do this in an effort to be protective, and I applaud that, but the problem with this is that it can be used as a weapon against women that are not the ideal image that we …
H.B. 274 Sentencing Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Asks whether the bill changes the policy for ignition interlock restricted drivers or only moves that language elsewhere.
▶ Watch at 1:44:00Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, on, uh, line 1 57, I'm sorry, one 60 an interlock restricted driver operating a vehicle without an ignition interlock. Are we changing that policy or are we just moving it to someplace else?
S.B. 282 Electrical Grid Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asked whether changes to Public Service Commission review language would give local entities more control over large load projects.
▶ Watch at 49:17Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, on line 16, it talks about the changes to the commission, and that's just in the short title. And then when you go down to line 2 54, um, it says, modifies commu commission review requirements. Then we go down to 2 54. Is, um, would this language, when you say modifies the commission, would this language on 2 54 create what Senator Winterton was asking for, for a, a more local control? Or is there, um, something else we can put in there so that there's more local control? Yeah, so this is talking about the Public Service Commission. Yep. Um, there, I'm trying to think, let me see where we have language about …
S.B. 282 Electrical Grid Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Moved to favorably recommend SB 282 to the Senate floor.
▶ Watch at 59:56Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I would like to favorably recommend Senate Bill 2 82 electrical grid amendments out with a favorable recommendation. I think this is something on a lot of people's minds lately about how we're gonna deal with our large load of energy and then also some of our water issues, which they mentioned just a lot happening with energy. So I think this is a, um, great bill for this time. Thank you.
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Presents S.B. 105 as a response to the No Kings rally shooting, saying it would give the parties a clearer and faster path than the current process, and says she is open to changes.
▶ Watch at 2:15:29Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, this is a, um, bill that is going to help us decide how we are going to deal with, um, one of the episodes that happened this summer. I didn't know King's Rally and I apologize for not being here, uh, with the last, uh, meeting session gets chaotic. So thank you for this time. Uh, this bill is also a bill about fourth 14th Amendment, which is due process on Juab June 14th. We had a tragedy at the No Kings rally. December 3rd was when the charges were brought to give all parties a path forward. Instead of waiting for six months, we need to find a clearer path. This bill is not …
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Responds that the bill would allow a separate charge for a person who harms an innocent bystander while using force against someone else.
▶ Watch at 2:18:26Read what they said
So now this actually creates a situation where the defendant is charged with recklessly or with criminal negligence injuring or causing death of another individual while using force, the defendant alleges was justified against a different individual. So on line 45, that would take away the silent part and would actually add, um, So this, this would, this would, this would allow a different charge to be filed, recognizing he may have thought he was doing good, but he still killed somebody. Yes. Who is innocent? Okay. Um, all right.
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says the current bill does not include a justification hearing, that she is willing to move toward one, and that her goal is a faster resolution.
▶ Watch at 2:28:32Read what they said
No, my bill currently doesn't have the justification hearing, but I am willing to move in that direction if you'd like me to. I am. I, like I said, this is a fourth amendment due process. I wanted the people that were involved in this situation to have a more speedy trial. It was six months because we were silent on the actions we were supposed to take. As the, uh, chair mentioned, this wouldn't have changed the outcome at all, but it would've just maybe have created a more quicker outcome so that the people involved didn't have to wait six months.
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says she is not trying to remove the justification hearing and has a version ready that includes it.
▶ Watch at 2:29:04Read what they said
I'm not. Okay. Um, I probably can't get a sub out in, in time. I have a bill that's with a justification. Is that public? Uh, no, because we went with the one without, so I have something ready. I'm willing to work with anybody who would like to work with me on these bills. I have two bills that were prepared and I went with the one that was, um, I felt less restrictive and figured I'd take the temperature of the body.
S.B. 105 Use of Force Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Says her intent is to close a gap in the law and that she is willing to work on the bill or consider the version with a justification hearing.
▶ Watch at 2:30:12Read what they said
Thank you. Um, two thirds of our states have statutes that make it not silent on this kind of incident. And we're trying to close that loophole. So my intention is to close that loophole. However I can do that is my intention. Okay. And I'd be glad to work with you. Like I said, I have a bill ready to go if you'd like to look at that one instead.
S.B. 271 High School Activities Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said the bill raises issues but needs more work, especially on transfers, academics, and eligibility, and moved to hold the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:10:02Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I've played sports my whole life. I love playing high school sports, and, uh, my kids also enjoy high school sports. Uh, over the summer we were listening to, uh, NPR, and we discovered that the NFL almost spends less money on high school sports and clubs. I mean, the NFL spends less money than high schools and clubs. So when we think about what we're all playing sports for, it's competition, but it's also fun, right? We're all supposed to be having fun enjoying it, and that seems to have gotten lost sometimes. So, um, I, I've spoken to, um, Senator Grover about this bill a lot. I think it does address some issues, …
H.B. 351 School Vision Screening Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Supports the bill and shared a classroom story about vision testing, then moved to send the bill out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:24:13Read what they said
Senator Riebe, you had your light on? Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I love this bill. Uh, when I was a teacher, I did not know that ice cream was how you called this test. We called it vision testing. So, uh, my kids were asked to come down for ice cream, and I thought it was ice cream. I am not kidding with this story. And my kids were not happy when they showed up and they saw there was no ice cream. So, uh, I love that story, but I also love this bill. So I would like to make a motion to send out HB 3 51 school vision screening amendments out with a …
H.B. 351 School Vision Screening Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said the bill is important, that she taught students who could not see the board, and that notifying families where to get help costs little.
▶ Watch at 1:25:16Read what they said
Yes. Thank you for bringing this bill. It is so important. I, I mean, I taught fifth and sixth grade and I had kids in my class that couldn't see the board and no one knew. And so having high mobility, having kids that aren't both of my kids benefited from this vision test. So I really do appreciate this bill. It is so important and it doesn't really cost a lot to notify people where they can get some help. So thank you so much for running this bill. Thank you, Senator.
S.B. 272 Transportation Funding Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Asked whether the bill would also fund transportation for students who leave their districts for other districts, noting districts are not funded at the required 85%.
▶ Watch at 1:31:17Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so we constantly start these conversation with leveling the playing field, and it's not a level playing field, and I'm not even gonna go into that conversation. But we don't fund public school education right now for transportation. We don't fund it at the required 85%. And so this would be including this. And we also have students that choose to leave their district to go to another district. Would, would we be then funding that as well with this bill, or is it just charter schools?
S.B. 272 Transportation Funding Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Said parents choose other schools and opposed studying or funding the proposal.
▶ Watch at 1:32:13Read what they said
Thank you. So our parents choose to go to another school. They choose to leave a neighborhood school. They choose to go to someplace that's further away. I mean, it, it, this is the choice they're making to do other things. And so I just, I cannot support a study of this. I can't support funding it. Um, we asked to have a parallel system, and I just don't think that this is where we should be investing our time and energy. Thank you.
S.B. 272 Transportation Funding Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Feb 18, 2026
Opposed the bill, saying charter schools were founded without transportation and that giving charter students transportation would be unfair compared with inter-district students.
▶ Watch at 1:42:01Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. When we went down this road with charter schools, it was founded on no transportation. And this is a bait and switch to the people of the state of Utah. We are not funding education in our districts to our requirement. And this would open this up further. And now you're asking to have a preferential transportation treatment for charter schools as opposed to inter-district students. So when we think about what we started down the road with this founding of charter schools, and now we keep saying, I wanna level the playing field. That's not what you intentionally asked for at the beginning. And so the people of Utah need to understand the, …
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Explains a yes vote, saying solar is hard to site, that she would prefer panels elsewhere than farms or desert, and that farmers' concerns and agriculture must be weighed.
▶ Watch at 12:31Read what they said
You go. Mr. President. I'd like to explain my vote. Um, I'm gonna be a yes. Vote on this vote. Vote I was at that committee hearing. I voted to get it outta committee. Um, it, it is a struggle that where we're gonna put these solar panels and, um, I, I've actually thought about this bill a lot. You know, um, I would prefer that they weren't in farms and I would prefer that they weren't in the middle of the desert. I would like them to be over parking lots by schools where the, the power can go right from the parking lot right to the school. And I think that's something that we should start thinking about …
H.B. 64 School and Institutional Trust Lands Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Riebe says she supports the bill, citing the cultural and scientific value of sites and the state's work on school funding.
▶ Watch at 1:29:46Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President Pro tem. Um, I, I think this is a great bill. You know, frequently we move into different areas and we kind of are, um, not sure how it's gonna work out and I think there's some appetite for us to see where this goes and make, uh, um, adjustments accordingly. I mean, when you think about culturally significant or scientifically significant, that's important for our culture. And then when you think about what a great job Sitler has done to increase the amount of money that are going to our schools, I think this is right. Aligned with the great work that they've been doing to, you know, educate our students, give us those resources …
S.B. 186 Charter School Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether charter schools can join a regional service center and asks Senator Balderree to yield.
▶ Watch at 29:02Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, can a charter school join a visa right now? Senator Baldry, will you yield?
S.B. 186 Charter School Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says charter and district schools can both request regional service center services and states opposition to the bill, citing equity concerns.
▶ Watch at 29:31Read what they said
Yes, thank you. Um, I am very aware of what Reese's do and I know how these regional service centers work and I know how they work in conjunction with the state school board. Um, I believe that us any charter school and any school district can ask for services from a regional service center, I'm pretty sure. Um, and if you can't get those services from a regional service center, you can reach out to the state school board, which is what many school districts do. Um, I currently hear and frequently hear that, you know, we have to create equity amongst our charter schools and our public schools, but then we have carve outs for our charter schools …
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks whether the fee schedule will be added to building costs and says the USBA and Utah Rural Schools Association oppose the bill.
▶ Watch at 50:49Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, the sponsors yield to questions. Yes, Thank you. When I was looking at the recommendations, 1.12, 3.1, uh, you know, a lot of the, um, summary was internal controls training, standardized costs, comply to codes, construction, re construct, re reconstructing, um, tactics, and then DFCM inspectors. So all of these things can be done without giving our buildings, um, control over to DFCM. Uh, I have looked with the USBA, the Utah School Boards Association, and they are in opposition of this bill. I looked to the Utah Rural Schools Association, and they're opposed to this bill. And I don't know where the League of Cities and stands on this bill, but when I look …
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the recommended changes can be made without DFCM control, notes opposition from the school boards and rural schools associations, and asks whether fees will be added to building costs.
▶ Watch at 50:49Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, the sponsors yield to questions. Yes, Thank you. When I was looking at the recommendations, 1.12, 3.1, uh, you know, a lot of the, um, summary was internal controls training, standardized costs, comply to codes, construction, re construct, re reconstructing, um, tactics, and then DFCM inspectors. So all of these things can be done without giving our buildings, um, control over to DFCM. Uh, I have looked with the USBA, the Utah School Boards Association, and they are in opposition of this bill. I looked to the Utah Rural Schools Association, and they're opposed to this bill. And I don't know where the League of Cities and stands on this bill, but when I look …
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks for confirmation that using DFCM is an opt-in choice for districts.
▶ Watch at 52:35Read what they said
Thank you. Um, may I have a follow up? Yes, proceed. Thanks. To clarify, this is now an opt-in for all districts that would like to use DFCM and not a requirement.
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether using DFCM services would be optional for all districts.
▶ Watch at 52:35Read what they said
Thank you. Um, may I have a follow up? Yes, proceed. Thanks. To clarify, this is now an opt-in for all districts that would like to use DFCM and not a requirement.
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks whether all districts must use the service or whether it is optional.
▶ Watch at 52:52Read what they said
Is this a requirement for all districts to use this service or an opt-in option?
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Repeats the question of whether districts must use the DFCM service or may opt in.
▶ Watch at 52:52Read what they said
Is this a requirement for all districts to use this service or an opt-in option?
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Sen. Riebe raises concerns about added costs, restrictions on district building, and whether the bill addresses school choice and district preferences.
▶ Watch at 53:39Read what they said
Thank you. Um, my, I'm concerned that school districts don't like this bill. They say it's adding costs to their building. I'm also concerned with, um, the restrictive nature of some of the abilities for our school districts also to build. Uh, when I think about our school districts, I am not excited about how big the schools are becoming and how palatial they're becoming. But we are a state that allows school choice. And when we build a new school, we find that many people move outta their school and go to that new school. So do you think this would address, um, the, the, the desires of our school districts and their per people to go to schools …
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Expresses concern about added costs, limits on district building, school choice, and whether districts keep control of maintenance and facilities, and says she will oppose the bill.
▶ Watch at 53:39Read what they said
Thank you. Um, my, I'm concerned that school districts don't like this bill. They say it's adding costs to their building. I'm also concerned with, um, the restrictive nature of some of the abilities for our school districts also to build. Uh, when I think about our school districts, I am not excited about how big the schools are becoming and how palatial they're becoming. But we are a state that allows school choice. And when we build a new school, we find that many people move outta their school and go to that new school. So do you think this would address, um, the, the, the desires of our school districts and their per people to go to schools …
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Sen. Riebe asks whether districts keep control over maintenance and facilities if they opt in.
▶ Watch at 54:56Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, one last question. Please. Go ahead. Um, so my, um, sorry. When we think about how we are building our schools, and now if we opt in, does, does the school districts still have control over their, um, maintenance and they're, um, uh, add-on buildings and can they be still in control of their facilities?
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Sen. Riebe states she will oppose the bill and wants districts to keep control of their buildings while achieving safety through code requirements.
▶ Watch at 56:25Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I, I, I still am going to oppose this bill because our school boards association has not supported this bill and our rural schools associations have not supported this bill. I, um, am concerned that when we start to look at the audit and then what the audit asks, we are focusing on more of control than actually implementing codes and keeping them safe. So I want my schools to be safe, and I looked at the code, and I think we can achieve safety through most of those recommendations, which were addressed. Uh, the opt-in part I appreciate, uh, but I am concerned that I, I would, I would want to keep control of all of …
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks about the fiscal note change for the substitute and asks Senator Fillmore whether he will yield.
