Legislators / Jordan D. Teuscher
Jordan D. Teuscher
Republican · House District 44 · House Rules Chair
Hear from them directly
Contact Rep. Jordan D. Teuscher
- Email: jteuscher@le.utah.gov
- Phone: 801-810-6170
- Office: 3731 W South Jordan Pkwy, Suite 102-323, South Jordan, UT, 84009-5634
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.
Jordan D. Teuscher serves on:
- Economic and Community Development Appropriations Subcommittee
- House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee
- House Ethics Committee
- House Political Subdivisions Committee
- House Rules Committee
- Economic Development and Workforce Services Interim Committee
- Political Subdivisions Interim Committee
- Utah Commission on Uniform State Laws
What they've said
315 remarks on 75 billsH.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says the Senate change gives a few small special service districts with less than a million dollars in revenue an extra year to become compliant with the electronic form submission requirements.
▶ Watch at 15:01Read what they said
I would. Um, this is a small change that, uh, I actually asked the Senate to make. After working with the special service districts, they found that there are a few small special service districts with less than a million dollars in revenue and they just needed a little more time to be able to make sure all their forms can be, um, received and sent electronically. So we just granted them, uh, um, an extra year to be able to come compliant with the law and that is the change.
S.B. 257 Domestic Relations Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Moves a substitute for the bill.
▶ Watch at 59:15Read what they said
Er pleasure. Uh, thank you Mr. Speaker Peram, uh, I'd like to move the, uh, is it first substitute the fourth, fourth substitute to Senate bill 2 57,
S.B. 257 Domestic Relations Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the substitute adds a child support calculation change covering social security disability insurance, which had been in a separate bill that passed unanimously.
▶ Watch at 59:34Read what they said
I would, um, colleagues, as I, uh, was talking with the good sponsor of this legislation and her great work on this bill, um, I had a similar bill that dealt with, um, child support calculations. Just changed a tiny little line that ensured that, um, social security disability insurance was included. This was running in a separate bill throughout the process that had gone through unanimously through this body and also through Senate Committee. But we thought rather than take up extra time on the floor, why don't we just put this in this bill because it was dealing with the same subject. So that's what you see in the sub in the, um, substitute. Thank you.
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Presents S.B. 292, which creates three new causes of action for accidents involving driverless vehicles: a strict liability claim capped at $100,000, a product liability claim capping non-economic damages at $1 million, and a manufacturer and developer liability claim, with a 2030 sunset review.
▶ Watch at 1:03:06Read what they said
Thank, thank you madam. Um, chair or madam, uh, speaker Pro tem, uh, really excited to talk about this, uh, this bill, as many of you have seen as you've visited other, um, cities where you have autonomous vehicles, those that are completely driving themselves around, and the the new types of technologies that are coming to our state. Um, as we've looked at our current laws to allow for this growth into the state of Utah, we found that, uh, many of our current liability framework was built around human drivers and traditional negligence principles that don't necessarily work when you don't have any sort of driver within the car. And so we've spent a, a fair amount of …
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains the $100,000 cap applies only to the strict liability claim, that the other claims have no cap on actual damages, and that wrongful death claims are not capped.
▶ Watch at 1:09:10Read what they said
No. Um, uh, thank you for the question. Uh, like I said, there is this, this sort of strict liability and if they decide to pursue that cause of action, which is, is really simple, again, you just have to prove that the the car was in driverless operation and they caused the injury, that's where you have the cap. But if you have damages that exceed that, you wouldn't go after that claim. You would go after either the, the Utah Product Liability Act claim, or this new manufacturer and developer liability claim in either of those claims. There is no cap whatsoever on actual damages. So all of your medical bills, anything else that would happen. And certainly …
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains the manufacturer and developer claim requires proof of a reasonable alternative design and more injuries than human drivers, and describes the damage limits for each claim.
▶ Watch at 1:10:56Read what they said
Thank you for the question. Um, so again, what you see there in, in 3 73 to 3 75 is under this new cause of action that doesn't exist today. So this is actually setting up a new ability for someone to sue, uh, underneath, uh, or, or bring a claim against these autonomous vehicles, um, for a manufacturer and develop developer liability. Now, it is a high bar, again, the, the bar there has to, you'd have to prove beyond a preponderance of the evidence that a reasonable alternative design existed and that the vehicle caused more injuries in the accurate then other human drivers. Now if, if you can prove that, then that would be the claim that …
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says the claim can be brought by an individual and targets companies that do not meet federal safety standards, while companies that meet those standards receive a presumption of safety that plaintiffs must overcome.
▶ Watch at 1:12:13Read what they said
No. Um, um, madam, uh, speaker pro tem, this, this could be done on a single claim. This does not actually contemplate a class action suit. You certainly could bring a class action lawsuit, but this is, this is set up for an individual to bring a claim underneath this, this, um, type of a suit. So I really, what this is targeting is, let's say you had a, a brand new sort of startup company that is trying to use their product and they don't meet those high standards of, of what the federal standards are, and then they cause damage. This is likely where you'd bring your claim against them. But if you have a, uh, you know, …
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains the $100,000 cap applies to the new strict liability claim, which requires no proof of duty or breach, that the product liability claim allows full actual damages, and that only non-economic damages are capped at $1 million.
▶ Watch at 1:14:37Read what they said
Yeah, th thank you for the question. Um, so again, this a hundred thousand dollars cap is, is a new cause of action that does not exist today, and it's a much lower burden than you would have in your standard negligence claim. So as, as you know, the, the good maker of the, the question here, um, knows when you bring these negligence claims, you have to establish typically, or you, you, you have to establish the, the duty of care and the breach of that duty of care. This takes away that, that requirement at all. All you have to prove here is that you were u that the car was in driverless mode and that it caused …
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that levels four and five have no human involvement and are treated as products, while levels one through three are unchanged.
▶ Watch at 1:17:44Read what they said
Yeah, thank you for the question. So in a level four and a level five, that's where you don't have any human interaction. And so that's what this is narrowing it to. It doesn't make any changes for levels one, two, and three. And, um, again, going back to what I had said earlier about in these cases where there is no human involved in the decision, it really is a product now. And establishing that that duty of care and the negligence is, is a much different thing than, than a human, that, that makes human mistakes. And so it makes more sense for it to fall underneath a product liability claim for four and five.
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says level three vehicles still require a driver, that the bill targets fully driverless vehicles, that level three cases keep existing protections, and that the question may be considered at the sunset review.
▶ Watch at 1:19:01Read what they said
Um, madam, uh, speaker em, it, it's a good question. Again, with a level three, you still have to have a driver. Um, they still have to be actively watching what's going on. And, um, in a level three though, I, I'm not sure there are any active level threes that, that happen. The idea is that the car could tell at any time, driver, you need to take over this car. And so I, I think this kind of falls into the Sunset discussion that we had. Maybe there's, there's some aspects that we should pull into a level three, but in, but in any event, what this is really targeted at is kind of the Waymo type cars, …
S.B. 292 Autonomous Systems Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Gives closing summation, saying the bill streamlines claims for minor accidents, keeps full damages in other claims, provides predictable liability for developers, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 1:21:50Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you for the questions. I know that this is a new emerging area of, um, technology and we're all kind of getting up to speed with what that does. This really just sets the proper framework to allow that to grow as we're going to be make changing to the, make making changes to the statute, I'm sure year over year to, to make sure we've figured out we're we're in the right space. The one thing I did want to just respond to is, is this comments that, that in, in whatever way maybe this legislation doesn't value humans. Um, I, I just, I take a little bit of issue with that. Really what we're trying …
S.B. 176 Landscaping Procurement Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Supports the bill, saying agencies need direction to move to electric equipment, that the bill allows exceptions where electric equipment is impractical, and describing an airport that switched to electric vehicles with less pollution and noise.
