Legislators / Troy Shelley
Troy Shelley
Republican · House District 66
Hear from them directly
Contact Rep. Troy Shelley
- Email: tshelley@le.utah.gov
- Phone: (435) 691-6000
- Office: P O Box 393, Ephraim, UT, 84627
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.
Troy Shelley serves on:
- Natural Resources, Agriculture, and Environmental Quality Appropriations Subcommittee
- House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee
- House Public Utilities and Energy Committee
- Economic Development and Workforce Services Interim Committee
- Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Interim Committee
- Native American Legislative Liaison Committee
What they've said
265 remarks on 78 billsH.B. 493 Consumer Products Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says manufacturers became neutral after changes requiring labeling of intentionally added ingredients, with 18 months to update box labels and six months for QR code labels, and listing chemicals such as dioxin, PFAS, arsenic, lead, and cadmium; says the bill passed unanimously in the Senate.
▶ Watch at 21:44Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, when we took this bill over to the Senate, we worked with the manufacturers and when we passed the seventh substitute, the manufacturers were all neutral and um, what we did is we made it so that they only had to, um, label the intentionally added ingredients and so that they would have 18 months to change their labels if they were on the box and they would have six months to change their labels if they were using a QR code on the box that linked to their website. Um, and they, they only have to list the chemicals if they're present in intentionally added ingredients and the chemicals that they need to list …
S.B. 252 Water Usage at State-owned Facilities Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks the floor sponsor to yield for a question.
▶ Watch at 32:21Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield Representative Koford, will you yield to a
S.B. 252 Water Usage at State-owned Facilities Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Asks where the bill limits its application to the Salt Lake Basin, since it does not appear to contain such an exemption.
▶ Watch at 32:28Read what they said
Thank you. As, as I read through this bill, I didn't see an, or a exemption where it was just the, uh, the, the basin, the Salt Lake, or to create Salt Lake Basin. Can you show me where that's at or specific to that area?
S.B. 201 Shelter Animal Euthanasia Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Moves the previous question to end debate.
▶ Watch at 1:53:14Read what they said
call The question, previous question has been called, which has the effect of any debate?
H.B. 444 State Land Access Road Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the change is a single line edit requiring the DWR to coordinate with the counties before closing a road.
▶ Watch at 2:13:34Read what they said
in order. I speak to it. Yes. This, uh, is just one little, uh, line change instead of, uh, the DWR uh, um, in consultation with the counties, they need to coordinate with the counties before they close the road.
H.B. 357 Amendments to Motor Vehicle Data Privacy · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the Senate amendments extend the compliance timeline for motor vehicle manufacturers, exempt vehicles that are not technologically capable of compliance, and move the posting of privacy information to the Motor Vehicle Division website.
▶ Watch at 2:55:05Read what they said
Yes. Um, we just extended the timeline for compliance for the motor vehicle manufacturers and we removed vehicles from that are not technologically capable of compliance from, um, from the requirement to comply and we changed the posting of the privacy information to the motor vehicle, uh, division website.
S.B. 181 School Discipline Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says seclusion rooms are traumatic for children and wishes there were other options, but appreciates the added guardrails in the bill.
▶ Watch at 3:12:28Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, so I, I Uintah some schools in my area who have seclusion rooms. I, I appreciate the sponsor bringing this forward 'cause it does put guardrails around them. I think that when, when kids are put in a seclusion room, particularly in the elementary school, um, that's gonna be their memory. It's, they're, they're not gonna remember all the other things. They're gonna be, remember being locked up in a room. And, and I just, I I dearly wish there was other options than these seclusion rooms, um, just, just because they're, they're so traumatic for the kids. But I do appreciate the sponsor and putting the guardrails around that. I wish, I wish we …
S.B. 181 School Discipline Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says he appreciates the guardrails but is concerned that seclusion rooms are traumatic for students and wishes there were other options.
▶ Watch at 3:12:28Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, so I, I Uintah some schools in my area who have seclusion rooms. I, I appreciate the sponsor bringing this forward 'cause it does put guardrails around them. I think that when, when kids are put in a seclusion room, particularly in the elementary school, um, that's gonna be their memory. It's, they're, they're not gonna remember all the other things. They're gonna be, remember being locked up in a room. And, and I just, I I dearly wish there was other options than these seclusion rooms, um, just, just because they're, they're so traumatic for the kids. But I do appreciate the sponsor and putting the guardrails around that. I wish, I wish we …
S.B. 254 Extracted Natural Resources Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Moves to circle the bill and says a short delay is needed to get the bill right.
▶ Watch at 25:01Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Motion to circle. Thank you, representative. That motion is in order. Uh, would you like to speak to that? Yeah, I, I think it would be very short order to be able to, uh, to just address this issue so that we make sure we get it right.
S.B. 254 Extracted Natural Resources Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says a short circle would help make sure the bill is right.
▶ Watch at 25:09Read what they said
Yeah, I, I think it would be very short order to be able to, uh, to just address this issue so that we make sure we get it right.
S.B. 254 Extracted Natural Resources Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says the fix would be quick and supports circling the bill.
▶ Watch at 28:06Read what they said
Uh, yes. I, I concur with the, uh, good representative from ENA County. I think it's a very quick fix. We just need to make sure we get it right.
S.B. 254 Extracted Natural Resources Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Agrees with the motion to circle, calling it a quick fix that needs to be done right.
▶ Watch at 28:06Read what they said
Uh, yes. I, I concur with the, uh, good representative from ENA County. I think it's a very quick fix. We just need to make sure we get it right.
H.B. 46 Taxpayer Information Sharing Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says the bill restructures a sentence in its text and asks for members' support.
▶ Watch at 1:20:38Read what they said
I would. Colleagues, we've all had those English teachers who love to use the red pen. This is no different. It's just a restructure of a sentence. That was perfectly fine. But, uh, they live among us, so I encourage your support. Thank you, Representative Shelley.
S.B. 209 Gooseberry Narrows State Park Study · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Shelley describes the bill as a study of the Gooseberry Narrows State Park site that does not designate a dam or park, and says the study would examine the site, a federal land trade, and what a dam would require.
▶ Watch at 1:40:45Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. So what this is, is a, uh, is a study for the Gooseberry narrow State Park. Um, it, it does not designate a new dam. It does not designate a new park. It just allows the state park to explore whether or not this is a good location for a state park. Now, make no mistake, the idea of having a dam here and having the water available is, is part of this. We, we need the state park and we need the water. Um, this is, this, uh, study will also explore whether or not trading a small piece of federal acreage for another piece of, of state acreage in a different location …
S.B. 209 Gooseberry Narrows State Park Study · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Shelley says the study costs $5,000 with no fiscal note, and State Parks determined it could absorb the expense.
▶ Watch at 1:45:23Read what they said
Uh, it's, this study is $5,000. The physical note is zero. The state parks, uh, determined that they could absorb that expense.
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.