▶ Watch at 1:17:33Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President Pro tem does, I'm looking at the fiscal note. So now in the fiscal note has changed to zero. Senator Fillmore, will you yield?
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the bill keeps the October 10 cutoff or uses a different date, noting a prior bill that changed the cutoff.
▶ Watch at 1:18:41Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President Pro Tem. Uh, I asked this question in, uh, I'm sorry. I just didn't realize the substitute was coming up. We actually passed a bill a couple of years ago that changed the October 10th cutoff. Uh, we were finding that schools were moving kids and then the money wasn't following them. And so that's why we Uintah this formula of having, um, an average. So this is going to still keep in the same October 10th, or is it gonna be a different number?
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the October 10th count date would stay the same or change under the substitute.
▶ Watch at 1:18:41Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President Pro Tem. Uh, I asked this question in, uh, I'm sorry. I just didn't realize the substitute was coming up. We actually passed a bill a couple of years ago that changed the October 10th cutoff. Uh, we were finding that schools were moving kids and then the money wasn't following them. And so that's why we Uintah this formula of having, um, an average. So this is going to still keep in the same October 10th, or is it gonna be a different number?
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the bill differs from the average daily attendance approach used in earlier work.
▶ Watch at 1:20:25Read what they said
Thank you. So I I it's the average daily attendance that we worked on instead of just the attendance on October 1st. So you're saying that this is not different from that
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the substitute differs from the average daily attendance approach previously worked on.
▶ Watch at 1:20:25Read what they said
Thank you. So I I it's the average daily attendance that we worked on instead of just the attendance on October 1st. So you're saying that this is not different from that
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the substitute moves property tax money to state coffers, citing constituent emails and a related bill that was vetoed.
▶ Watch at 1:20:50Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, thank you Mr. President. So my next question would be that, uh, there's some misunderstanding that this is actually going to take money from, um, the property tax and put it back into the state coffers. Is that something that changed in the substitute? Because that's what I'm hearing in my emails. And this is similar to SB 37 that passed and then was vetoed because people were upset about that. So is that similar to the bill or has that have been subbed out? Uh,
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the substitute changed a provision that would move property tax money to state coffers, and compares the bill to SB 37.
▶ Watch at 1:20:50Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, thank you Mr. President. So my next question would be that, uh, there's some misunderstanding that this is actually going to take money from, um, the property tax and put it back into the state coffers. Is that something that changed in the substitute? Because that's what I'm hearing in my emails. And this is similar to SB 37 that passed and then was vetoed because people were upset about that. So is that similar to the bill or has that have been subbed out? Uh,
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Explains a no vote, saying she supports parts of the bill but that school districts and superintendents oppose it and she wants constituent input.
▶ Watch at 1:24:14Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Uh, I'm a no on too. Uh, I do like what this bill is doing, but it's very different from the bill that we heard in committee and all of our school districts, our and our superintendents association are against this bill. This new fund that was created is very different from the bill we heard. And I, I don't really think the, uh, the will of the, the will of the community is caught up with what this bill is. So I I'm kind of, um, I would love to have my constituents weigh on in, on this bill, but right now I need to say a no. Thank you.
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Votes no, saying she likes the bill's intent but that the version differs from the committee bill, and that school districts and superintendents oppose it.
▶ Watch at 1:24:14Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Uh, I'm a no on too. Uh, I do like what this bill is doing, but it's very different from the bill that we heard in committee and all of our school districts, our and our superintendents association are against this bill. This new fund that was created is very different from the bill we heard. And I, I don't really think the, uh, the will of the, the will of the community is caught up with what this bill is. So I I'm kind of, um, I would love to have my constituents weigh on in, on this bill, but right now I need to say a no. Thank you.
S.B. 194 Election Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says the signature-gathering system is flawed and that high signature requirements contribute to fraudulent behavior, and says she will not support the amendment.
▶ Watch at 1:28:10Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President ProAm. Um, as I look at the signature gathering process that's happening right now, um, I have all the faith in the world of our county clerks, but this system is flawed and I think our ability to have a higher number of signatures is actually causing some of this fraudulent behavior. Big money coming from outside the state and just creating undesirable outcomes. And so to decrease the number of signatures in future, not my race in the future would be a betterment to the process. So I will not support this amendment.
S.B. 125 Theft Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the theft of services provision, such as riding a ski lift without paying, remains in the bill after the substitute is adopted.
▶ Watch at 1:29:40Read what they said
So theft of services actually incorporated, like if you jumped on a ski lift and so I, I like that part of that. That would, that's not the sub, That's not the sub that's in the, the underlying bill. Oh, the sub itself only does the item that I just pointed out. I'll, I'll explain the under. I like bill after the sub is adopted. May I follow up? Go ahead. Thanks. Um, so by taking that out, I, I'm not as supportive of this bill because that was the part of the bill. I like the theft of services. So is that still in the bill, that theft of services? Yeah,
S.B. 125 Theft Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says her concern is that changing theft of services to merchandise still treats the conduct as a service.
▶ Watch at 1:31:16Read what they said
I I can ask offline, but, uh, the first one said theft of services and then when we turn it into merchandise is merchandise is still the same type of thing as a service. So that was my concern. So I can ask you offline. Thank you.
S.B. 194 Election Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the bill makes it easier for people who are older, disabled, or without car access to electronically put signatures on petitions.
▶ Watch at 1:34:33Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I'm looking line 2, 2, 4, 8, and it says that we can send an image to electronically remove our signatures. Um, but this, you know, this, this is, um, it's great that we have made that process easier, but when you think about gathering signatures, we haven't really worked enough on electronically allowing people to give their signatures. Uh, I have many people that are, um, older disabled, um, don't really have access to cars, work full time working two jobs. And when we think about electronically taking office signature, we should be working on electronically putting on a signature. Is there any, um, thing in here that would make it easier for people …
S.B. 194 Election Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Asks whether the practice on line 248 is current practice or an enhanced practice for removing signatures. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:35:43Read what they said
Thanks. So on line 2 22 48, is this current practice or is this a enhanced practice for taking your signatures off?
S.B. 194 Election Modifications · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Reads the language on line 248 about electronically sending an image to remove a signature and asks whether that makes it easier to take a signature off.
▶ Watch at 1:36:07Read what they said
It's a 2, 2, 4 8. And it says, um, requesting the removal of a signature from a signature packet for the race electronically send a clear image of the document to the other county clerk described in section subsection one. So does this make it easier to take your signature off?
S.B. 65 Minimum Basic Tax Rate Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Opposes the bill, saying constituents are uncomfortable with state tax going into the income tax fund, that property taxes should stay local, and that school districts, superintendents and rural schools do not support it.
▶ Watch at 1:38:17Read what they said
This was the bill that I intended to speak upon the last time this bill was, um, voted on last year. And then it was vetoed. People were upset that we were taking our property tax and moving over to the state fund. We had it, um, we had many emails about this bill. Our, my constituents do not feel comfortable about their state tax being put into the income tax and then possibly diluted into other buckets so that they could pay for other things. Uh, our property tax is already increasing dramatically and it should stay where it's local. So this is the bill that we saw last year that people did not like and it was vetoed. …
S.B. 253 Library Materials Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Said regional service centers are a resource that smaller school districts can use to navigate policies like these.
▶ Watch at 52:43Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I know that there's regional service centers out there that are really great resources when smaller school districts are trying to navigate, uh, tricky policies. And they are a great resource that all of our state, well, not all of our state, but most of our state can rely on to, uh, assist with these things. So our regional service centers, which do incredible jobs and I work for, can help with that.
H.B. 146 Mentoring and Supporting Teacher Excellence and Refinement Program Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Said the bill has teacher support and thanked the sponsor for bringing it forward.
▶ Watch at 1:01:00Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, as a teacher with an admin degree, I went for the big money and I ran for office. So, um, people do find different ways to serve in their communities. I do appreciate that our teachers are supportive of this. I've heard nothing but good things about this, so thank you for listening to our teachers. Thank you for listening to our teacher communities, and thank you for running this bill. Thank You Boy. Sitting by me. I know has changed you a little bit. No, thank you.
H.B. 146 Mentoring and Supporting Teacher Excellence and Refinement Program Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Moved to send H.B. 146 out of committee with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:03:59Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to send out House Bill 1 46 mentoring and supporting teacher Excellent. And refinement program amendments out with a favorable recommendation.
H.B. 146 Mentoring and Supporting Teacher Excellence and Refinement Program Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Said the pilot data showed most participating teachers had 10 or more years in the classroom, helping keep institutional knowledge and mentor newer teachers, and that the program offers professional development without leaving the classroom.
▶ Watch at 1:04:24Read what they said
Yeah, thank you. I appreciate the discussion today. And those who came to support the bill, uh, just I wanna highlight something because of what Senator Baldry had mentioned, what was interesting as I looked at the data that came outta the pilot was actually the majority of the teachers that this Uintah had been in the classroom 10 years or more. And so it is a way to keep those teachers that have that institutional knowledge, uh, weathered those 10 years and also keep them in the classroom to help, uh, mentor and train some of the newer teachers we have coming into the profession. I also think that professional development is something everyone strives for in their career, …
H.B. 143 Special Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asks whether the bill's listed notice methods require confirmation of receipt and whether lack of confirmation could harm school districts; the sponsor responds that districts must show they used the methods, not that parents received them.
▶ Watch at 1:37:55Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I just see on line 48 it says certified mail. Um, so through one or more of these following methods, do they have to be, um, they have to have, uh, receipt of confirmation and if they don't have receipt of confirmation, will that put our school districts in any of harm's way? Yeah, so, um, they have a couple of options, um, right there. And, um, so I think the school district needs to demonstrate that they did these things, but not necessarily that, you know, you know, sometimes parents are great about acknowledging things and sometimes they're not. So they just need to be able to demonstrate they, they sent the mail.
H.B. 143 Special Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asks as a follow-up whether a district would be protected if it sent notice by email or other method that parents did not receive.
▶ Watch at 1:38:34Read what they said
Yeah, it, it is hard. And some of our parents that, um, I have actually been on IEPs and five oh fours in those meetings, and our parents sometimes really struggle to get there. And so I just wanna make sure there's nothing in this bill that would hold a district liable if they weren't able to try when those, so if they just sent an email and they sent it to 'em and it wasn't received, that would still be okay?
H.B. 143 Special Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Asks whether districts should use at least two notice methods to cover their bases, and thanks the sponsor for her work on special education.
▶ Watch at 1:39:05Read what they said
Do we want 'em to do at least one or two methods to make sure we have covered our bases? Thank you for being, uh, such a diligent guardian of our special ed kids.
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Raises concerns that the bill's list of religions is incomplete and asks how the list would be made more comprehensive.
▶ Watch at 1:52:46Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, you know, I'm going to say, as a teacher, I feel a little bit of whiplash with, you know, anti DEI, anti CRT laws, and that has really caused some of this consternation with some of these conversations. Um, when I think about the religions you mentioned here, I can say that religion is a concept in every part of our world that people look to when they're in dire straits. And some of them are mentioned here, but others are not mentioned here. And that's a part of my frustration as well. Um, when we think about some of these concepts, we don't really talk about the Native Americans and the indigenous people that …
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Argues the bill is unnecessary because teachers can already cover these topics, and that a list could limit other religions discussed in class.
▶ Watch at 1:59:57Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, I don't really feel the need to run a bill because this is already a law and everybody can do this. And I think emphasizing it only makes it seem like we have an agenda. Uh, I know that we have Jehovah's Witnesses who feel very, um, left out in our schools, but that's not always part of our curriculum. As a Roman Catholic, I was raised Roman Catholic. I don't always feel included in some of the, the conversations here in the state capitol, but I, I don't feel like it's my place to assert my religion into other people's religions. So I think as we start talking about these things, um, we, we, we, uh, …
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Moves to move to the next agenda item, arguing the bill is unnecessary because the topics can already be taught.
▶ Watch at 2:21:25Read what they said
Thank you. I would like to make an alternative motion to move the agenda since this timeline doesn't fit. And I know that two of my colleagues voted against a bill of mine that would protect students from laws that they didn't understand because they felt the curriculum was too, um, two weighty. And we couldn't have our schools being burdened with more curriculum. And so the bill that I tried to run was the conversation you had that we had too much to do in our schools already, and my bill failed. So with that, I think that you should probably have the same feeling about this bill. 'cause we can already do it. So I mo mo moved …
S.B. 268 Religious Curriculum in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Maintains her substitute motion and says similar bills should be voted on the same way.
▶ Watch at 2:23:17Read what they said
As I was told, when I run my bill, we have so much to teach in class, so we shouldn't be adding to the agenda by my two colleagues here. That's why they failed my amendment. So I think that all of these bills that are unnecessary and, um, don't really need to happen, should be voted on the same way. So I'm standing with my motion.
S.B. 243 Tax Increment Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Introduces SB 243, which changes the timeline and percentages of property tax increments for certain housing and transit reinvestment zones, and presents an amendment.
▶ Watch at 1:06:33Read what they said
So, Senate Bill 2 43. Is this working? Oh, yep. The light doesn't go on. Have you heard that before? No, I didn't. Oh, The light's not on, so it's confusing. Oh, I guess just for me though. Um, hi. Thank you for listening to my bill. This is a very simple bill and it's, um, something that was brought to my attention that creates tension between our, uh, city of a first class and our schools in a city of the first class. So it is changing the timeline of our, uh, tax increments. And it is, um, it's for certain housing and transit reinvestment zones proposed by a municipality or a county. And it changes the terms and …
S.B. 243 Tax Increment Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Explains that the bill reduces the share of tax increments captured from 80% to 50% and the capture periods from 25 to 15 years and from 45 to 30 years, arguing this lessens the impact on school districts.