▶ Watch at 1:39:28Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill, um, for a couple reasons. I, I do want to address two issues that have come up recently. One is, could they do it if they wanted to? Well, certainly I think half the bills we have here, agencies might be able to do it if they wanted to. The problem is they need direction. Government needs a push sometimes, and that's what this bill does. It pushes them in the right direction to the question of, well, what if it's just not practical? You know, they, they've got a big field, they, it just doesn't make sense to use electrical. I think the bill al already contemplates that. …
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Presents S.B. 287, saying targeted advertising to minors harms children and that the bill imposes a 4.7% tax on large companies' targeted advertising revenue, with proceeds going to children's programs.
▶ Watch at 1:54:24Read what they said
Thank you. Um, over the past decade, something about childhood has changed. We see disturbed sleep, declining attention, rising anxiety, and earlier exposure to harmful content. Now, these trends did not occur randomly. They emerged alongside an online economy that was built on targeted advertising and engagement, maximizing design. Now far too long, companies have been using these types of, uh, algorithms and, and systems and, and targeted advertising to monetize children's vulnerability. Mine their data, capture their attention and generate revenue without avoiding any accountability. Now, colleagues, we know this problem. We have been trying to solve this problem over the last few years. We've seen the harm from kids that we know, uh, our own kids, maybe our …
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Clarifies that bills with sunset dates were swept into this bill, that the sunset was removed from a House-passed bill with Senate agreement, and that he knows of no concern about adding the amendment.
▶ Watch at 1:57:08Read what they said
Thank you. Mr. Speaker Just wanted to clarify things. Yesterday, there was a little bit of question of how this worked through. Um, we had generally treated bills that had a Sunset, but more policy language allowed to go through. And only those bills that had a Sunset date were, were swept into this, but there was a little bit of confusion. So this was, this Sunset was taken out of a bill that had passed through the house that the Senate is okay with. We confirmed that on both sides. And so we have no, uh, or I don't have any concern. I don't know of anyone has concern with adding this amendment.
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Thanks the member for the motion and describes the main substitute changes, including a new public education or awareness campaign on the effects of targeted advertising.
▶ Watch at 1:59:36Read what they said
Thank, thank you. Um, I, uh, I appreciate the motion. Um, as you'll see, the, the real difference in the substitutes are, is included down, um, in lines starting 1 56 and on with, with the big, uh, change in line 1 68, that public education or awareness campaigns regarding the effects of targeted advertising on children, families, and adults.
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the first substitute changes lines 156 and 168, adding public education or awareness campaigns about the effects of targeted advertising on children, families, and adults.
▶ Watch at 1:59:36Read what they said
Thank, thank you. Um, I, uh, I appreciate the motion. Um, as you'll see, the, the real difference in the substitutes are, is included down, um, in lines starting 1 56 and on with, with the big, uh, change in line 1 68, that public education or awareness campaigns regarding the effects of targeted advertising on children, families, and adults. Back to the discussion to
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Responds to earlier opposition by saying the tax targets large global companies, cites whistleblower documents about harms to children, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 2:09:56Read what they said
Thank you. Um, Madam Speaker pro Tem. Uh, I appreciate the good discussion. I I do want to respond to the, the, the targets from, or the, uh, the comments from my good friend, um, uh, from Orem who talked about this being a tax on Utah residents. This is not a tax on Utah residents. This is a tax on some of the biggest companies in the entire world. And he's right. Businesses want to maximize profits. That's what they're driven to do. And generally we're okay with that, but not on the backs of our children's health and wellbeing. Now, we were lucky enough to know that this isn't hypothetical. In fact, whistleblowers now have, have released a, …
S.B. 287 Targeted Advertising Tax · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Responds to opposition by saying the tax falls on large global companies, and cites whistleblower documents showing the companies knew about harms to children from targeted advertising and algorithms.
▶ Watch at 2:09:56Read what they said
Thank you. Um, Madam Speaker pro Tem. Uh, I appreciate the good discussion. I I do want to respond to the, the, the targets from, or the, uh, the comments from my good friend, um, uh, from Orem who talked about this being a tax on Utah residents. This is not a tax on Utah residents. This is a tax on some of the biggest companies in the entire world. And he's right. Businesses want to maximize profits. That's what they're driven to do. And generally we're okay with that, but not on the backs of our children's health and wellbeing. Now, we were lucky enough to know that this isn't hypothetical. In fact, whistleblowers now have, have released a, …
S.B. 278 Development Authority Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Says he has worked closely with the authorities and that the bill gives the state more control over public infrastructure districts that are created.
▶ Watch at 2:15:31Read what they said
to speak to that motion? Yeah, I've Just been working closely with all of the different authorities. There's, um, some language in here that gives the state actually more control over any of the public infrastructure districts that are created.
S.B. 278 Development Authority Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains the bill as a cleanup of Point of the Mountain State Land Authority provisions, including allowing 50 acres for for-sale housing with coordination with Draper City, limiting tax capture to phase one, changing the split of privilege tax on transferred land, and directing 25% of sales tax to the state.
▶ Watch at 2:16:05Read what they said
Thank you colleagues. This is just the, uh, cleanup bill that we have for the point of Mountain State Land Authority. There's four main changes that you'll see here. The first one allows for the point to move forward with allocating 50 acres of land for for sale housing that will support the state's goal to increase, um, for sale housing stock. Um, the amendment requires the point to coordinate with Draper City to ensure that the development of any of those parcels are done in accordance with with the point's objectives. The second thing that it does is it defines the privileged tax that's allocated in phase one is restricted just that first phase, the 105 AC acres that's …
S.B. 278 Development Authority Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Presents S.B. 278 as a cleanup bill for the Point of the Mountain State Land Authority, covering 50 acres for for-sale housing with Draper City coordination, restricting the privilege tax to phase one, reversing the split of privilege tax on transferred land, and directing 25% of the sales tax to the state.
▶ Watch at 2:16:05Read what they said
Thank you colleagues. This is just the, uh, cleanup bill that we have for the point of Mountain State Land Authority. There's four main changes that you'll see here. The first one allows for the point to move forward with allocating 50 acres of land for for sale housing that will support the state's goal to increase, um, for sale housing stock. Um, the amendment requires the point to coordinate with Draper City to ensure that the development of any of those parcels are done in accordance with with the point's objectives. The second thing that it does is it defines the privileged tax that's allocated in phase one is restricted just that first phase, the 105 AC acres that's …
S.B. 310 Uniform Intimate Images Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that S.B. 310 enacts uniform civil remedies for unauthorized disclosure of intimate images, allowing a person to sue someone who knowingly shared their private intimate image without consent.