▶ Watch at 1:07:54Read what they said
Thanks. When you look at line 1 0 4 2 1 0 6 mm-hmm. These are the numbers that I'm changing. So right now we are capturing 80% of tax increments. I'd like to reduce that to 50. We are doing it for 25 years. I would like to reduce that to 15, and I'd like to take the number 45 and reduce it to 30. Um, consider, like when you think about using these tax increments, those tax increments go from the municipality and the person building and are taken away from our schools. So I think 80% is a really high number, and it really creates, um, this tension between our cities and our schools districts. When you …
S.B. 243 Tax Increment Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Responds that the bill's effective date is May 6, 2026, and that it applies going forward.
▶ Watch at 1:09:20Read what they said
Well, the date the bill goes into effect on May 6th, 2026. So I, I would think that you could only do it on Wednesday. Were going forward. Okay.
S.B. 243 Tax Increment Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Agrees to add language limiting the bill to agreements negotiated after its effective date.
▶ Watch at 1:10:49Read what they said
I would gladly put in, um, this bill is only in effect for bonds or agreements that are negotiate, start negotiation after the State. Yeah. Whatever the date is. Okay.
S.B. 243 Tax Increment Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Says she has not yet talked with lenders or developers and that constituents in the area want different terms to protect students in local districts.
▶ Watch at 1:12:09Read what they said
Yeah. So I live adjacent to the city of the first class, Sandy. And this was brought to me by concerned citizens from inside that city. And their concern was that, are we going to benefit the developers that are coming into our city or are we gonna protect the children that are going to schools in our city? So I do have some kind of, um, interest in protecting our developers, but not as much as our Citizens. I understand your interest. I totally get it. Yeah. What I'm trying to get at is, does this mean that no deals can happen? Like have you talked to the lenders and the developers to see if this is congruent with, …
S.B. 243 Tax Increment Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Sums up by saying the bill addresses negative impacts on school districts, that unintended outcomes of past policy were harmful, and that the bill merits floor discussion.
▶ Watch at 1:21:20Read what they said
Yes, thank you. You know, um, when we think, when we, when we think, when we think about counties of the first class, cities of the first class and a city of a first class in a county of a first class, it gets very, very calculated. Very, very prescriptive. And as we've had this conversation many times on the floor, my cities are usually the ones that have these types of, um, very particular legislation passed for them. We've had conversations about airports and we've had conversations about, um, other projects that the state is being asked to pay for. Um, when I look at this bill, I think it'd be a great conversation to have on the floor. …
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Accepts the chair's offer of personal privilege and says today recognizes organ donation day, with guests present.
▶ Watch at 48:58Read what they said
I am. Thank you Mr. President. Thank You. Today with us, we have, uh, people recognizing or organ donation day.
H.B. 230 Offender Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Moved to pass the bill substitute out of committee with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:27:06Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd like to send house Bill two 30 offender amendments out with a favorable re recommendation.
H.B. 279 Higher Education Code Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Moves to send the bill out as amended with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 44:12Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to recommend HB 2 79 higher Education code amendments out with a favorable recommendation.
H.B. 279 Higher Education Code Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says a reviewing office had no concerns with returning these functions to private higher education institutions.
▶ Watch at 44:37Read what they said
Yeah. So I'll just, uh, also say that, uh, Yui has reviewed this bill and they didn't have any concerns with any of these functions being given back to the private higher education institutions.
S.B. 244 Cardiac Emergency Response Plans in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Supports the bill, notes the bill has no fiscal note, and recommends it with a favorable recommendation while cautioning against overly burdensome training or plan requirements.
▶ Watch at 55:34Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think this is a fantastic bill. I noticed that it doesn't have a fiscal note. Um, adss are very expensive. I like that there's an ability to have an in-kind donation and also, um, a new path for people to receive donations. But I'm a little concerned that it doesn't have a fiscal note. Um, I also hope that our trainings are not too cumbersome, because when you open one of those things, it pretty much gives you those instructions pretty quickly. So, you know, having excessive training or making that CERP plan a little too robust would not benefit anybody. Just getting these devices into every school is the most important thing. So, um, …
S.B. 244 Cardiac Emergency Response Plans in Schools · Senate Education Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Thanks Amy Mitchell for her story and states that schools are community centers, so these devices should be in every school.
▶ Watch at 57:02Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, thank you, Amy, for sharing your story. Uh, it's an incredible story, and I, I believe that our schools are our centers of our community. So this is paramount that we have these in every school. So, I, uh, that's my sum.
H.C.R. 4 Concurrent Resolution Regarding Religious Freedom · Senate Education Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Opposes the resolution, saying it emphasizes one religion and leaves others out, and that she will vote no.
▶ Watch at 1:05:35Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I am not a religious person. My kids are not part of a, Um, formal religion. I believe I'm a very moral person. I believe I am someone who cares deeply about people. I believe that I work hard to be a virtuous person by representing moral excellence, character strength, and high standards of behavior, which is the definition of virtue. Um, I, I find this resolution problematic because when we start emphasizing one religion or one person or one ideology, we are forgetting all the others. And each year, or every other year, when we have something like up this up here, we usually have the, uh, church of Satan that says, great, we …
S.B. 181 School Discipline Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Moved to send the bill out with a favorable recommendation, saying seclusion has been used infrequently and only in serious circumstances and that the added guardrails are helpful.
▶ Watch at 1:30:50Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to motion that we send Senate Bill 180 1 out with a favorable recommendation, school discipline amendments, um, to the, um, speaker's point as a person who's been in classrooms and schools for the last 25 years and worked in schools that had units in them and had extra, um, teachers and care and protocols in place, I have seen this used very judiciously. I'm hoping that this captures any bad actors out there and puts better guardrails around it. Um, when students are, um, students are supposed to be put in this situation, they are going through a very traumatic time. They are experiencing turmoil, and their family is in turmoil. And …
H.B. 163 Grow Your Own Educator Pipeline Program Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Thanked the sponsor for including paraprofessionals in the program and spoke about the importance of trained special education teachers.
▶ Watch at 1:37:02Read what they said
Um, thank you so much for including these people into this, um, program. Uh, as a teacher, as I just mentioned, I love my job. I have never wanted to do anything else in my life besides be in classrooms and schools. It is a privilege and an honor to spend my day with the kids in our community. And I, I miss it tremendously when I'm not in the classroom. Um, uh, I, I'm kind of gonna use this as a pitch. If anyone's leaving the listening, the millions and millions of people out there, education and teaching is the best job you can ever do. 99% of the day, you are having a great, great time. The kids …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says her comments were meant for the bill rather than the substitute motion and apologizes.
▶ Watch at 51:20Read what they said
Uh, okay, this is to the bill. I, I apologize. Okay, that's not to the substitute motion. Yeah, the motion is to substitute. The motion is Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Sorry.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Asks questions about the bill's Class B misdemeanor penalty, preferring larger fines, the 14-day removal deadline, sign placement on overpasses, and whether the sign size could be larger.
▶ Watch at 53:22Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, the sponsors yield to questions. My first question is on Line 201, making this a Class B misdemeanor. Um, I, I do believe that we should have responsibility over our signs, but a class B misdemeanor can be up to six months in jail or, um, I, I just don't think that six months in jail is a reasonable thing for just putting a sign in the wrong spot. I would prefer to see that these fines were greater. So if we could make it just a larger fine that was dedicated to the homeless school lunches and just have it be a really, uh, significant fine, I think that would be a much better …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Asks about the Class B misdemeanor penalty and prefers larger fines, asks about the 14-day removal period, raises signs on overpasses, and asks whether the sign size could be increased.
▶ Watch at 53:27Read what they said
My first question is on Line 201, making this a Class B misdemeanor. Um, I, I do believe that we should have responsibility over our signs, but a class B misdemeanor can be up to six months in jail or, um, I, I just don't think that six months in jail is a reasonable thing for just putting a sign in the wrong spot. I would prefer to see that these fines were greater. So if we could make it just a larger fine that was dedicated to the homeless school lunches and just have it be a really, uh, significant fine, I think that would be a much better deterrent for people to not put these signs, um, in …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says she supports the bill, describes municipal concerns about overpass signs, and says she wishes it were stricter on who can be fined.
▶ Watch at 56:37Read what they said
Yes, thank you. I I appreciate that answer. Um, I know in Salt Lake County, we, we definitely have people putting up signs over and over and over again, over overpasses and it's not unintentional. It's, um, a, a, a great placement if you wanna have your name out there. But it's something that I know my municipalities have really been bothered by because they do spend a lot of time taking them off our highways, taking them off our, um, on ramps, off ramps, and then also over or overpasses. So I, I support this bill. I wish it was a little bit, uh, stricter on who can be fined with putting signs in illegal spots. So thank you.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says overpass sign placement bothers municipalities and states support for the bill while wishing it were stricter on who can be fined.
▶ Watch at 56:37Read what they said
Yes, thank you. I I appreciate that answer. Um, I know in Salt Lake County, we, we definitely have people putting up signs over and over and over again, over overpasses and it's not unintentional. It's, um, a, a, a great placement if you wanna have your name out there. But it's something that I know my municipalities have really been bothered by because they do spend a lot of time taking them off our highways, taking them off our, um, on ramps, off ramps, and then also over or overpasses. So I, I support this bill. I wish it was a little bit, uh, stricter on who can be fined with putting signs in illegal spots. So thank you.
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says emails she has received state the bill would burden women who changed their names, and asks whether it creates an unnecessary burden for them.
▶ Watch at 1:17:35Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, ironically, today I'm wearing a white suit to discuss women's suffr for, uh, voting. And the letters that I've received most about this, the emails, um, letters would've been when we suffered more. Um, but the emails I'm receiving are that this would be more of a burden for women and they, uh, change their names, which makes some of the documentation that you are mentioning on your bill more, uh, difficult to obtain. So if you didn't have a license, you'd have to go back and get a birth certificate, which doesn't have the same name as maybe your license, or you might have to get a passport, which is expensive. So these are …
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Asks whether a woman who changed her name would need two forms of identification while a man with matching documents would not.
▶ Watch at 1:18:50Read what they said
Senator Rebe. Thank you, Mr. President. So if you're a male and you have a birth certificate, that's the same name that you have on your license, would you need to have two forms of identification if you were a female because you changed your name?
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Asks what a married person without a driver's license would need to show, and whether two forms of identification would be required.
▶ Watch at 1:19:42Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so if you don't have a license, because many people don't have a driver's license and you are married, you have to bring your marriage certificate, but if you got married and you don't have a license, would you bring your birth certificate, which doesn't have the same name as your voter registration? Would you have to bring two forms of identification for that
H.B. 209 Voting Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Says the bill makes registration more cumbersome for older people, people who changed their names, and those facing costly documents, and that it would disenfranchise voters and lower turnout.
▶ Watch at 1:21:07Read what they said
Yes. Thank you. I'm gonna close with this statement. Um, I, I disagree that this is making it streamlined. I think it's making it more cumbersome for older people who might not have current UpToDate information. I think it's making it more difficult for a person who gets married and changes their name. I think the list of documentation is extensive, but many of those documentation pieces cost money and are, um, sometimes a burden to get, if you're an older person who doesn't drive anymore, your license is going to be expired, and that's no longer a legal form of identification. If you are an older person and you're a little longer traveling, you won't have a passport. And …
S.B. 60 Income Tax Rate Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Opposes the bill, citing growth needs for infrastructure, services, and the disability waiting list, and arguing the benefits would go mainly to a few people.
▶ Watch at 19:20Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, we have spoken frequently about having the best economy in the nation. And I, I think that's great. And I think our population has increased tremendously, which we have, you know, have some growing pains for that. And so when we think about cutting the income tax, we haven't cut the income tax again yet. And people are still coming here in droves. And when you look at the reason why most people are coming here, fourth on the list is our tax rate, but prior to that is quality of life, outdoor recreation. And those things require infrastructure and supports. When we think about what's gonna happen when we start cutting our income tax …
S.B. 78 Property Tax Relief Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Says the bill is controversial among people she works with and asks that it be circled so the amendment can be reviewed before third reading. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 37:55Read what they said
Thank you. I appreciate the good Senator Vickers request. This is a really controversial bill for some of the people that I am working with. So I, I would wish that you would circle it and we can see what the amendment is before we move into third
S.B. 97 Tax Revenue Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks whether the 25% reserve limit would keep school districts from saving for capital projects and bonding.
▶ Watch at 59:02Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. I had similar concerns as, uh, Senator Winterton with the 25% capital, um, reserve. Would this impede or school districts from having reserves so that they could save up for like a capital improvement? Or would this, uh, negatively impact their abilities to hold onto money and not have to bonds because they've actually been saving money? Would that impede them from doing that?
S.B. 97 Tax Revenue Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Says some small school districts struggle to bond for capital needs, raises concerns about the local levy and minimum school program effects, and asks about the new growth definition.
▶ Watch at 1:01:34Read what they said
Yes, thank you. Um, I, I understand that point of view and I understand that, uh, I, I actually agree with most of what you said. My concern is some of our school districts, which brings us down to line 6 77 when we're gonna be, um, levied and add Vale Auditorium tax, um, doing quick research. This seems to be something that is, might be a regressive tax as people are really trying to hold onto their assets in those kind of ways when you are, um, lower income. And then also, um, having that buy-in for a local effort by raising the minimum school program fund. When I think about school districts like Tink, tick, Daggett and, um, …
S.B. 97 Tax Revenue Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Asks whether the new growth definition would address the Mountain View school district situation.
▶ Watch at 1:03:29Read what they said
Yeah, that was a question about the new growth definition. I know that Mountain View, the new school district that was developed, would this help them with the definition of new growth because they are, um, running a bill about new growth and how they can bond for their schools, that an unprecedented growth in that area.
S.B. 97 Tax Revenue Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and says school districts differ widely, making the balance difficult.
▶ Watch at 1:04:12Read what they said
Thank you. I appreciate that. You know, uh, we, we feel a lot of frustration when we're talking about our schools, but our schools come from so many different areas. I mean, Park City is so different than tech. Uh, tic and Daggett is way different than St. Washington County. So, uh, trying to thread those needles and find the balance is hard. And so I appreciate your willingness to work with people.