▶ Watch at 2:35:46Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This is another great bill. Uh, this bill enacts the uniform civil remedies for unauthorized disclosure of Intimate Images Act. So essentially it gives someone the right to sue someone else if that person knowingly shared their private intimate image without consent. Um, with that Mr. Speaker, happy to answer any questions about the bill.
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Moves that the House concur with the Senate amendments to the substitute for H.B. 416.
▶ Watch at 2:50:28Read what they said
Thank you, uh, Mr. Speaker, this, this bill may, excuse me, move to Concur with the Senate amendments. Thank
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that the Senate left out a funding-structure substitute, so the bill was recalled and amended to include mental health service provisions for first responders from H.B. 338, and urges concurrence.
▶ Watch at 2:50:35Read what they said
Uh, yes. Uh, this is a bill that should look familiar to everyone. This, this passed the House and the Senate. Unfortunately, the Senate had forgotten to incorporate a substitute, um, that dealt with the, with the structure of the funding. And so we recalled this bill is now been passed by the Senate. One, um, fortuitous thing that happened, maybe a blessing in disguise is that as this came up and we looked at it, there was an opportunity to include some of the provisions in House Bill 3 38, which passed this body unanimously and, uh, provides mental health services to first responders, especially in rural areas. So, uh, we were able to incorporate that into the fifth …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Presents H.B. 212, which sets a petition process and thresholds for forming a new county, addresses rural property and tax continuation, and requires local option transportation sales tax in the new county.
▶ Watch at 3:10:13Read what they said
that, uh, creates a legislative process or creates a process for particip petitioning a municipality to initiate the process to create a new county. Um, it establishes threshold for petitioners and certain viability requirements in the formation of a new county. It allows certain rural property to remain in a seceding in a seating county in, in certain circumstances and it provides a continuation of property taxation between seating counties and a new county to satisfy general obligation or revenue bond indebtedness. It also requires the new county to level levy local option sales and use tax for transportation at the same rate in similar manner of the seating county for transactions within the new county. Otherwise, it clarifies other …
H.B. 90 Sexual Offenses Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Moved to recall HB 416 from the Office of Legislative Research and General Counsel.
▶ Watch at 3:20:29Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I move that we recall from the office of, uh, legal research and general counsel HB four 16.
H.B. 90 Sexual Offenses Amendments · House floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Said a substitute was not adopted on the Senate side and that the Senate needs to adopt it.
▶ Watch at 3:20:39Read what they said
Yeah, there was a substitute that wasn't adopted on the Senate side that we need them to adopt.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 45) · Mar 6, 2026
Explains that a concern about rural counties in the bill has been resolved, and that the rural language refers to a rural owner in a county of over a million people.
▶ Watch at 3:44:33Read what they said
petitioning municipality means municipality located within the county with a population of more than a million. This is not applied to any rural counties. There was a concern about that and we've got that straightened out on the bill. All the language down below that talks about rural is actually related to a rural owner that lives within a county of a million people. With that, Mr. President yield the questions.
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Explains the bill's changes, which let either party move qualifying cases against the state to a three-judge panel, with a constitutional court as a fallback if the panel is found unconstitutional.
▶ Watch at 7:00Read what they said
I would, uh, colleagues, this bill has changed quite a bit, um, from the time that we passed it in the house. Um, as you recall this, this bill initially dealt with, um, ensuring that we had, uh, distribution in the court systems for those municipal cases, that they would have their own calendars, uh, where municipal cases could be heard because of the limited staffing that the municipalities had. Um, as we have looked at, um, a previous policy that we passed earlier in the session that dealt with allowing for a three judge review panel in the case, uh, where the state was, um, being challenged in a civil action, um, we decided that there were a few …
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says the $1,500 fee reflects three times the judges and the typical $500 district filing fee, and that existing fee waiver processes for indigent parties still apply.
▶ Watch at 11:55Read what they said
Uh, that's a really great question. Uh, Mr. Speaker, as we looked at this, especially now that we're allowing for any party, um, to re to remove to this three judge panel before we could really limit it because it would be the state, uh, that would have the ability to initiate the review because any party can do that, we felt it appropriate to add an additional fee for re removal to the three judge panel. As we looked at it, the typical filing fee is about $500 in a district court matter. Since we're doing three times the number of judges, it makes sense that we have a $1,500, uh, removal fee. Now, something I think that's important …
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Responds to Stoddard's concerns, argues the bill extends a right to the other party for a small fee, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 13:56Read what they said
I would. Um, and I appreciate the, the comments from the good, uh, representative from Murray. Um, I I do think it's a little curious. We are giving the right to the other party today to remove to the three judge panel the bill that, that he would say was a good bill and a good policy. This bill allow, uh, the original bill didn't allow for that at all. So to say that I have concerns about having to pay $1,500 to have a right that they didn't have in the original bill, I think he should be jumping for joy that we're extending this right with a small fee, uh, attached to that. And so, um, colleagues, this …
S.B. 183 Surveillance Camera Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Presents the bill, which would bar law enforcement from tampering with or disabling a person's private-property surveillance camera, with exceptions for a court order, exigent circumstances, or officer safety, and notes that a Roy police chief has suggested changes.
▶ Watch at 15:33Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This is a very simple bill. It simply prohibits law enforcement from tampering with changing the viewing direction of or disabling an individual's surveillance camera like a ring camera. Um, as long as the camera's installed on the, per the person's private property. Now we have exceptions, clear exceptions in the bill, um, if it, uh, if they need to apply for a court order, if it's exigent circumstances or otherwise, to protect officer safety. Now I know that the, um, the good police chief from Roy has been working, um, on this issue and has some thoughts on it, uh, has made the bill a little bit better. And so I look forward to a, …
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · Senate floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Presents H.B. 147, which would require state and local governments to offer an electronic way to submit forms, with some exceptions, and sets later effective dates for some local governments.
▶ Watch at 35:22Read what they said
to appear in person to submit a form in paper, you know, a record or information. Uh, oftentimes it will force unnecessary trips to a government office HP 1 47. It requires, uh, state government and local governments to provide an electronic means for persons to submit a form. Now, there are certain times that there are exceptions and there are certain times that there actually is a good reason to have someone come in for a, an in-person visit. And that that's, you know, maybe from federal state or court rule. If a law a person is required to submit a fingerprint, if the person submitting the form is incarcerated in, in as an incarcerated individual, it has to …
S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Presents S.B. 218, describing the history of constables and current issues with their appointment and oversight, and explains that the bill creates a uniform statewide licensure and oversight process through the Department of Occupational and Professional Licensing.
▶ Watch at 59:03Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, you may or may not know that the Office of a Constable is actually one of the oldest law enforcement roles in the English speaking, um, legal tradition. It dates back over 1000 years. Um, in fact, when it, it started, you know, you think Constable, it comes from the Latin meaning come stub eye, uh, which means count of the stable. So originally these constables were in charge of the Royal Cavalry, and over the years, their, um, their roles continued to shift over and over. Um, in the 12th century, they were local officials responsible for ensuring compliance. Uh, in the 13th century, they formalized the watch and ward system, um, and …
S.B. 218 Constable Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Responds that constables have no formal police training requirement, that requirements currently vary by city and county, and that the bill would have the department set uniform statewide requirements.