S.B. 162 Online Sales Tax Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Sen. Riebe asked how pre-written computer software delivered electronically would be taxed for schools, hospitals, and students, including whether it is taxed on download or on each use.
▶ Watch at 1:31:23Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. I'm looking online, 1807 and thinking about our schools, our universities, hospitals, says amounts paid or charged for storage, that's prewritten computer software delivered electronically. Um, when I think about who's using some of these software licenses and some of these computer software delivered electronically, um, would, I mean, if the hospital is for profit and would they be paying for the first time they download it or each time they use it? It seems that, uh, this, this seems, uh, not to have good guardrails around it. So I'm not sure how a school would do with this, or if a student was asked to use a program after school, would they all be taxed …
S.B. 162 Online Sales Tax Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Sen. Riebe restated her concern about how software licenses used by schools, hospitals, and students would be taxed.
▶ Watch at 1:32:29Read what they said
So online 1807, it's talking about pre-written computer software delivered electronically. Uh, and my concern is that these are, would be schools, hospitals, um, homeschoolers, and if the school buys the process, the product, and then students use it, is it forever? Uh, if you are asked to use a program at, at home to go with school, are those gonna be taxed at the same rate as like, um, Netflix or Amazon?
S.B. 162 Online Sales Tax Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Sen. Riebe said home use of such software is a concern and asked how it would be handled compared with streaming services.
▶ Watch at 1:33:15Read what they said
Well, the problem is you're gonna be using them at home and so it just, it, it, this streaming service leaves me curious about how we deal with some of these things that are, you kind of walk in two different worlds. So just my question about that. Thank you, Senator Wilson.
S.B. 242 Transportation Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Riebe said she received many emails about the motor vehicle capacity section and asked whether anything in the bill would take away bike lanes or discourage biking.
▶ Watch at 45:03Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I received a lot of emails about section 72 dash two zero dash 1 0 1, and, uh, I, the emails are, the emails are saying that we are taking away the ability for people to have bike lanes and use the roads instead of cars. And it seems like a 72 47 to preserve motor vehicle capacity. Um, is there anything in here that would take away our bike lanes or, um, make it less, uh, desirable to ride your bikes? I mean, uh, I think that getting more people outta their cars in Salt Lake City would be great. So this is one of the emails that I received the most complaints about.
S.B. 242 Transportation Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Riebe thanked the public, said she shares their concerns about bike connectivity and local voice, noted the trail network provision, and said work on the bill will continue.
▶ Watch at 1:25:18Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I just wanna thank all the people that showed up today to speak to this bill. Um, I know that, um, connectivity with bicycles is very important. Uh, I spent some time in Copenhagen a couple of years ago and it was incredible to bike all around the town and have that infrastructure in place for that. Um, I recognize that some of your major concerns are the ability to, um, impede traffic and not support bike bicycling. I I don't think that this is what we're trying to do here, but we're gonna keep working on that. I also understand that the connectivity in the state of, I mean in the city of Utah …
H.B. 22 Vintage Vehicle Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Moves to replace the second substitute with the third substitute of the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:49:38Read what they said
Senator Rebe moves to DeLeT title of body second substitute house bill 22 and replace it with third substitute house bill 22.
H.B. 22 Vintage Vehicle Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Asks what happens to vehicles that currently have a discontinued Model T license plate.
▶ Watch at 1:55:33Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. Um, so that license plate with the Model T Ford goes away. And what happens if you have that? Do you have to come back to the Okay.
H.B. 22 Vintage Vehicle Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Says constituents were confused by the bill and asks what benefit it provides.
▶ Watch at 1:55:58Read what they said
Uh, somebody actually spoke to me and they were very confused by this whole thing. And so I don't really think there's that many cheaters out there. So what's, what money are we saving? What money are we wasting? Is it air? Like what is the benefit for the citizenry of Utah to change all this and confuse people?
H.B. 22 Vintage Vehicle Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Says the bill aims to streamline the process so owners do not need to use loopholes to avoid emissions tests.
▶ Watch at 1:56:44Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, like I said, I had people contacting me and they were very confused by this. So we're really just trying to make a streamlined process and not really, the whole cheater thing kind of leaves a bad taste in my mouth. So it's like, oh, we're not really cheating, we're just trying to help people have a better system. Right. Yep. Okay. So have people not have to go through loopholes to get around the emissions test.
H.B. 22 Vintage Vehicle Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Moves to send the third substitute of HB 22 out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:59:18Read what they said
Yes. Thank you. May I make a motion? Yes, may. I'd like to send house bill 22 second sub out with a favorable recommendation.
H.B. 128 Traffic Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Moved to pass HB 128 out of committee with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 2:04:00Read what they said
Thank you. I'd like to send out House Bill 1 28 with a favorable recommendation
S.B. 60 Income Tax Rate Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Opposes the bill, saying income tax cuts shift burdens to property taxes and reduce funding for retirees, students, and people with disabilities.
▶ Watch at 1:00:36Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Uh, I would just like to stand in opposition of this bill. When I think about my two neighbors and home, they both are retired individuals that are now having increased property taxes, thrust upon them. And, um, when we keep cutting the income tax, we are actually pushing that burden to our communities. And this seems like, um, everybody hates taxes, but when I look at some of the bills that we have coming through this body, everybody's has a fiscal note that is attached to the income tax. And when we think about our students and how we're funding education, that's through the income tax. So in this lean year where we're asking everybody …
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asks which audit the bill responds to and says some provisions seem heavy-handed for other institutions, so may not support it in committee.
▶ Watch at 58:07Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm looking at the audit that you're referencing. Is that the audit that was, uh, conducted with, um, Utah Systems of Higher Education Governance, or was it the Utah State University audit? This was the Utah State University audit that was released on Friday. Thank you. Um, I, I like a lot that's in this bill, but I think when we think about an audit to Utah State University and then changing all of our guidelines across all institutions, it feels a little heavy handed. Um, I recognize that we have some things to learn about what happened with Utah State University, but I also think that, um, I think a lot of school, this …
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asks about provisions that appear to be new code, including outside legal counsel and school board representation on technical college boards.
▶ Watch at 1:00:36Read what they said
Um, so what, you mentioned that a couple of these pieces are already in code, and we're just bringing them over, but when I see it in red, it, it always means new code to me. So I'm concerned with outside legal counsel. I guess that's previous code. And then also, I'm a little concerned with, uh, lines 1 48 that talks about each, uh, from no more than four of the local school boards for the school districts. I, I don't see that in the audit, but like I said, maybe we can have a conversation more in depth about some of these things, because I didn't recognize this was a response to that audit. And when I look …
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Says some provisions were not in the audit and plans to follow up with the Board of Higher Education. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:01:38Read what they said
Okay. Yeah. I'll, and they were, you're right. They weren't in the audit, but Thank you. I'll talk to the yushi board and, um, maybe we can have a better understanding. Thank you.
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asks the sponsor whether she may ask one more question.
▶ Watch at 1:08:09Read what they said
You could, I I'd like to ask you one more question, if that's okay with the sponsor, right?
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asks how strategic planning fits with the role of the system as a whole.
▶ Watch at 1:08:16Read what they said
But, but I, here's the part that kind of hit me was the whole idea of strategy, right? And moving forward. And that's where, that's where I, I think that has to, in my mind, has to be some joint thing, because they also have to align with their role and mission, right? Yeah. And, and so part of that strategy has to be built by ushi as well, I would think. And, and I, I was a little bit concerned in looking at that, that, that maybe in, in saying that's the role of the trustees. We, we forget that, that that has to be in concert with the overall system. Agreed. Does that make sense?
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Says the strategic planning provisions reference alignment with the system and thanks the witness for clarifying this. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:10:42Read what they said
Thank you. I, I think, I, I think item C here actually does say that, uh, in consultation with stakeholders in the institutions region, prepare, approve, and monitor progress on a strategic plan for the institution that aligns with. And item four, there actually says board goals and metrics. So yeah, We asked for that too. And, and so I, I, I guess that does kind of clarify that relationship. I just wanted to make sure that we weren't just assigning strategic planning to the trustees without consideration of the system as a whole. So, thank you.
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asks about the audit referenced, whether trustees are appointed by the governor, and whether the bill changes what trustees do.
▶ Watch at 1:11:28Read what they said
Thank you. May I ask a question of the witness? Sure. Thank you. Um, part of my concern is that when you look at the makeup of a board of trustees, or most of them are appointed by the governor, and, um, when you think about the definition of a trustee, it's supposed to be creating a community, um, strengthening alumni community identification with university traditions. So if you think about what a trustee has been in the past, and then you think about what you're projecting on and into the future, you're now creating a, a, like, as you mentioned, kind of a power struggle. And the, the governor gets to a board, uh, appoint many of these trustees …
S.B. 240 Higher Education Institutional Governance · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Expresses concern that the bill reduces institutional autonomy and adds state oversight, and thanks the witness for the answers.
▶ Watch at 1:15:15Read what they said
My struggle up here too, in this capital building making laws, is that we make too many laws regarding education. And as we start creating more laws for higher education, it is eroding the autonomy of our institutions. And so, if we think about eroding the autonomy of our institutions, we are thinking about why, why would I spend more money to go to University of Utah if I can go to SUU? And they're under the same umbrella with the exact same missions and trustees and appointed board members. So, as someone who likes smaller government and a lack of oversight and heavy hand in this, I, I really struggle with a lot that's in this bill. I do …
S.B. 232 Regulatory Impacts on Families · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Noted the fiscal note is zero and said the bill would not cost anyone anything.
▶ Watch at 2:08:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm looking at the fiscal note, and it has a fiscal note of zero. It's not gonna cost anybody anything to do this. To think about the impact on families.
S.B. 232 Regulatory Impacts on Families · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asked how the bill would be enforced and what the penalty would be if a decision were found to be bad for families.
▶ Watch at 2:09:24Read what they said
And my second question is, how would you, in, after you came up with your idea, how would you enforce it? What would be the penalty if they decided that it was bad,
S.B. 232 Regulatory Impacts on Families · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asked how entities would publish their opinions, noting there is no enforcement mechanism.
▶ Watch at 2:09:56Read what they said
And how Would they, there is no enforcement mechanism. How Would they publish what their opinions are?
S.B. 241 Early Literacy · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Raised concerns about third-grade retention, the grade-level benchmark, support for English language learners and students with IEPs, and asked how those students would be treated under the bill.
▶ Watch at 2:26:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I really appreciate this Bill. I really think it's important that we really, really, really, really, I'm tired, uh, that we focus on our third grade and our K through pre-K through third. Some of my concerns are the retention. I really hope that we are retaining our students or working hard not to retain our students. Uh, thinking about a bulging third grade would be kind of a, a weird spot to be in. Have like, you know, six third grade classes, and then one fourth and one second. Um, one fifth. Um, I'm concerned about the retention. Uh, I'm also hopeful that we look at our measurements of success as being on grade level. …
S.B. 241 Early Literacy · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Followed up on the benchmark color levels, urged keeping students in higher yellow and green levels, and said retention concerns her, especially for students experiencing trauma at home.
▶ Watch at 2:31:04Read what they said
I did. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Um, I appreciate you mentioning DIBELS as being, or Cadence being the test. Um, we went from, um, measuring greens and saying that they were the, and then we Uintah blues, which is above. And so the yellow dots are actually pretty nice too. And for people that have given this test, they know what I'm talking about with the yellow, blue, and green dots. And for the rest of you, we'll explain it later, but, um, I, I do would like to make sure that we're high yellows and greens and not moving into blues, because that isn't, and then also, yeah. And then also we have students that are on …
S.B. 241 Early Literacy · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Moved to recommend SB 241 favorably.
▶ Watch at 2:42:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to recommend Senate Bill 2 41 out with a favorable recommendation.
S.B. 241 Early Literacy · Senate Education Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Said she appreciates the bill's flexibility but remains concerned about retention and about families asking for waivers, and called the bill a great step for students.
▶ Watch at 2:44:06Read what they said
Yes. Thank you so much. I appreciate this bill. I appreciate the flexibility of it, but you know, when we ask parents to sign a waiver or ask for some kind of, um, special dispensation to not be left back, it usually falls upon the least of us that get left back the most. So that's why I'm so concerned about that part. And I, I understand all the ramifications around it, but, uh, that, that still concerns me greatly. I think this is a great bill and it would be wonderful for our students to get those extra resources. Thank you.
S.B. 129 Commemorative Day Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Says she supported the bill earlier, but that its reference to the September 2025 political violence conflicts with its goal of bringing people together, and votes no.
▶ Watch at 15:13Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Uh, the last time we heard this bill, I supported this bill and, um, as I'm looking at it now, it actually makes reference to political violence on September 10th, 2025. I do believe that this was a horrific event, but if you're going to reference this and we're actually not trying to come together, we're actually trying to highlight something that was political violence. So it, it, it pains me to see that this is really a good idea to have civic engagement, and I really do believe this is something we should be doing. But, um, I think this is almost counterintuitive of what the bill was intended to do. So I'm a no
S.B. 132 Spaceport Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Asks whether the closed-door trade-secret discussions violate the Open Meetings Act and whether trade secret could be defined more clearly, citing constituent concerns.
▶ Watch at 24:19Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. I've had some people contact me about the, uh, descriptions on line 1 0 7 and 1 0 9 that discuss that. It's just a trade secret and they're wondering if this is in violation of the Open Meetings Act and, um, if there could be a better definition of a trade secret. Um, are some of our constituency believes that too much of this work is happening behind closed doors and it, it's, um, it's disconcerting to them. So is there a better different definition for Trade Secret and or does this, uh, violate Open Meetings Act?
S.B. 132 Spaceport Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and says constituents are concerned that too much work is happening behind closed doors.
▶ Watch at 25:30Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I appreciate that answer. Like I said, I've constituents that are just concerned that we are doing too much work behind closed doors and I wanted to make sure that this wasn't part of the Open Meetings Act. Thank you.
H.B. 65 Construction Code Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Sen. Riebe asked whether glazing requirements would apply to everyone, whether they cost more than SB 64, and how schools could avoid unfunded mandates.
▶ Watch at 38:39Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I'm looking at lines, uh, 10 27, 10 40 and 10 51. And I'm curious about this, uh, glazing. Um, I know that this has been a conversation with a lot of our school districts and trying to move up to having, uh, more secure structures and entrance ways. Um, as we start adding this information to our statutes, we have actually increased the expense of our schools and our school districts are very concerned that these kind of statements are unfunded mandates. And although we all want our schools to be safe, we need to recognize that retrofitting some of this glazing has become very expensive. So, um, with the glazing, would that be, um, would …
H.B. 65 Construction Code Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Sen. Riebe said the fiscal note was zero and asked whether differing definitions for child care programs and school areas would increase costs for small businesses.
▶ Watch at 41:20Read what they said
Yes, yes. Thank you, Mr. President. I appreciate that clarification. I did look at the fiscal note and it was zero and, uh, it just concerns me greatly because this is something that my school districts have said to me a lot, that we are, um, putting undue burden on them to, uh, create a safer school environment with things that are really expensive and also hard to find. So I'm glad this isn't a new, uh, part of code. Uh, I can't find the line again. But there are also, uh, different definitions about what a child hold on residents program is and then what a, uh, school area would be. Um, I, I know you just said that …
H.B. 65 Construction Code Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 18) · Feb 6, 2026
Sen. Riebe asked whether the effective dates affect existing institutions and whether there is a grandfather clause for existing construction.
▶ Watch at 43:09Read what they said
Go ahead, Senator. Yes. One last question. Thank you for your patience. Um, my last question is, I'm noticing effective dates if there's an institution that's already a avail, uh, being used and, um, open, does this change the requirements for what they're building is already at and how it needs to change to accommodate this new bill? Is there a grandfather clause for old construction, or do all people have to adhere to this? And I know that this is, as you've said already, that this is already in code, but does that change any dates for somebody that's already operating a business?
H.B. 11 Dyed Diesel Fuel Search Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Expresses appreciation for Senator Harper's work on the bill and says she had not been aware of the impact of dyed diesel.
▶ Watch at 19:43Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I have a lot of respect and admiration for, uh, Senator Harper and I just appreciate the hard work he does to bring us diet fuels. You know, as, uh, my colleagues mentioned, wasn't really aware of the, uh, impact of diet fuels and now I know more about diet fuels and, uh, just so appreciative of that. Thank you.
H.B. 85 State Sovereignty Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Asks whether the bill would hinder Utah from receiving aid during a crisis such as an earthquake or natural disaster.
▶ Watch at 31:29Read what they said
Thank you. Um, would this bill jeopardize us from receiving aid during a crisis? Um, meaning if we're gonna say that we don't wanna be a part of these organizations, would that hinder our ability to receive aid if there was an earthquake or some kind of natural disaster?
S.B. 39 Investment Zones Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Says a housing and transit reinvestment zone in their district is affected and asks for confirmation that no zones are being expanded.
▶ Watch at 1:18:09Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, to reiterate, Senator Winton's point, uh, my district is, um, impacted by this, um, housing and transit reinvestment zone and they have been concerned that this is expanding it, not recreating a new one, but I just wanna go on record making sure that we are not expanding any of these zones. We're just putting it in a different section of code.
S.B. 227 Punitive Damages Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Riebe asked how predictability for punitive damages would be achieved if the bill does not address premiums, questioned the state's revenue from punitive damages and the zero fiscal note, and said she has not yet seen the language.
▶ Watch at 44:22Read what they said
So my question is, if we are trying to bring predictability to the payouts for punitive damages, and we are saying that in punitive damage, this wouldn't solve that problem, how would we solve that problem? Would it be to increase the fines for nefarious characters? I mean, where is this money coming from and how do we actually target where this money needs to be spent? Because you're saying that people that are insurance, the cars shouldn't have higher premiums to pay out the punitive damages. And then we're saying that even if we do raise the costs, we're not getting at the root of where the punitive damages is coming from. So how do you increase that fund …
S.B. 227 Punitive Damages Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Riebe said the question is how to give injured people benefits while keeping premiums fair for truckers, and suggested looking at safety ratings rather than capping punitive damages.
▶ Watch at 55:31Read what they said
Uh, thank you Mr. Chair. So my understanding is that punitive damages should not be reflected in our premiums 'cause this is hurting our truckers. Yeah. But if you were the person that got hurt and your family got hurt, you would want to have some kind of benefit from your insurance. So that's the question we're trying to answer. I I respect that we should not be overly burdening our premiums for truckers, but, um, maybe we have to look at the safety rating and dealing with that. Uh, maybe it's not in where we're capping our punitive damages, but how we're doing our safety ratings that would bring our premiums into align with the activities. Uh, I don't …
S.B. 226 Fatal Motor Vehicle Accident Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Sen. Riebe moves to pass S.B. 226 out favorably and says she has questions to ask later.
▶ Watch at 1:09:25Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to recommend Senate Bill 2 26 fatal motor vehicle accident amendments. That was a favorable recommendation. Uh, I appreciate the work you're doing on this, and I think that there's a way we can come to a safe Blanding zone. Um, I have some questions I'll ask you afterwards about this, but thank you so much for your work on this.
S.B. 88 School Technology Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Says the fiscal note for the bill shows no funding and that schools are being asked to do more with no money, and says she will vote no because the bill is unfunded, not because she opposes the policy.
▶ Watch at 30:00Read what they said
Senator Rebe. Thank You Mr. President. Thank you Mr. President. Uh, I appreciate the work that's been doing on keeping our school safe, but when you look at the fiscal note of this bill, there is zero. And, um, this is one of the examples of how we are increasingly asking our schools to do more with no money. And so providing these kind of services, although, um, are important, it is an unfunded request. And, uh, I'm gonna be voting, no, not because I don't like the policy, but because it's unfunded. Thank you.
S.B. 19 Digital Evidence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Asks whether the League of Cities and Towns, which is watching the bill, has had its needs met.
▶ Watch at 33:48Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I'm looking on, uh, some trackers here from the League of Cities and towns and also, um, they have said that they're watching this bill. Have they had their, um, their needs met with why they're not supporting this bill yet?
S.B. 19 Digital Evidence Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Notes there is no fiscal note on the bill and asks how the service would be funded.
▶ Watch at 34:40Read what they said
I am noticing that there's no fiscal note on this bill. So, um, how would this be funded to provide this service?
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Asks whether the disclosure must be on the front of a yard sign or can be on the back, and how it must be displayed.
▶ Watch at 39:27Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President Pro Tem. Um, regarding the line, uh, talking about, has to have the, uh, indication who paid for it. Would that have to be on the front of the sign? Or it could be in the back 'cause you would be close enough to read the back, but you know, when you're a first time candidate and money's tight, taking up that space would be, um, counterintuitive to somebody who is limited amount of money. So can it be on the back of a sign if it's a yard sign, or does it have to be on the front? Or is there any indication on how that has to be displayed?
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and asks for clearer language so first-time candidates who make honest mistakes are protected.
▶ Watch at 41:04Read what they said
Thank you. I appreciate those answers. I think that there's, uh, a lot of good in this bill, but I think there's a, some nebulous, um, terms that might cause people to do things that not intended into the good Senator Weiler's point that we have. A lot of people who run for the first time, it might not, might fall into pitholes with this. So I'd love a little bit more clearer language so that we can make sure we're protecting anybody that made honest mistakes and not nefarious activities. Thank you.
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Asks to have the sponsor yield to a question about the resolution.
▶ Watch at 1:13:05Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President Pro tem on line 78. There is a very, very, um, different meaning to these Two different words. Do you wish to sponsor yield to a question? Senator Riebe? Thank you. Will the sponsor yield to a question, Senator Fillmore?
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Asks the sponsor to explain the meaning of the changed words in the resolution, expressing concern about the size of the change.
▶ Watch at 1:13:24Read what they said
I'm very concerned about the nature of these words. They mean something tremendously different and it concerns me greatly that we're making such a big leap for such a grand definition change. Can you please explain those?
H.J.R. 1 Joint Rules Resolution - Amendments to Joint Rules · Senate floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Thanks the sponsor for the explanation and says she appreciates the change.
▶ Watch at 1:13:50Read what they said
Thank you. I wish our legislation would stay still and stop moving so quickly, but if we have to change the letterhead, I appreciate that. Thank you.
S.B. 54 Carson Smith Opportunity Scholarship Program Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Asks whether a pending Utah Fits All court ruling would affect students covered by this program.
▶ Watch at 46:26Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, you mentioned the scholarship program and how it fits in with Utah fits all. Utah fits all is, um, currently in litigation and it's going to have a ruling on, I think February 16th if we're changing. Is there any change here that would be impacted by the ruling of Utah, Al because you kind of mentioned that it, it's compensated, compensated in Utah fits all, but if Utah AL doesn't go through, then are we gonna put people in harm's way with the changes in the spill?
S.B. 54 Carson Smith Opportunity Scholarship Program Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Asks whether the bill changes sibling coverage that students might otherwise get through Utah Fits All.
▶ Watch at 47:07Read what they said
Maybe I didn't ask my question. Do you mind if I have a follow up? Go ahead. Thanks. So you mentioned that some of the people that were impacted by this would be captured by the Utah fits all. So are we changing anything in this bill that would no longer capture them here and they would rely on that one that might not be there? So I thought that's what you said when you were presenting Your bill. So in, in the current
S.B. 85 Excellence in Education and Leadership Supplement Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Said some districts told her they dropped out of the program and asked how many districts are participating now.
▶ Watch at 56:34Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I've had a few districts tell me that they have dropped out of this program. Um, it just, I mean, I I, when it came out, I heard that it might be difficult and I thought it might be difficult to participate. How many school districts do you have participating in this right now?
S.B. 85 Excellence in Education and Leadership Supplement Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Feb 3, 2026
Asked a follow-up about how many districts started in the program before it dropped in number.
▶ Watch at 57:12Read what they said
Did you start with, oh, may I have a follow up please? We Started off with 50 and then it dropped to 2025.
S.B. 69 School Device Revisions · Senate floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Riebe says she opposed the bill earlier but school districts have reached out, and she feels it is heavy-handed and that parents should guide their children's device use, while noting her teachers asked her to support it.
▶ Watch at 34:01Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I have opposed this bill in the past, but my school districts have reached out to me. You know, my struggle is my son is 16 and he's been a great worker for years and he's a very responsible person. When he turns 16, he could drive a car, he could get a job, and then when he turned 18, I mean, he could vote. I mean, all these responsibilities our students are being asked to be a part of and we don't trust them with a device. And, you know, when I think about how we can protect our students from getting into harm's way, it's not by restricting everything they do, but it's …
S.C.R. 1 Concurrent Resolution Regarding Nuclear Energy · Senate floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Speaks in support of the resolution, saying there are misconceptions about nuclear energy and that Utah should consider all energy options safely.
▶ Watch at 37:37Read what they said
Yes, I am. Thank you, Mr. President. I rise in support of this resolution. I understand that we have some, um, misconceptions about nuclear energy and I think that this is something that we need to start addressing. We need to work on energy in a braided approach and start looking at all possible opportunities and making sure it's as safe as possible. So I rise in support of this concurrent resolution. Thank you.
S.C.R. 3 Concurrent Resolution Regarding Nuclear Weapons Testing · Senate floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Riebe says the resolution asks the nation not to resume explosive nuclear weapons testing, cites downwinder harm in Utah and the stockpile stewardship program, and says the resolution is about weapons testing rather than nuclear energy.
▶ Watch at 40:21Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, this is a resolution that is asking us not to resume explosive nuclear weapons testing. Uh, there's a moratorium on explosive nuclear testing in the 1990s and we have had the US Secretary for nuclear security state that we collect more data than anyone else and he would not advise any more testing. On line 43, it talks about 187 countries have signed a, um, agreement to hinder nuclear testing. And then on line 52, it references down winders. Uh, we have had many citizens in the state of Utah be victims of down winding, uh, lung and cancer. We have leukemia, uh, lymphoma, thyroid, breast cancer, and then esophageal cancer. We currently have a …
S.C.R. 3 Concurrent Resolution Regarding Nuclear Weapons Testing · Senate floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Riebe responds that she supports nuclear energy and safety, says a House co-sponsor who is a downwinder supports the bill, and asks for passage of the resolution before calling for the question.
▶ Watch at 44:01Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. Um, you know, I've been up here eight years and in my eight years I acquired this hat, it's called the Yellow Cake Caucus hat. And, uh, I learned a lot in that caucus and I came to understand the opportunities we have available to us and how sometimes we have to change our minds and come to different conclusions when different information is presented to us. So in this bill, it recognizes that we are asking not to have explosive nuclear weapon testing. I support nuclear energy and I want it to be safe. But if we want to put our best foot forward and say we are committed to safety, we need to recognize …
H.B. 78 Nuclear Regulatory Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asks whether the bill would bring extra radioactive waste to Utah and how that would be mitigated, and says constituents are concerned about this.
▶ Watch at 38:00Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm the proud owner of a caucus cake yellow cake caucus hat. So I am supportive of nuclear energy, but my constituents are concerned about, I think it's line 51 that talks about waste management. Will this open the door for bringing, um, any extra waste to the state of Utah? And how will that be mitigated, or is that not gonna be happening? Go ahead, Mr. Chair. This, this doesn't give us, at this point any additional authority beyond what we currently have. Um, but it does, it does. That's just one component of the nuclear lifecycle. Uh, we already have authority, uh, agreement, state authority for low level radioactive waste. We would have …
S.B. 197 Transportation Funding and Governance Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Riebe asked whether the appointment structure would include geographic representation, including Salt Lake County, and raised concern about losing county representation.
▶ Watch at 1:11:02Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm looking at, uh, lines 3 71 and it says, two members appointed by the speaker, two members appointed by the Senate and, and then three members appointed by the governor. Are these gonna have, um, geographical connections to who's appointed? Um, sometimes when we change the makeup of a board, we, um, have a tendency to forget counties of the first class and representatives of counties are the first class. And, um, I know it seems like it's not political, but it kind of feels a little political that we are losing representation on some of these commissions and boards. So as the largest county and the only county of a first class, um, …
S.B. 197 Transportation Funding and Governance Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Riebe asked whether nominations would be a pool of names, and Harper confirmed that each nominating body may submit one or more names.