▶ Watch at 1:03:59Read what they said
Thank, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, no, there is no formal police training for, for any of these constables. Um, but it, it, it ranges from, uh, the cities and the counties for what type of requirements they have for that licensure. Um, what this bill would do is, is formalize that process and allow for doppel to come up with the uniform requirements for the statewide constables across the state.
H.B. 32 Signature Gathering and Verification Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Says he appreciates the change made by the Senate amendments and will now vote in favor of the bill after previously voting against it.
▶ Watch at 1:10:13Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate that change and, uh, originally voted against this bill will now be voting in favor.
S.B. 256 Identity Protection Modifications · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Explains that the bill clarifies defamation law to cover AI-generated and digitally manipulated content in non-commercial deepfakes, adds a notice and takedown requirement before suit, limits damages if content is promptly removed, recognizes identity as personal property, and exempts news, commentary, parody, satire, political speech, and transformative works.
▶ Watch at 1:15:36Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I don't have a good history lesson with, uh, with this bill. Gimme one second here. All right. So, um, Mr. Speaker, uh, AI and deepfake technology have, has really fundamentally changed how personal identity can be misused. Uh, in Utah. We've already tried to address many of these issues on both sides of the spectrum. Last year, the legislature passed, uh, protections addressing commercial misuse of a person's name, image, or likeness. Utah's law also, um, recognizes, uh, within common law and statutory defam deamination, uh, including libel and slander different types of protections of, of people's identity. The problem that this bill is trying to solve is that non-commercial DeepFakes may not meet the …
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether the sponsor will yield to a question.
▶ Watch at 2:04:01Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor of the, uh, amendment yield to a question? Representative Ballard, will you yield? Yes.
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield to a question about the amendment.
▶ Watch at 2:04:01Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor of the, uh, amendment yield to a question?
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks what the underlying policy bill was that contained this sunset extension.
▶ Watch at 2:04:10Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'm just wondering what was the underlying policy? Uh, bill that had this Sunset extension?
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks what the underlying policy bill was that included this sunset extension.
▶ Watch at 2:04:10Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'm just wondering what was the underlying policy? Uh, bill that had this Sunset extension?
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks to confirm that the sunset was originally in HB 374 and was then removed so it would be in the Sunset bill.
▶ Watch at 2:05:02Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'm just taking a look at that. In HB three, um, 74. So this originally had a Sunset extension and then you pulled it out to ensure that it would be in the Sunset Bill. Is that correct?
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks whether HB 374 originally had a sunset extension that was pulled out to be placed in the sunset bill.
▶ Watch at 2:05:02Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'm just taking a look at that. In HB three, um, 74. So this originally had a Sunset extension and then you pulled it out to ensure that it would be in the Sunset Bill. Is that correct?
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks for time to check whether the bills folded into the Sunset bill went through the process on their own merits and whether both chambers agreed to the workload extensions.
▶ Watch at 2:05:44Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, um, I'd love just a little bit of time to just double check this. One of the things that we've tried to ensure with the Senate is as we were looking at this omnibus Sunset bill, that all of the bills that got incorporated into this bill, uh, proceeded through the process on their own merits and then Uintah under our, our rules, the joint leadership to look at workload extensions and making sure that both bodies were comfortable with that. That may be the case with, with this, I'm just not positive. I'd love just to a second to, to review that and make sure that both sides are okay with that.
S.B. 12 Sunset and Repeal Date Amendments · House floor debate (day 44) · Mar 5, 2026
Asks for time to confirm that both chambers agreed to the bills incorporated into the sunset bill through the joint leadership process.
▶ Watch at 2:05:44Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, um, I'd love just a little bit of time to just double check this. One of the things that we've tried to ensure with the Senate is as we were looking at this omnibus Sunset bill, that all of the bills that got incorporated into this bill, uh, proceeded through the process on their own merits and then Uintah under our, our rules, the joint leadership to look at workload extensions and making sure that both bodies were comfortable with that. That may be the case with, with this, I'm just not positive. I'd love just to a second to, to review that and make sure that both sides are okay with that.
S.B. 235 Governor Compensation Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Presents the bill, which ties the governor's salary to the Chief Justice's and sets other statewide officials' salaries as percentages of it, with an estimated $300,000 ongoing fiscal note, and explains the change in bill sponsorship.
▶ Watch at 1:06:49Read what they said
Um, Senator Mikel was terrified to come in front of you today. Um, Actually here's, here's kind of the, the story on this. This, this was a bill that, that he ran to increase the compensation for the Attorney General. Um, I, I, previously, before serving the legislature, I sat on the Executive and Judicial Compensation committee. And, uh, you know, most of our Supreme Court judges, our Governor, attorney General, they're pretty severely under market for their skillset, but that's, that's pretty common. Um, but it's gotten to be quite a bit below market to where, um, you, you really, uh, You don't want to be in a position where you're attracting people that either are only independently wealthy …
S.B. 235 Governor Compensation Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Thanks the committee and explains the sponsorship change near the end of the discussion.
▶ Watch at 1:15:11Read what they said
Thank you Committee, and thank you for letting me explain kind of the, the little switcheroo at the end there.
S.B. 235 Governor Compensation Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Says the Attorney General was the only person who opposed the bill during the process. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:15:26Read what they said
I do want you to know that through the process of this, there's been one person opposed to this bill and it is the Attorney General. Like, like he's the only person who has, who has opposed it, but Interesting. Yeah. Thank
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Raises concerns that the bill could lower professional standards for school mental health services by expanding eligible personnel to interns and others with less specialized training.
▶ Watch at 1:18:35Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I'll, I'll try to be nice. I I kind of wish the original sponsors here 'cause um, I've got some, some serious concerns with the bill. Um, some of the information that I've received recently, um, for, from those that have worked on this policy in the past, um, both within the legislature and outside the legislature, have, have said that they believe that these changes will actually lower the professional standards for school mental health services. Um, by expanding these, these personnel to different groups like interns, um, and others who may have less specialized training in school-based assessments, intervention and crisis response. Um, also it seems to create an incentive to substitute the …
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Asks whether interns are funded under current law and whether the bill expands coverage to additional groups such as marriage and family therapists and clinical mental health counselors.
▶ Watch at 1:20:49Read what they said
And if, if I could ask another question. Yes, Mr. Chair, in terms of the interns, I don't think they're receiving funding under the current statute. Right. So this does expand it to different groups of people then we're currently covered underneath this bill. And then, you know, some of these other ones, like the clinical mental health counselors, the marriage and family therapists, um, and some of the others, those, those would not fit under the current definition of the statute of a, um, school psychologist, uh, school social worker or a school counselor. Can, can you speak to that?
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Says the bill expands licensing to groups beyond the original intent and asks which specific lines are at issue.
▶ Watch at 1:21:48Read what they said
Well, just that, I mean, talking about it, it sounds like the presentation that you came in is, Hey, we're not really changing anything. We're just clarifying what this really meant. But the way I read this is this actually expands to a bunch of other groups of licensing that really wasn't the intent of this legislation. And that's the concerns that I'm hearing from people about this bill. Okay. And what were the line numbers specifically with The, so it would be like, um, in line, uh, 62, in line 64, um, in line, uh, 55.
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Disagrees that a marriage and family therapist would fit under the other social worker category.
▶ Watch at 1:22:48Read what they said
Yeah, I, I guess I just disagree. I don't think that a marriage and family therapist, for example, would fit under the soc other social worker. I don't think they're considered a social worker in any respect.
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Says clinical mental health counselors are a common role in these situations and asks about that category.
▶ Watch at 1:23:03Read what they said
Um, really fast though on that. Um, specifically with 63, the clinical mental health counselor. I, I, that is a pretty common role in these situations. Just, I know I'm not, again, I'm not sure on the family one, but that one is. So Thank you.
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Says the funds are limited and should prioritize school psychologists over interns and marriage and family therapists, and that the bill needs more work.
▶ Watch at 1:29:24Read what they said
I'll just add my, my comments to that. I, I think I still have some concerns that have already been addressed either by my comments before or Representative Thurston's. But I, I think too, we gotta remember that here we're talking about a limited pool of funds, um, that, that we can draw on. And so, um, if we're prioritizing how those funds are gonna be used, I'd rather prioritize them for the psychologists, for those that are specialized in this type of space with schools and not in interns and not marriage and family therapists or, or other types of groups. And I just think this needs a little bit more work.
S.B. 297 School Social Worker Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 4, 2026
Makes a motion to adjourn the meeting.
▶ Watch at 1:36:46Read what they said
I'd just like to make a motion to adjourn. Can we do that? Okay. So we have a motion,
S.B. 148 General Oversight Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the third substitute addresses concerns, including committee meeting timing, the governor's appearance before committees, and the limit on bills a committee can open.
▶ Watch at 34:36Read what they said
Yeah. This is a, uh, substitute that we worked closely with the sponsored legislation on, um, to bring it in, uh, to, to address some of the concerns that, that we had in, in particular, the substitute, um, doesn't change, uh, the timing of when the committee can meet. It takes out the questions around, um, whether the governor has to appear before committees and it, there's a third thing. Oh, how many bills they can open. So it's just based on the general rules that we already have for committees opening bills.
S.B. 148 General Oversight Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the third substitute was worked out with the sponsor to address concerns, leaves committee meeting timing unchanged, removes provisions on governor appearances and the limit on bills committees can open, and relies on general committee rules.
▶ Watch at 34:36Read what they said
Yeah. This is a, uh, substitute that we worked closely with the sponsored legislation on, um, to bring it in, uh, to, to address some of the concerns that, that we had in, in particular, the substitute, um, doesn't change, uh, the timing of when the committee can meet. It takes out the questions around, um, whether the governor has to appear before committees and it, there's a third thing. Oh, how many bills they can open. So it's just based on the general rules that we already have for committees opening bills.
S.B. 135 Nuclear Reprocessing Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Moves to lift several Senate bills from rules and assign them to the Economic Development and Workforce Services, Education, and Health and Human Services committees.
▶ Watch at 40:47Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I move that the following bills be lifted from rules and assigned to the following committees, uh, to economic development and Workforce Services Committee. First substitute Senate bill 1 93 to the Education Committee, second substitute Senate bill 2 67 and first substitute Senate Bill 3 22 and a Health and Human Services Committee for substitute Senate Bill 1 74.
S.B. 135 Nuclear Reprocessing Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the bills were assigned on the rules report, but the Senate delivered them late, so the committee assignments are being formalized.
▶ Watch at 41:17Read what they said
I would, um, these bills were assigned and on the rules report yesterday. However, the Senate was a little delayed in getting us the bills. They weren't read into the house until this morning. So we just wanna make sure that we formalize those assignments, those committees.
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that when an appellate court vacancy has multiple applicants, the court would send five additional names from the seven it would typically send.
▶ Watch at 57:12Read what they said
I would, this just makes a, a small change that, uh, in the event that there is an appellate court position, um, where there are more than one applicant that is applying, it would have the court, uh, send on five additional names from the seven that they would typically send.
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the substitute changes the number of names a court sends for an appellate vacancy with multiple applicants, from seven to twelve, by adding five more names.
▶ Watch at 57:12Read what they said
I would, this just makes a, a small change that, uh, in the event that there is an appellate court position, um, where there are more than one applicant that is applying, it would have the court, uh, send on five additional names from the seven that they would typically send.
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Presents the bill, which would consolidate high-volume civil cases, mostly evictions and debt collection, into a centralized district court division staffed by commissioners, with contested hearings or trials returned to local district judges.
▶ Watch at 57:51Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, recently the Utah Bar Foundation conducted a study on high volume civil cases. And they found that, um, that, that really, those cases came down to those with evictions and debt collection cases. Now, the foundation worked with practitioners, court stakeholders and advocates, and developed a recommendation on how we could improve efficiency and access in these types of cases. Now, the, the problem we see is that these cases are often repetitive and procedural in nature. Um, they're usually handled online, um, or, or remotely. They're processed county by county creating inefficiencies and, um, inconsistencies in the way that they're, they're treated, they rarely move on to trial. Um, they're a lot of the …
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Presents the bill, which consolidates about 70% of high-volume civil cases, mainly evictions and debt collection, into a centralized district court division staffed by commissioners, with contested hearings or trials returned to local district judges.
▶ Watch at 57:51Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, recently the Utah Bar Foundation conducted a study on high volume civil cases. And they found that, um, that, that really, those cases came down to those with evictions and debt collection cases. Now, the foundation worked with practitioners, court stakeholders and advocates, and developed a recommendation on how we could improve efficiency and access in these types of cases. Now, the, the problem we see is that these cases are often repetitive and procedural in nature. Um, they're usually handled online, um, or, or remotely. They're processed county by county creating inefficiencies and, um, inconsistencies in the way that they're, they're treated, they rarely move on to trial. Um, they're a lot of the …
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Gives closing remarks in summation and urges support for the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:00:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I, I couldn't say it better than my good colleague from Salt Lake, uh, county. Yes. Yes. Yes. Please, uh, support the bill.
S.B. 270 State Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Closes by agreeing with the previous speaker and urging support for the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:00:45Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I, I couldn't say it better than my good colleague from Salt Lake, uh, county. Yes. Yes. Yes. Please, uh, support the bill.
S.B. 208 Vehicle Emission Inspection Program Revisions · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Says the bill did not receive a House hearing but is a good, short bill, encourages members to review it, and offers to answer questions when it comes back up for discussion.
▶ Watch at 1:52:50Read what they said
I would. Uh, colleagues, this is a bill that did not receive a house hearing. However, it is a really good bill. It's very short, easy to read, so I'd encourage everyone to take a look at it. Scrutinize it. I'd be happy to answer questions when we come back and encircle, it'll tell you more about it.
S.B. 235 Governor Compensation Amendments · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Explains that the bill ties the Governor's salary to the Chief Justice's salary, keeps the Attorney General at 95% and other constitutional officers at 90% of the Governor's salary, and calls the cost a minor budget adjustment.
▶ Watch at 1:58:21Read what they said
Thank you, uh, Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, we've been looking closely initially at the, um, the State Attorney General's salary. Uh, as you know, many of, um, the legal market has drastically shifted in the state of Utah, um, with some bigger firms moving in and wanting to make sure that we are not, uh, keeping pace with the market because we certainly can't do that. It is a sacrifice to serve in those positions, but ensuring that there is, uh, an enough of an, an incentive for good attorneys to be able to run for that position. As we looked at the bill, um, and just raising the Attorney General's salary right now, it's tied to the governor's salary, …
S.B. 208 Vehicle Emission Inspection Program Revisions · House floor debate (day 43) · Mar 4, 2026
Sponsor says the bill bars the DMV from registering a vehicle while its owner has unpaid civil penalties for an false or improper address, unless the penalties are paid or the car has a new owner.