▶ Watch at 1:12:56Read what they said
Thank you. So when you say that we get to nominate someone that's just in the pool of people, they might consider out of that geographical location, so it's not Correct. Okay. So you are so, so they can submit one or they could submit more. That's up to them. Thank you. I appreciate that.
S.B. 197 Transportation Funding and Governance Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Riebe said the nomination layout gives local areas more say and asked whether appointments require Senate consent. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:13:11Read what they said
Yeah. Yeah. I, I like the layout. Uh, it does give the locals more, say as far as, uh, nominating a person to be considered for those. And again, legislatively they could look at that list. The governor can look at that list. But if, and I can't see it right off, but this is in, uh, with consent of the Senate, correct?
S.B. 197 Transportation Funding and Governance Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Riebe questioned why the proposed board is larger than the current one, said she wants to hear the League's position, and thanked the sponsor.
▶ Watch at 1:24:06Read what they said
Senator Rebe. Thank You, Mr. Chair. Um, I wanna thank the people that have worked with UTA. You definitely have made it a, um, more robust service. Uh, I would, I'm really interested in seeing what the league says I am. Um, I find it odd that we're going from a smaller board to a bigger board because that's not what we've been doing lately. So I, I'm just curious if that's gonna bring a betterment. Uh, whenever we talk about boards, we're always trying to shrink 'em instead of grow them. Uh, but I can understand why we're growing this one because we wanna make it more, uh, across. We wanna impact, we wanna create a, a bigger impact …
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether a farmer with prime farmland could still receive state incentives for a solar plant.
▶ Watch at 1:37:03Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I'm looking on line 55, as said, a solar plant that is permitted after May 6th, 2026 is not eligible to receive state incentives. If the soil where the project is located is prime farmland, farmland, statewide importance. So if I own prime farmland and I am struggling as a farm to make ends meet, and I'd like to supplement my income by putting a solar plant there, I can't receive any state incentives because we've decided in the state that I can't get that. Is that what this bill does?
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether the bill would prevent converting farmland to other uses and whether the state should incentivize keeping farmland.
▶ Watch at 1:38:02Read what they said
Okay. But If I, and probably on a relative scale, it would be insignificant to you. Yeah. But, um, if I wanted to take that land and sell it and build condos and take away that farmland, there's nothing prevent me from doing that. This, this bill does not address any of that. No, it doesn't. But like, I still want the farmland, so wouldn't I wanna incentivize people to keep their farmland instead of just being like, I can't make ends meet here. I mean, I struggle with telling somebody what they can and can't do with their land. So,
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Expressed concern about open space and farmland and about landowners selling if they cannot make ends meet.
▶ Watch at 1:45:36Read what they said
Well, it's not really a question. I mean, I, I, as I look at this bill, I'm very concerned about open spaces. I, I, I look at what's happening in the state of Utah and I'm, I wanna keep all of our grazing land in our farmland available, but it makes me nervous that if someone is struggling on their land, that they can't make ends of meet, that they're like, forget it. We'll just sell it if I can't do what I want on it. And that's why I'm a little concerned about saying
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Said private individuals do this, but the concern is public spaces. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:46:13Read what they said
Okay. Uh, because there are private angels do individuals doing that, but like you said, we're talking about public spaces.
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Said she prefers solar on less productive land and wants to keep farmland for farming and grazing.
▶ Watch at 1:46:27Read what they said
Well, I, I would, I would prefer that we did our solar farms on places that weren't so arable and so, uh, lush for cows and grazing. Um, but I, I I, I, I nervous that like, somebody that can't make ends meet would just be like, well, we're justly. Absolutely. So that Was my concern. That is a concern. Yeah. I wanna keep our, I wanna keep our farm first. I wanna keep our land for farming and grazing. Well, Thank you for that. Yeah. So that was my concern when I asked that question.
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked about Farm Bureau membership and praised Salt Lake County farmers.
▶ Watch at 1:58:59Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, as a Farm Bureau member, are you guys farm Bureau members? $72. You can be a lifelong farm member. Salt Lake. Salt Lake County. No, I'm, I'm wearing Farm Farm Bureau socks today. I have Farm Bureau socks too. And I think you should all join the Farm Bureau because I met some really great Salt Lake County farmers, which, like I said this morning seems like an oxymoron statement, but we do have farmers here too, and we really appreciate what they're doing.
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Moved to pass HB 16 as amended out favorably to the full Senate.
▶ Watch at 1:59:22Read what they said
So, uh, I would like to send HB 16 solar panel plant amendments out with a recommendation to the full Senate Discussion. That motion saying none represented for summation.
H.B. 16 Solar Power Plant Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Described his decades of work with rural electric co-ops and support for the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:59:48Read what they said
No, but I Uintah work right outta college at the rural electric co-ops. And I've been serving the farm in ag areas for the last 39 years. And food may be more important to me than most anybody else, but we all depend on it. And, and I, and I appreciate your support on this bill.
S.B. 69 School Device Revisions · Senate floor debate (day 11) · Jan 30, 2026
Asks whether the bill's definition of emerging technology could restrict robotics and AI use in classrooms.
▶ Watch at 33:36Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President online. 68. It says, emerging technology at a school during school hours. Um, when you, we talk about emerging technology, uh, the definition includes robots and ai. Uh, would we be creating a policy that would not allow teachers and students to use robotics during the classroom time?
S.B. 69 School Device Revisions · Senate floor debate (day 11) · Jan 30, 2026
Raises concerns about students who need phones for safety and mental health, and asks whether parents could obtain an exception to let their child keep a phone.
▶ Watch at 34:34Read what they said
Yes. Thank you for that clarification. When I looked at top emerging technologies shaping 2026, the first list is saying AI and robotics. So I was just wondering if, uh, this could be, uh, misinterpreted and we could actually be hindering our ability to use emerging technology in our classrooms. Um, uh, i, in this bill, there is, uh, policies for schools to develop a procedure for students that are, um, needing access to their phones. Uh, I, I struggle with this bill because as I was listening to the radio on the way home, uh, I was listening to a, a mom who wrote a book about a tragedy that happened in her life. And, you know, she didn't …
S.B. 123 Privacy and Cybersecurity Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Moved to recommend SB 123 Privacy and Cybersecurity Amendments out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 40:09Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to, um, recommend s Senate Bill 1 23 Privacy and Cybersecurity Amendments out with a Favorable recommendation.
S.B. 123 Privacy and Cybersecurity Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Said the bill allows federal and private grant funds as well as state funds to go into the account, and that the substitute makes the account non-lapsing along with technical changes.
▶ Watch at 40:36Read what they said
Thank you. One thing I'd like to call out in, um, in this bill, it allows us if there are federal funds to still receive those private grants funding from other public entities as well as state dollars that puts in a fund. And the biggest change in the sub one is that we're making that the funds and that account non lapsing, besides other technical changes. Yep.
S.B. 186 Charter School Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Asks for written documentation of the claimed $25 million funding shortfall and asks whether Resource Education Service Agencies are available to charter schools.
▶ Watch at 49:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, where is this publication that says the State Board of Education calculations showed charter schools received approximately $25 million less? Is that a, a report somewhere that I can refer to? Uh, I don't think that they've written it down. I worked with the finance team at the Office of Education. I've been told it's, there was another bill last year, uh, that senator, that Representative Peterson ran that, that resolved some of the funding issues for small school districts. I've been told that because of that bill, this 25 million could actually be closer to 50. I can, I can ask the state board, um, finance team if they would put it in writing …
S.B. 186 Charter School Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Asks where the graph comparing charter and district school performance came from and says her own review of neighborhood schools did not show charter schools outperforming them.
▶ Watch at 52:45Read what they said
Thanks. And I just have one last question. Go ahead. This, uh, equal expectations required equitable support. This graph here that says Utah Charter Schools versus district, um, where, how did you come up with this graph? Because I'm very familiar with the data gateway, this graph, and, um, as I've looked at all of my neighborhood schools and I compare their scores, because I, I've done this frequently. I actually, uh, wrote a paper when I was getting my master's that talked about the, um, the scores of my local school districts and the scores of our neighborhood school districts. And I picked random spots. Like, I literally almost like threw a dart at a map. And I picked …
S.B. 186 Charter School Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Raises concerns about the $30 million fiscal note compared with the cost of Resource Education Service Agencies, and moves a substitute motion to table the bill until reports are received.
▶ Watch at 1:05:37Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm looking at this fiscal note of, uh, $30 million, and, um, when I looked in the budget really quickly for what our Reese's cost, it's a $2.1 million for four Reeses across the state. So that's, that's a big difference between equity of what we're doing for our public schools and what we're doing for a charter school potentially. Uh, on February 27th and 2018, Howard Stevensons had an article in the paper that said charter schools are not the, uh, we're not the, we were disappointing. I think that was the word that he used in that article. And Howard Stevenson was the person that ran the bulls to start charter schools. When …
S.B. 186 Charter School Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says the request is large in a lean budget year, describes charter schools in turnaround status and enrollment equity concerns, and asks for better data before acting.
▶ Watch at 1:11:02Read what they said
Thank you. As we are asking all of our districts and LEAs to cut their budgets by 5%, we are asking $30 million for our charter schools. They represent 10% of our population to 12. And, um, when I, there's one story that I'd like to share before I, uh, relinquish the microphone is, I, I work in neighborhood schools and we have a school where we had four kids from the same family. And I don't know, I think about this family all the time because it makes me wonder what's going on in our schools and how it's happening and how we, what we're doing. So there were four kids and they had one child with severe learning …
S.J.R. 8 Joint Resolution to Initiate a Law School at Utah Valley University · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Supports making legal education accessible and says the resolution is a good step toward informing people about their legal responsibilities.
▶ Watch at 1:44:42Read what they said
Thank you. I, um, especially like in the short title that we should make people, um, we should make legal education accessible to people. So, uh, in light of the last bill, that was great. I think this is a really great indication that we should make people aware of their legal responsibilities. So thank you. Getting volunteers from the Law school. Couldn't have said it better myself. Uh, okay. Any other, any other clarifying comments?
S.B. 56 Citizenship Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Moved to send SB 56, as amended, out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 1:51:10Read what they said
Thank you. I'd like to make a motion that we send Senate Bill 56 citizenship education amendments out with a favorable recommendation.
S.B. 56 Citizenship Education Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Urged support for SB 56, saying the bill would teach students practical skills such as safety, legal responsibilities, and financial wellbeing.
▶ Watch at 1:51:42Read what they said
Thank you, I, uh, appreciate that amendment. If that will get us over the finish line. Uh, I think students frequently say, why didn't I learn this in school? Uh, I have my own kids saying that to me. I have kids I work with saying that to me, and they're like, how come I didn't learn this in school? So we learn algebra, geometry, chemistry, phys ed, we learn all these things that really are, um, important. They are very important. But when we think about our kids' lives and their safety and their legal responsibilities and financial wellbeing, this is something that is super important to them. Uh, I know as a student in high school, if somebody …
S.B. 172 Airport and Air Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Asks how many days the notice period lasts, noting bill text that refers to eight days after notice is published.
▶ Watch at 49:08Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm, I saw that this said eight days on line, uh, 4 67 airport operator may not dispose of lost or mislead property until at least eight days after the day on which notice is published. So, I'm sorry, I might have missed that. How many days is it published for? 30 days?
S.B. 172 Airport and Air Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Asks whether the bill addresses the value of lost items and whether higher-value items are held longer, and asks the airport representative to introduce himself.
▶ Watch at 50:07Read what they said
And then also my secondary question, you can ruminate on it while I'm asking it. Um, you know, like a, a watch or a iPad or, uh, a ring or, um, earrings or, I don't know, smaller items that might have higher value as opposed to big bulkier items that might just be, um, sentimental. I wouldn't wanna, like, you know, say that her sentimental thing that's, you know, a big teddy bear isn't worth as much as a earring. Is there anything that talks about like, the potential value and maybe holding onto it longer and then being Yeah. So that's it. Yeah. We don't, go ahead. No. Yeah. Um, so the, would you introduce yourself First? Yeah.
S.B. 172 Airport and Air Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Asks how an owner would identify and claim an item from the online posting.
▶ Watch at 52:07Read what they said
That, that's, that's the only way you're going to identify your ring or not, right? Is, is pictures. So if I go on that website and I said, oh, I like that ring. That's mine. Well, there's a, I'm going straight to the nefarious. Sorry. Exactly. Yeah, you did. You, you you made a little beline there, but, Um, I'm like, oh, a little side hustle I got going on here. Uh, I guess that you can, if, uh, You'd have to say what airline you found it on, or would there be something
S.B. 172 Airport and Air Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Asks whether the bill says where sold items will go and whether a fund is created.
▶ Watch at 52:38Read what they said
So, and then is there anything in this bill? I was, just read it over quickly and is there anything that says where we're gonna sell it and where that money's gonna go once it's sold? Is there a fund that we're creating for We that's not, uh, listed in this bill?
S.B. 172 Airport and Air Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Asks where sold lost property would be sold and where the money would go.
▶ Watch at 53:19Read what they said
Um, so, I'm sorry, what was the question? What's the, I didn't see where we're gonna, where we're gonna sell this and where that money's gonna go to.
S.B. 172 Airport and Air Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Mentions a public surplus website and thanks the attorney for the answer.
▶ Watch at 54:57Read what they said
Oh, public surplus.com. That would be kind of fun. Have you ever looked@publicsurplus.com? That's a rabbit hole that you could spend a day on. So thank you. I appreciate your answer. Thank you, sir.
S.B. 151 Public Safety Funding Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Moved to pass the first substitute for S.B. 151 out favorably to the full Senate.