▶ Watch at 2:19:32Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. This is a very simple bill. This bill simply prohibits the DMV from registering a vehicle. If the owner has unpaid civil penalties for providing a false or improper address, as soon as they pay those penalties, or if the car is owned by a new owner, then they can go ahead and register it. But until those penalties are paid, they, the DMV can't register that car. Happy to answer any questions.
S.B. 31 Office of Professional Licensure Review Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Asked the sponsor whether the 2000-hour agreement was meant to resolve the issue or whether work would continue.
▶ Watch at 58:29Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I, I do have a question for the sponsor of the legislation, um, if that's appropriate. Um, Senator, so in, in your conversations and collaborations as you came to this 2000 hours, did you make any sort of, um, uh, deals or, or, um, statements that, that this would solve the problem? That we wouldn't be working on it or continue to work on this hours in the future?
S.B. 278 Development Authority Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Mar 3, 2026
Teuscher speaks in favor of the bill, saying it will help the project move forward with for-sale property and funds for parks and recreation.
▶ Watch at 46:36Read what they said
Thank, thank you members of the committee. Um, I don't think I've ever testified, uh, in a committee before. And I thought I'd take the opportunity just to, to tell you how much I appreciate and love, uh, this good senator and his good work here. I've, uh, had the, let me introduce myself. I'm, I'm Jordan Tuscher. Thank you. We didn't, almost didn't recognize you with no beard and shorter hair, But I, I will say I, uh, I have the privilege of, um, being the co-chair of this, um, project for the last, uh, going on four years now. And, um, ha have, uh, had the great privilege to work with Senator Stevenson as he has been able …
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says the changes were requested by banks seeking consistent treatment of regular securities and digital assets, so they would not need separate programs for each.
▶ Watch at 21:19Read what they said
Would. Um, these changes came at the request of, uh, some of the banks that, uh, were trying to ensure that there was a consistent process for the regular securities that they treat as well as the digital assets. And so we added some language to make sure that they were treated exactly the same so they wouldn't have to run a different program for securities and for digital assets. Thank you.
H.B. 604 Local Government Official Amendments · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks the maker of the motion to yield for a question.
▶ Watch at 42:51Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the maker of the motion yield to a question? Representative Thurston, will you yield to a question?
H.B. 604 Local Government Official Amendments · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Asks whether the word commissioner could sweep in members of commissions outside the executive branch.
▶ Watch at 42:59Read what they said
You, Mr. Speaker. I, I'm just wondering about Commissioner and I, you know, I'm not totally versed in the way the executive branch looks at this, but I know that when we set up a, any commission in theory, that would, anyone who sits on that commission is considered a commissioner. And I don't know if we would consider all commissions to be with working within the executive branch, but, um, do you have any fear that this might, that though we're talking about commissioners and no can picture the people that we're talking about that this might maybe sweep in some other types of commissioners that sit on commissions that we aren't intending to sweep in.
H.B. 604 Local Government Official Amendments · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Says the bill needs more work and scrutiny, and that he is not yet sure how he will vote on the amendment.
▶ Watch at 44:19Read what they said
I'm not sure how I feel about the, the motion to amend it probably is fine. Um, I think there's probably more work that needs to be done generally on this bill. Um, I think when we get to, to bill 600 plus that there's probably a good chance that more work needs to be done with this bill. And I think, uh, maybe a sign of that is that we're wordsmithing the bill on the floor and this work didn't happen in, in committee. And so though, though I applaud the good sponsors work on this bill, generally, um, I think this probably needs a little more work and a little more scrutiny before this passes, uh, the house …
H.R. 8 Resolution Admonishing and Censuring Judge Don M. Torgerson · House floor debate (day 42) · Mar 3, 2026
Supports the resolution, citing the judge's inappropriate comments, the absence of any apology or explanation since May, and the public's interest in information before retention elections.
▶ Watch at 1:26:02Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I agree with the, uh, the good representative that when we look at censure, that this should be something that we take very seriously, that we don't use lightly, and that we use it very rarely and surgically in the cases where it's warranted. Now, I stand in support of the censure today, and it's not about the sentence, um, and, and the decision that the judge made in that case, though, I think there is some, some questions around that. And I, and I believe we have some legislation this year that helps to tighten that, to help give more direction to our judges and these types of cases. But I do take issue with …
H.B. 543 Uniform Commercial Code Amendments · House floor debate (day 41) · Mar 2, 2026
Opposes the bill, saying it would make Utah nonuniform with the Uniform Commercial Code and should be studied during the interim.
▶ Watch at 53:52Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I rise in opposition to this bill. One of the, um, great, uh, uh, opportunities I've had in being in the legislature is serving on the Uniform Law Commission. And as I've talked about that process with many of you, it is a very rigorous process. We have representatives from all 50 states that come together, um, and look at important issues. Um, they have a, a rigorous process of over four years to developing different types of policies. One of the landmark pieces of the Uniform Law Commission is the Uniform Commercial Code. It is adopted by all 50 states and really enables the engine for commercial, uh, commerce, uh, to happen across all …
H.B. 216 Child Support Calculation Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 27, 2026
Presented HB 216, which would remove the exclusion of Social Security Disability Insurance from income the court may impute for child support, so the court can consider it while keeping the decision discretionary.
▶ Watch at 2:07:18Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. Members of the committee. This is a really simple bill. Um, currently there, um, there are two different types of, uh, very similarly named, uh, income replacement, uh, uh, benefits that come from the government. Supplemental Security income SSII and then Social Security Disability Insurance. SSDI, uh, SSI is a need space program that provides monthly payments to those that are 65 and older, blind or disabled, who have limited income and resources. Whereas SSDI is an insurance program that, uh, everyone's granted that as you pay into social security and you become disabled, then payments come to try to supplement what your income was when you become disabled. Well, for whatever reason, uh, in our …
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Teuscher moves to circle HR 7 so that one more rule change can be added to the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:15:24Read what they said
I would, uh, I've been working with the good representative. We had one other rule change we wanted to include that just didn't get adopted in this sub. And so if you could give us a little bit of time we can get that adopted.
H.R. 7 House Rules Modifications · House floor debate (day 38) · Feb 27, 2026
Says one more rule change was left out of the substitute and asks for time to get it adopted.
▶ Watch at 1:15:24Read what they said
I would, uh, I've been working with the good representative. We had one other rule change we wanted to include that just didn't get adopted in this sub. And so if you could give us a little bit of time we can get that adopted. Thank you Representative Teuscher, uh,
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Introduces second substitute HB 416 on firefighter cancer.
▶ Watch at 52:50Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, um, honored to be able to come and speak to second substitute house Bill four 16.
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Explains that HB 416 creates a cancer benefit trust fund and a board to cover the gap before workers' compensation claims are paid, with the board to study funding amounts.
▶ Watch at 52:59Read what they said
I do have handouts. Do you mind if I turn hands that around? No, Thank you. May as well have 'em while you're talking. Yeah, That'd be great. Go ahead. Um, and she has one for the next bill as well. Do you mind if she just gives them both right now? Awesome. So as many of you remember, um, last year, we passed some really landmark legislation that increased, uh, cancer screening options and added, um, some, some new presumptions, uh, for cancer. Um, pres presumptive cancers that emerge from a firefighter service for workers' compensation. Many people don't know that firefighters risk a much higher, uh, or have a much higher risk of certain cancers due to their …
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Says the bill directs the board to study how the trust fund should coordinate with workers' compensation, including whether it reimburses or supplements claims.
▶ Watch at 1:01:41Read what they said
No. I, I, I didn't really get into the details of that. And quite honestly, we're, we're still trying to figure out exactly how we're going to cover that. So if you'll see on starting in line 1 49 of the bill, um, it directs the board once it's been set up then to study exactly how this should work. And we've looked at various states and, and how they do this. Um, and I think there's, there's some disagreement, you know, of, of where the, the coverage should come in. Is it going to reimburse the workers' comp claims? Is it in addition to the workers' comp claims? And so that's what they're going to study and come back …
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Summarizes the bill as addressing the financial gap before workers' compensation payments begin, and says future work may look at trust fund distribution and mental health treatment.
▶ Watch at 1:02:55Read what they said
Yeah. Thank, thank you. Thank you for the comments that we've had. Uh, I just want to say, as we think about these, uh, amazing public service, uh, members that, that run into fires and dangers and are often the first responders, when anything happens, uh, this is really the least that we can do, um, when they put their lives on the line. And as a result of that, uh, now are having to deal with the effects of these cancers, um, what we don't want them to have to think about is how much money do we have in my bank account? How am I gonna make my mortgage payment for my family? Um, all of these questions …
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Presented H.B. 147, which would require state and local governments to offer an electronic way to submit forms and records, with listed exceptions such as federal or state law requirements, fingerprinting of incarcerated individuals, and notarized forms.
▶ Watch at 1:05:52Read what they said
Thank you. Um, so, uh, this is a little, uh, less, uh, somber of a bill in, in a way, but one that is good for government efficiency. Um, I had a, uh, a constituent reach out over the interim that, uh, complained to me about having to, um, need to getting a, a government document. And he reached out to the department and the response was, okay, you need to fill out this form. And, uh, to get the form, we had to drive down to Salt Lake City, stand in line, fill out the form and paper, come back another day to actually receive the, the document. He said, I'm, I'm having to take off two days of …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Rep. Teuscher presented HB 212, which would let a county with over one million people split through city resolutions representing at least a third of the county's population, as an alternative to gathering signatures, with a required feasibility study before voters decide.
▶ Watch at 1:27:22Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. My, uh, intern has a flyer for the committee. Do you mind if she hands that out? Nope. That's great. Awesome. So you already passed it around. Great. Oh, they're already passed it around. She's on top of things. She's ahead of everybody. Yeah, That is, uh, no surprise, but, uh, house Bill two 12. Um, this is a bill that has been many years, uh, in the making. Uh, as we look at our county sizes and, um, the, the size of government and it continues to grow and grow, you start asking the question is, is there a point where it makes sense to split a county under our current code? In order to …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Rep. Teuscher said the bill does not address the number of senators and that 29 is a fine number.
▶ Watch at 1:30:30Read what they said
Yeah. This bill doesn't address in any way how many Senator Vickers we have. And I, I think 29 is a fine number. I think it could be 28, it could be 30. It doesn't really matter. I do believe in the history of our state, we've had a lot less Senator Vickers and more counties. Yeah. Um, and so it just happens, I think more of a coincidence now of 29.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Rep. Teuscher said some other states have 30 senators. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 1:30:59Read what they said
So. Yeah. Well, you presiding an officer can split, but there are a number of states that have 30 Senator Vickers. Yeah. And then they do, you know, either double or three time the number of house members. Yeah.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Rep. Teuscher said Salt Lake County voted on the bill, is neutral, and that the county worked with the sponsor to make it fair, giving voters another opportunity to exercise their constitutional rights.
▶ Watch at 1:31:55Read what they said
Yeah, the only thing I neglected to add is, um, Salt Lake County did, uh, take or did vote on this and, and, uh, we're neutral on this bill. We've worked closely with them to make sure that, um, what's in here is, is fair. And again, it just gives voters another opportunity to be able to exercise their, their rights under the constitution.
H.B. 228 Vehicle Sales Amendments · Senate Transportation, Public Utilities, Energy, and Technology Committee · Feb 26, 2026
Presents House Bill 228 Second Substitute, which would define additional vehicle title brands, require a check of the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System before issuing new titles, and add odometer discrepancy disclosures, following a constituent's experience with an undisclosed hail-damaged vehicle.
▶ Watch at 53:32Read what they said
Yeah, thank you. Excited to be here and excited to present on House Bill 2 28. Second substitute. Um, uh, in brief, I had a constituent reach out to me. This is the last interim. They had purchased a vehicle, uh, for their, for their son that was a new driver. And after a few months of rain and sitting in the sun, they started to notice, uh, kind of spots across their car. And as they started to look into it, they found that that car had had significant hail damage that had been repaired, um, but was never disclosed. They didn't know about it. Um, come to find out it was from a different state, uh, that had …
H.B. 502 School Attendance Modifications · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Spoke in strong support, saying chronic absenteeism is a problem, attendance has become optional, and grades should reflect skills such as showing up and working with others, and that teachers face burdens from excused absences.
▶ Watch at 42:02Read what they said
Yes. Thank you Mr. Speaker Peram. I rise in strong support of this bill. Um, I think we have heard over and over, um, over the last four or five years how much of an issue chronic absenteeism is in our schools. And, um, as I've talked to teachers to try to understand what the problem is, I think the pendulum has just swung so far the other way where, where attendance at school has really become optional. And, uh, I applaud the good sponsor and really trying to tackle this issue and find the right balance, um, especially in a world where it, it's not just parents or the legislature that's kind of moved to, to make this more …
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Moves to adopt second substitute S.B. 59, which would aggregate the length of two marriages between the same spouses when a court considers alimony, unless the court finds that aggregating would be inequitable.
▶ Watch at 50:37Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. I move, uh, substitute to to H or SB 59. Motion is to adopt second substitute SB 59. Would you like to speak to it? I would. Um, this is a bill. It doesn't change anything that, uh, the good sponsor just talked about, but it does add another section to alimony. And this is an issue that was recently brought up to me where, um, as, as the good sponsor, uh, mentioned, typically when you have alimony and, uh, and then you're remarried, uh, the you no longer receive alimony. Well, there there is a, a circumstance where someone could be married, uh, get divorced, maybe the marriage was for, for 20 years. …
S.B. 59 Alimony Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Explains that the substitute would combine the length of two marriages between the same spouses when a court considers alimony, to prevent resetting the alimony period, and lets the court decline if combining them would be inequitable.