▶ Watch at 1:03:27Read what they said
Thank you. The Superior Senator will be making the motion. I would like to make a motion that SB 1 51 Public Safety Funding Amendments. Um, go to the full Senate with a positive recommendation. Okay. That's first substitute, right? First substitute.
S.B. 131 Charter School Eligibility · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asks whether students admitted under the preference are placed at the bottom of the lottery list or given priority.
▶ Watch at 41:31Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a follow up. Go ahead. So when they get on the list, are they still at the bottom of the list or they have like, preferential treatment?
S.B. 131 Charter School Eligibility · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asks whether this places those students in the same category as others on the list.
▶ Watch at 41:47Read what they said
Then people who live farther away. Seems like it puts it in the same category, right? I don't know. That's the question I'm asking. Yeah,
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked how the October 1 count approach would affect the current system and whether the bill described by the sponsor is the one before the committee.
▶ Watch at 52:23Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So when I'm looking at this section of code 53 F dash two dash 3 0 2, that was just amended in March 13th, 2024, and we kind of struggled with the October cutoff because we saw a little shell game with kids moving around a lot to make sure we got that October cutoff. Is this going to bring us back to what we were doing before then? Um, probably from that standpoint, it would make it even worse. Um, yeah, the, uh, if this were in place, the October 1st date would take increased rather than less importance. And I, and again, I think that gets to the point that, uh, the advantage of …
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Questioned why a bill that differs from the one described was brought forward before it was ready.
▶ Watch at 53:12Read what they said
and somebody that has been, you know, doing this a couple of years, I, um, I struggle with setting bills out that aren't ready. And I know that I have been the victim of that many times because people say this isn't ready for prime time. And the bill that you're mentioning is drastically different than the bill we see before us. So, um, why, why would you bring this bill to us today if it's drastically different than the one you just described?
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Moved a substitute motion to move the agenda until the bill is ready with more precise language.
▶ Watch at 58:31Read what they said
Thank you. I would like to make a substitute motion that we move the agenda until this bill is ready with better language, more precise language, I should say.
S.B. 62 School Finance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Said the bill is not ready, that it differs from what the sponsor described, and urged colleagues to vote to move the agenda.
▶ Watch at 1:00:07Read what they said
Thank you. Um, in education, what we really need is stability. We need continuity. And we just passed this law in 3 13 20 24 to bring that stability back. Uh, parents using their right to choose where to go are doing that. But it also makes it very difficult when you are operating large school districts and preparing for the next year. So this bill, as the good sponsor mentioned, takes away some of that stability. Um, as a senator here in the state of Utah, I have voted 90% of the bills across the aisle. And, uh, I, I always support good legislation, but I have many of my bills killed because they were not ready for prime …
S.B. 34 Public Education Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Sen. Riebe asked whether staff from the Utah Schools for the Deaf and the Blind or its advisory committee support moving oversight of the superintendent role, saying she is concerned about reduced advocacy.
▶ Watch at 1:12:55Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Madam Chair. Excuse me. I said, Mrs. Chair, I apologize, madam. Um, I did not, when this bill came to interim, it was a lot smaller. It had a lot less focus, and it, I had a lot focus. It focused on the lines 1 71 that talked about, um, moving the, uh, superintendent of the schools for the deaf and the blind to be, um, part of the state superintendent and the role of the superintendent for the school, for the deaf and the blind, and to another employee of the state board. So not, this says that we will no longer have a superintendent that, uh, is over the schools for the deaf and …
S.B. 34 Public Education Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Sen. Riebe asked whether the interim superintendent has given up his assessment oversight role.
▶ Watch at 1:15:47Read what they said
Not really. Okay. Um, I'm a big fan of Darren Nielsen. I think he's amazing. But did he relinquish his, um, position as being over assessment?
S.B. 34 Public Education Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Sen. Riebe asked the Utah Schools for the Deaf and the Blind to tell her whether they support the change and asked what the difference is between the Catalyst Center grant and the APEX grant.
▶ Watch at 1:16:18Read what they said
Um, well, I, I, I would ask that the us uh, the Utah State for the, the Utah School for the Deaf and the blind would reach out to me and tell me whether they support this or not, because this isn't alarming. It seems really, um, not in the best interest for those students as a school teacher, I've seen that they frequently that's okay, are forgotten about, and they don't get the resources they need while they're in schools that are outside of school for the deaf and the blind. And when we think about the school for the deaf and the blind, it's not just that building. They actually are supposed to advocate for every kid who …
S.B. 34 Public Education Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Sen. Riebe asked whether the APEX grant definition and the funding source change in the bill would affect the Carson Smith and SOEP funding.
▶ Watch at 1:22:18Read what they said
Thank you. Um, looking on lines 3 37 all the way down to lines, uh, 4 0 6. So this is the same definition that we had for the Catalyst grant, and now we're just replicating it for the Apex Grant. Yes. Okay. It's just changing the name. Okay. Just making sure that no one's losing their funding. And the last question I have is on line 4 57, we crossed out 53 E dash three dash 5 0 7, and we replaced it with 53 F dash five dash 2224. So in 53 E three, that money goes to Carson Smith and SOEP, and we crossed that out. And now this 53 F oh, would that change where the …
S.B. 34 Public Education Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Sen. Riebe said she will take her remaining questions about the grant offline.
▶ Watch at 1:24:15Read what they said
Thank you. And, uh, Mr. Darren Nielsen's always been a Helper, and whenever I've needed help, I've always sought out for him and his Mr. Rogers. So I appreciate Darren for your questions, but I'll ans I'll listen to those questions offline. Thank you. Thank You.
S.B. 34 Public Education Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Sen. Riebe said she would work on her questions but will vote no because she is concerned about taking money from suicide prevention.
▶ Watch at 1:29:33Read what they said
I do. I, my son. Um, I, um, I, I'm willing to work with you on those questions that I've asked, but I really do believe that suicide prevention money isn't super important. We have the largest rate of suicide in the nation with some of our peers, um, to the northwest, east and south. So, uh, I, I would be willing to support this bill and work with you on those other changes. But with the money taking away from suicide prevention, I'm gonna have to be a No thank you.
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asks about the fiscal note, where the 1.25 percent fee goes, and who was on the working group, and says the public should be heard on the bill.
▶ Watch at 2:08:19Read what they said
Yes, I have numerous questions, but I'm just gonna ask like two or three right now. Um, so there's no fiscal note on this bill yet, so we don't know much it's gonna cost us. Um, but there is a fee that is opposed, um, 1.25% of a total cost for all public school construction. So, um, where would that, that fee would go into a fund that DFCM administers, where would that fee go to? So the fee would cover all of the oversight provisions in the bill include with the most of it being plan review, the initial process, we were looking at plans, issuing a permit, and then to cover the cost of inspections. Thank you. Um, …
S.B. 164 School Construction Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
States that she will vote no and suggests making the bill an opt-in option for districts.
▶ Watch at 2:51:07Read what they said
I will still be voting no, but I would suggest maybe we make it an opt-in possibility. And, um, see who wants to partake in this process.
S.B. 152 Public and Higher Education Collaboration · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Moved to send SB 152 as amended to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 2:57:34Read what they said
Thank you. I would like us to, uh, send Senate Bill 1 52 public and higher education collaboration out with a favorable recommendation to the full Senate as as amended. Thank you.
S.B. 77 Dual Language Immersion Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked why the test is changing and what the reason is.
▶ Watch at 3:01:53Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had a few people reach out to me asking why we are changing the test. Is, is there a change in the test right now that we, and what's the reason behind it?
S.B. 77 Dual Language Immersion Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Moved to delete and replace the bill text with the first substitute.
▶ Watch at 3:03:22Read what they said
I move to delete and title Body Senate bill 0 0 7 7 Dual Language Immersion Amendments. And replace it with Sub one First substitute. Thank you. No sub one. Just kidding.
S.B. 167 Reintegration for Disciplined Students · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Asked whether the bill would work with a similar bill by Senator Owens or hinder it.
▶ Watch at 3:07:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I know Senator Owens has a bill similar to this, that, um, would create a policy that would, um, uh, tell other districts that a student was integrating that had a difficulty in another district. Would this bill help hinder? Would it work in conjunction or you don't see them affecting each other at all?
S.B. 167 Reintegration for Disciplined Students · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Pointed to a line in the bill about integration plans for students who committed serious offenses and noted it overlaps with Senator Owens's bill.
▶ Watch at 3:08:40Read what they said
Thank you. I'm looking at line 11 that says integration plans, requirements for students have committed serious offenses. And that's basically what his bill is, so, yeah.
S.B. 167 Reintegration for Disciplined Students · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Moved to adopt Amendment 2 to the bill after some back-and-forth over the amendment's wording.
▶ Watch at 3:09:04Read what they said
Well, you've got the mic. Um, amendment two. Sure. Second amendment. I would like to de delete and title and bo body 1 67 reintegration of disciplined students. Wait A sec. Sorry. Just as amended. Oh, As amended. Oh, I'm sorry. Amendment two. We just need to move Amendment two. Oh, I'd like to move amendment two. I'm sorry. It's getting late. Thank
S.B. 167 Reintegration for Disciplined Students · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Moved to recommend SB 167 as amended to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 3:11:45Read what they said
I would like that to make a motion that we recommend SB 1 67 reintegration of discipline students to the full Senate with a favorable recommendation As amended. As amended. Okay. The motions on the table, uh, to recommend SB 1 67 as amended to the full body of the Senate.
S.B. 167 Reintegration for Disciplined Students · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Made a lighthearted remark during discussion.
▶ Watch at 3:13:10Read what they said
Uh, I'd like to just add, you should see the bald spot from, just kidding. I don't wanna look. I'm afraid to look. Wave.
S.B. 104 School Medication Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Moves to send SB 104 out with a favorable recommendation.
▶ Watch at 3:30:53Read what they said
I'd like to make a motion that we send out Senate bill 1 0 4 out with a favorable recommendation. Okay. So the motion is to send out SB 1 0 4 with a favorable recommendation. And so we'll come back some, uh, I'll waive and thank you.
S.B. 134 Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Says constituents support the Supreme Court and asks whether the sponsor would support all judiciary funding requests and oppose adding Supreme Court justices.
▶ Watch at 23:32Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I have received a lot of emails about this bill over the weekend as well. And, um, my constituency really supports what the Supreme Court has done, and they have been the, um, the branch of the government that they feel is really holding back some of the more, um, unconstitutional things going forward. And so we have Utah fits all. We have Prop four, and we also had a Planned Parenthood ruling that went in contrary to some of the bills that came out of here. So when I think about my constituency and that the legislature has the ability to do this, and that we should be doing this, we should also be doing it …
S.B. 134 Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Asks whether there is evidence that Supreme Court cases were not heard in a timely way and says lower courts need resources.
▶ Watch at 26:29Read what they said
Yes, thank you, Mr. President. So in those 61 cases that you just mentioned, do, is there anything that says that they weren't heard in a timely fashion? Because I think our Supreme Court justices are doing what they need to be doing, and they're doing it as, as diligently as possible. I think it's the lower courts that we actually need to start spending our resources on. So is there anything that indicates that they weren't hearing their courts in a timely fashion?
S.B. 52 Substitute Teaching Requirements Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 7) · Jan 26, 2026
Explains a no vote, saying she voted yes in committee but now believes the bill removes guardrails on hiring unlicensed substitutes, which could most affect rural and low-income students, and that she would support it with more safeguards requiring efforts to find a licensed teacher.
▶ Watch at 46:10Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I'd like to explain my vote. I voted for this in committee hearing because, um, my fellow teacher constituents, the, I'm sorry, the big groups that Vote for Education said that they supported this bill. But there was a young lady in the committee that was very compelling, and she was saying that as a high school student, she has received lots of really bad, um, people who are just filling in. And she says, as the classes got harder, it was harder and harder to find people to fit that role. And I, I understand the point of this bill. I really do. And I've seen it work in some schools, but I've also …
S.B. 134 Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Asks whether funding can prioritize the lower appellate courts over additional Supreme Court justices, citing constituent concerns.
▶ Watch at 40:46Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. Will the sponsor yield to questions? Senator Wilson, will you yield? Yes, go ahead, Senator Evie. Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I have been contacted by many constituents about this bill. Uh, they recognize the need for the appellate courts to have more staff and more support, and I am very supportive of that. They have indicated to me that they are concerned about the Supreme Court being, um, extended. So, um, I'm a little torn between how we are going to fund this in such a lean year. And if we are, um, if we could prioritize funding the appellate court over the Supreme Court justices, my constituents would be, uh, more amicable to that. …
S.B. 134 Court Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Says constituents are concerned about packing the Supreme Court and that she is struggling to meet both needs.
▶ Watch at 41:56Read what they said
Thank you. Um, like I said, my, my constituents are very concerned with, um, and this is from their words, from packing the Supreme Court with what the 10, with the tension we've had lately. So I'm, I'm struggling with how, uh, I can meet both those needs with my constituents. Thank you.
S.B. 91 Motor Vehicle Registration Services Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Asked whether the fee distribution described in the bill is new or existing code.
▶ Watch at 14:21Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm looking on line, uh, 50 and the distribution described in subsection three A, is that new to this part bill or is that there the
S.B. 91 Motor Vehicle Registration Services Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Asked whether the distribution method is the same as in the previous version of the bill.
▶ Watch at 14:57Read what they said
And, uh, we were always distributing it the same way in the previous tempation of this bill, or is that kind of new to this one? Uh,
S.C.R. 3 Concurrent Resolution Regarding Nuclear Weapons Testing · Senate Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environment Committee · Jan 22, 2026
Presented S.C.R. 3, which asks to continue the state's position against nuclear weapons testing, citing health concerns from past testing and the reliability of the stockpile without testing.
▶ Watch at 1:36:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, this is a resolution that is asking us to continue the good work that we're doing. Uh, we have a, um, a message, um, a request that we commit to anti-nuclear testing resolution. We have a lot of, uh, good legislation in place and a lot of good rules. And a program that has determined, created and maintained the reliability without testing our nuclear weapons. And, you know, as we've looked into the past, we've seen some serious health concerns from testing in the past. And so we have 25 years of good, um, stewardship of these weapons. And we'd like to be the leader in protecting our citizens from unnecessary exposure. So the resolution's …
S.B. 101 Specialized Product Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 3) · Jan 22, 2026
Riebe thanks Fillmore for the resolution and shares that September 11 was her first day as a teacher in Utah, and that the resolution honors people important to her.
▶ Watch at 53:18Read what they said
Thank you Mr. President. I would just like to take an opportunity to thank Senator Fillmore for running this bill. Uh, nine 11 was my very first day as a teacher in the state of Utah. And, uh, as I was watching TV getting ready to go to work, I was thinking about my brother, who's a port authority cop, my neighbors who are police officers and firemen. And so it really is really close to my heart that you are taking the time to honor the people that, um, are near and dear to me. And, uh, I just really appreciate that. So thank you for running this resolution.
S.B. 17 Credit Card Processing Fees Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said she likes the idea but is concerned about fees for lower-income students and suggested that cash discounts should come with fee reductions; she said she would vote no for now.
▶ Watch at 43:45Read what they said
Thank you. I'm, uh, Noah on this bill too. I, I like the idea of it, but when I start thinking about our lower income students trying to budget properly, having those extra fees is really problematic when you are really on a tight budget. Um, and then also, uh, to the point that Senator Fillmore made, you know, providing a cash discount like many other stores. And, um, gas stations do this as well, that if you're going to be making something cheaper by not getting those fees, you should have that taken off your fee as well. So I think there's some avenues to explore here, but, um, right now I'm a no
S.B. 51 School Safety Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Moves to replace the bill text with the first substitute, SB 51 Part Two.
▶ Watch at 47:41Read what they said
I'm rusty at this too, but I'd like to delete and title and Body Senate bill 51 school safety modifications and replace it with Senate bill 51 part two. Is it first substitute? First Substitute. First substitute. There we go. 2.0.
S.B. 51 School Safety Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Says she likes the bill but raises concerns about classroom implementation and asks whether schools could face liability if records are not checked quickly enough and whether students should be responsible for their records.
▶ Watch at 53:44Read what they said
Thank you. Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate all the work you're doing. I like this bill. Um, but when we think about some of the things that are happening in our schools, they sound really great on paper, and then when we actually try to implement them, they're really difficult. Uh, I'm getting a few emails about door stops. You know, having a third grade classroom where you have to keep the door completely open or locked is really problematic for every teacher across the whole entire state, because in, on paper it sounds good, but when you actually try to teach a class and have the door completely opened or completely locked, it's very disruptive. So this …
S.B. 51 School Safety Modifications · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks a follow-up question about protecting districts from accountability for missed records within set time limits and how to make records clearly visible, then asks the chief to respond.
▶ Watch at 56:44Read what they said
May I have a follow up? Yeah, go ahead. Um, I, I, and IEPs are missed and so are, um, some other things in the school districts that I'm representing, this does happen more because there's more gang activity. Uh, so I, I like the spill. I really think it's a great, um, step in the right direction. But I, I would like to see that there's some kind of protections for our districts not to be held accountable for, you know, 24 hours, 48 hours. Um, how do we protect our districts from saying, look, the law says you were supposed to see that right away. And, um, I'm not trying to protect bad actors. I'm not trying to …
S.B. 69 School Device Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asked whether every district must have a waiver process that lets parents decide whether their child may have a cell phone.
▶ Watch at 1:05:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so when you say that each school district can create their own policy, um, I, I would like to see that there is a waiver that is required for every district to allow the parent to decide if they'd like their kid to have a cell phone. Is there a requirement for a waiver for every district?
S.B. 69 School Device Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Opposed the bill, citing parents' choice, student safety, communication needs of English learners and low-income families, and asked that a waiver be required.
▶ Watch at 1:06:00Read what they said
Thank you. Um, I, for one, trust parents and parents are buying their kids these phones. So these are, um, some of my concerns. We just heard a bill about school safety that, you know, we recognize that there's a problem with violence in our schools. If you have a student that feels threatened or they feel uncomfortable at school, their phone is their lifeline. And, uh, this was brought to me by kids. I actually had a mock trial in this classroom, in this room, talking about the cell phones. And, um, kids were saying that when they feel suicidal, they feel alone. Their phone is something that they can rely on with the safe UTF to either report …
S.B. 69 School Device Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asked whether the bill covers students who have medical devices tied to school. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:09:13Read what they said
I, I, I'm just curious, is, is there something in there for kids that, that have medical devices that areti tied to their school Line? 76. Okay. Thank you. I just wanna make sure you said that.
S.B. 69 School Device Revisions · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Explained her opposition, saying school districts can act without a law and that low-income and refugee families may need phones and be less able to advocate.
▶ Watch at 1:29:42Read what they said
Yes. I, you know, I, I'm not saying that we should have cell phones in our school and I think that's, um, a misconception when I think about all the ways that we can eliminate, um, people that are allowed to have their phones, they are addressed on line 72 to line 76. But when you think about families that are low income or come from refugee status, or come from a situation where they don't have the ability to advocate for themselves, they, they might not fit into this category. Um, I believe it's heavy handed. I believe that school districts can do this without a law. And, um, I just feel like, you know, as a democrat, small …
S.B. 119 School and Classroom Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks whether the bill is effectively moving money from one education account to another, and how that affects the funding that would otherwise be covered by law.
▶ Watch at 1:35:58Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. President. I'm, uh, I'm Mr. Chair. I'm looking at the fiscal note, and someone described this to me as a shell game. Um, and that's what, when we talked about, I'm like, oh, okay. So the economic stabilization restricted account is already an account that is for education, and we're going to move some of that money out of that account, I guess, because it says that we are going to see that, um, may reduce the uniform school fund expenditures. So are we moving it from one account to the other and then not getting the money that was from the stabilization account, because this is now covering something that we were supposed to be covering …
S.B. 119 School and Classroom Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks whether the new authority to use the stabilization fund is limited to this year or would continue indefinitely.
▶ Watch at 1:38:14Read what they said
Thanks. May I have a follow up? Go ahead. So you mentioned that it's this year, but is this bill have parameters for just this year? Or is this gonna go on forever? As a new, as a new statute,
S.B. 119 School and Classroom Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks whether the change is consistent with the original purpose of the stabilization fund, which was to protect education funding when revenue falls.
▶ Watch at 1:38:44Read what they said
Thank You. And in that way, it really is consistent with the spirit of what we were doing anyway, right? When this was drafted, we thought, well, if there's an economic downturn, and we, you know, that means we're gonna collect less money. We need to have a way to be able to fund education. And that's why this was created here.
S.B. 119 School and Classroom Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asks how the bill's Utah curriculum would differ from the existing Utah core curriculum and online resources.
▶ Watch at 1:39:29Read what they said
Um, student materials and resources, including and creating a Utah curriculum. We already have a Utah core curriculum. We don't follow the Common Core. We already have a Utah core. How would this be different than what we already have? I mean, I, I'm on the UEN website all the time. Um, I look at all the resources there. I'm kind of curious why school districts even buy textbooks anymore with all the materials available online. So how would this book this bill change the fact that we already have a Utah court,
S.B. 119 School and Classroom Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Says the education community repeatedly asks the Legislature not to pass certain bills, and states she will vote no.
▶ Watch at 1:48:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, year after year, I come up here. I got involved as an educator, and, um, we have our education community come up to the microphone and ask us not to do things. And every year we vote against what the education community asks, the superintendents, the business associations, the school boards, all of these people are in their schools nonstop every day trying to make ends meet. And they ask us not to pass these bills or to pass the bills. Um, we look at education and we say that we're not succeeding at the rate we should be succeeding. And yet we have hundreds of bills micromanaging us and unfunded mandates. And so as …
S.B. 75 Educator Salary Adjustment Eligibility · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Thanks the sponsor and cites a national student-to-nurse ratio and Utah's ratio, then asks whether anything in the bill requires an increase in nurses in schools.
▶ Watch at 2:05:53Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, thank you for running this bill. This is very important. The, uh, national average for a student to nurse ratio is one to 750 kids. That's what the average recommended, um, ratio is in the state of Utah. It's one nurse for every 2,700 to 2,800 kids. I, I personally have been working on trying to get more nurses in school since I was on the state school board. And so thank you for running this bill. It's super, it's important for our kids to have someone that they can rely on to help them with their medical needs. So thank you. I, I, I have, I I have one question that I, I I'm …
S.B. 75 Educator Salary Adjustment Eligibility · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Shares a personal story about a school nurse handling a student's COVID test, praises the constituent-to-legislator process that led to the bill, and thanks the chair and committee.
▶ Watch at 2:07:06Read what they said
So the, the, the nice nurse that came up and spoke, my son was an athlete too during COVID. Um, in, in his mind, uh, um, positive was good. And so he Uintah a wrestling tournament and came back and took the golden nurse, gave him a test, and she brought him outta class, or he got sent to the office because he coughed in class. And he went down there and they tested him, and he came back positive. And she says, son, I have to tell you you're positive. And, and he says, oh, that's good. Right? Of course, the school nurse had to explain in, in her sweet manner and did so to let him know he …
S.B. 52 Substitute Teaching Requirements Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asked whether an LEA could give the substitute a locally specific license to become a licensed teacher.
▶ Watch at 2:12:31Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, could the LEA give that substitute an la specific LEA specific license and therefore become a licensed teacher?
S.B. 52 Substitute Teaching Requirements Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said the flexibility is appealing but worried the bill could leave some schools without licensed teachers, and said she will vote no.
▶ Watch at 2:12:53Read what they said
Okay. So, um, in theory, I love this. I love that scenario you just described. Um, I work at schools like that. Uh, I work at East Side Schools where lots of parents are leaving six figure jobs to stay with their kids and be in their schools and, um, even, you know, five figure jobs. But I also work in schools where we have kids that are not being, um, met with the same robust paraeducators, and they also are not met with the same types of people in their classrooms. And when I see legislation like this, it helps people that have a lot, but sometimes hurts people that don't have a lot. So I, I do appreciate …
S.B. 88 School Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Asked whether the bill's zero fiscal note reflects the added monitoring burden on school districts.
▶ Watch at 2:31:49Read what they said
Thank you. Um, Mr. Chair, I'm looking at the fiscal note and it says that this is zero. Um, as somebody who has monitored technology in a school, um, do you think this is going to increase the burden of that for school districts?
S.B. 88 School Technology Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said she will vote no because districts are being asked to cut budgets and do more with less.
▶ Watch at 2:33:10Read what they said
Thank you. Um, we are asking our school districts to cut their budgets by 5%, and then we're asking them to do more with less. So, um, I don't know what the school districts are going to be, uh, voting on this as, but, uh, right now I am going to be a no because we are asking our school districts to do more with less. So thank you.
S.B. 58 Public School Attendance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Riebe questions how competency-based learner validated programs fit within an attendance bill.
▶ Watch at 2:43:41Read what they said
Thank, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so I'm looking at line 82. The learner validated program means an education program specific, specifically designed for competency based or self-based learning. It seems almost contrary that we have like a competency based pacing in an attendance bill. I mean, if attendance is required for seat time, would that person then be, um, excluded from the attendance amendments, or is their attendance completely modified because they're just going through a program
S.B. 58 Public School Attendance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Riebe asks what attendance would mean for a student in a learner validated program who is not progressing with proficiency.
▶ Watch at 2:44:49Read what they said
Thank You. Thanks. So for clarification, if they are supposed to be, if they're supposed to be moving through this program or a learning, um, sorry, a learning validated program, and they're not moving through it with proficiency and you're not really talking about their C time, it just seems, what would the attendance be for?
S.B. 58 Public School Attendance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Riebe asks how attendance would change for a student who does not pass a competency-based class.
▶ Watch at 2:45:46Read what they said
So they would then continue enrollment measurements. Uh, like, so when you say 89 to 93, what would be the difference? They didn't pass the class even though it was supposed to be a competency BA class. So they would, how would this change the attendance A, B, C, and D? I don't understand that.
S.B. 58 Public School Attendance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Riebe raises concern that students who fail funded online programs could still be counted as completing or attending.
▶ Watch at 2:47:00Read what they said
So if you are someone in this program and you don't succeed through it, and we are, we are funding it, because if it's like a online program and you're getting a WPU for it, but no one's successfully finishing it, you're still gonna say that they've actually completed the course even though they failed. And that every LEA, even though that LEA might be failing kids at a high rate, they're still gonna get that as at a positive attendance rate.
S.B. 58 Public School Attendance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Riebe asks whether an LEA with poor results could write its own policy that still reports positive attendance.
▶ Watch at 2:47:36Read what they said
But the a, the LEA might be the one that's having the problem. So if you have a school district, a an LEA that's not succeeding, they're gonna write their own policy.
S.B. 58 Public School Attendance Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Riebe says the policy could create a gap that lets a school report attendance without meaningful instruction, and suggests more work on that part.
▶ Watch at 2:47:53Read what they said
Okay. I see that as a big hole that we could have a nefarious group create a school that doesn't really do anything, and people fail and like, oh, they showed up. So I, I, I struggle with that part of that. So maybe we can work on that. Thank you. Thank you.
S.C.R. 2 Concurrent Resolution Concerning Remembrances of the 25th Anniversary of the 9/11 Attacks · Senate Education Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Thanked the sponsor and shared that she started teaching in Utah on September 11, 2001, and spoke of friends and family affected by the attacks.
▶ Watch at 2:52:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I wanna thank you for running this bill. This day was the very first day that I started teaching in Utah. I started my job as a teacher driving to work, thinking about my family members that are police officers and firefighters in New York City. Uh, I appreciate this bill because I did lose friends that day. Uh, I've lost friends to, um, suicide, uh, people lost their careers, people dealing with PTSD health related activities from this horrific event. And so, um, I do really appreciate this, and it, it is hard for me to think about how infrequently, infrequently we think about this day. And so, uh, I just wanna say thank …
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.