▶ Watch at 50:49Read what they said
I would. Um, this is a bill. It doesn't change anything that, uh, the good sponsor just talked about, but it does add another section to alimony. And this is an issue that was recently brought up to me where, um, as, as the good sponsor, uh, mentioned, typically when you have alimony and, uh, and then you're remarried, uh, the you no longer receive alimony. Well, there there is a, a circumstance where someone could be married, uh, get divorced, maybe the marriage was for, for 20 years. They get divorced and then decide that they're going to get remarried. So they get remarried and then maybe quickly after divorce again, at that point, it reset the alimony clock. …
S.B. 109 Alienation of Affection Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Moves to remove Second Substitute S.B. 110 from the Senate third reading calendar and return it to the Rules Committee for fiscal impact review, and asks whether anyone wants to speak to the motion.
▶ Watch at 1:02:10Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem. I move that we remove second Senate, second substitute Senate bill one 10 from the Senate Third reading calendar, Representative Teuscher moves at second substitute Senate B Bill one 10 removed from the Senate third reading calendar and be returned to rules Be returned to rules for fiscal Impact. Would you like to speak to it?
S.B. 109 Alienation of Affection Amendments · House floor debate (day 37) · Feb 26, 2026
Moves that the House adopt the House Rules Committee report.
▶ Watch at 1:04:39Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tem I move that the House Adopt the House Rules report.
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Presents H.B. 218, which would require a digital skills course in seventh or eighth grade, set clear standards for it, and create an advisory council to advise the superintendent.
▶ Watch at 2:05:28Read what they said
Awesome. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, um, as many of you know, and, and my, uh, intern as a flyer, if that's okay, if she passes that out. Yeah, That's fine. Um, as many of you know, we've, we've been working over the last few years on trying to ensure that kids can safely navigate emerging technologies, social media, and, uh, ai, um, in a way that sets them up to be successful in life. Um, as part of it, we have looked at companies that, uh, have algorithms that are harmful to miners. And, uh, as we, we looked at this, we really said, we need a three legged stool. One leg of that is …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Answers that the bill requires the board to establish course standards beginning with the 2027-2028 school year, which the board considers a reasonable timeline.
▶ Watch at 2:09:41Read what they said
Yeah, that, that's a really great question. If you look at line 63 of the bill, uh, it says, beginning with the 20 27, 20 28 school year, the state board shall have established standards for a digital skills course. Um, and so in, again, working with the state board, they felt like that was a reasonable timeline.
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Agrees, says an earlier version covered K-12 and that principles from a similar bill by Rep. Defay were folded in, and says the advisory council would help shape the curriculum.
▶ Watch at 2:11:41Read what they said
When you brought, could, do you mind if I respond to that really quickly? I, I completely agree with you. And I will say the, the original version of this bill was a little more expansive in providing requirements throughout the K through 12 experience to ensure that there was a learning path that they were talking about those systems. Then it wasn't just a, a single class being, uh, isolated out, but it might be in kindergarten and in first grade and in third grade. And each year you have different standards that, uh, the school board would te would, would, um, to work through. Representative Defay has had another bill that was somewhat similar. And so as we …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · Senate Education Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Answers that the bill leaves the advisory council's makeup to the state superintendent and that the Legislature could revisit it in a year.
▶ Watch at 2:15:21Read what they said
Yeah. Um, if you look at line 68 and 69, that's where it talks about it uhhuh. Um, and, and really we've given, um, full autonomy to the state superintendent to determine what that council looks like. And in, in consultation with her, we felt like that that was the right place to put it. And if, if she doesn't feel like she can get the right people, or, um, maybe she's missing something, we could come back in another year and be a little more prescriptive. But we felt pretty comfortable giving her that autonomy.
S.B. 148 General Oversight Amendments · House Rules Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said the sponsor identified a real issue and took a creative approach, but was unsure it is the perfect solution and asked him to keep working on it while supporting the substitute.
▶ Watch at 57:50Read what they said
Let's see. Any I, I'll just, uh, add, and we've, we've had a little bit of conversation about this. I think that, um, I think you've identified an issue that we need to figure out a good solution to. Yeah, and I think you've been very clever and, and creative in, in trying to, um, incentivize the governor to follow the way that the, you know, the approach that we would rather and not have the courts have to step in and, and maybe, um, uh, you know, change the legislation that's in front of us. That being said, I'm not sure it's the perfect solution, so I, I would hope that you'd work through that solution in the future. …
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Presents H.B. 366, which would require one assigned judge per city's municipal cases at the closest courthouse, and introduces Ryan Robinson to add context.
▶ Watch at 1:02:44Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair, and thanks for passing out that handout that gives a little bit of background on this. Um, as many of you know, um, typically municipal, um, cases are heard in justice courts. Um, if those cases and, and those cases would include your class, uh, B class C misdemeanors and infractions. Uh, if those cases are appealed, then they're heard de novo at the district court level. Um, we also have granted the ability for cities to prosecute Class A misdemeanors. If they do that, then they have to bring those cases, uh, in a district court for the original jurisdiction. So for for much of Utah's histories, those appeals or the cases that were heard, …
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Presented the bill, which sets a framework for how the state treasurer handles digital assets in unclaimed property, modeled on how securities are treated.
▶ Watch at 1:23:11Read what they said
Great. And I, I do have a flyer. Um, my intern can pass up. I'm, I'll be very brief here. Um, the legislature has already passed the, uh, revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act, which, uh, as many of you know, the, the, our, our Good State Treasurer administers that. And if, if any unclaimed property is received, um, they have a great website and go through, um, significant efforts to try to get that property back to utahns, um, so that they, they can, uh, get their unclaimed property. Uh, unfortunately in in today's world, we're dealing with different types of assets and one of those types of assets is digital assets. And there isn't, uh, any clarity in the …
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Said the bill is a consumer protection tool that helps custodians return property to owners who have lost track of it.
▶ Watch at 1:31:17Read what they said
I, I'll just say, uh, in some of the comments that we heard, I, I don't know if any of you had have had the great, um, uh, feeling of going on to the my Cash Utah dot gov site and having your name show up there and be like, oh, here's $500 that I lost. And I'm so glad that the state grabbed it for me. 'cause otherwise I would never see that money. Um, before there's a number of accounts that I'm sure I set up 10 years ago and bought a little bit of Bitcoin. I actually know that and I can't find it. And I hope one day it shows up here and I can get …
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Gave the example of a person who lost a Bitcoin hard drive in a landfill and said the lost asset could be recovered in the future.
▶ Watch at 1:32:11Read what they said
I say remember that James Howell is the guy that, uh, lost his hard drive in a landfill, has been trying to excavate his landfill because he, you know, he can't find his, uh, he can't find his bitcoin hard drive. So, uh, it's a billion dollars sitting out there waiting to be discovered someday in the future. So, okay.
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 25, 2026
Gives sponsor summation, saying the bill restores a long-standing practice for municipal cases, does not require special calendars, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 1:47:21Read what they said
Th thank you. And, and I'll be brief. I appreciate the chair and the accommodation and hearing, um, all of these, uh, members of the, of the public and, and the real issues that this is causing. And, and I do want to say that I, I have compassion for the court and, uh, a great respect for Michael and the position that he's in and, and having to defend this position. If this was a new proposal, if we were coming here today to say, Hey, I think this would be a good idea to separate out, uh, municipal cases differently, I think that would be a very different debate. Um, and I could see the court's perspective in …
H.B. 478 Residential Rental Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Said he would vote against the motion so members of the public who came to speak have the chance to do so.
▶ Watch at 1:15:34Read what they said
Yeah. Thank you. I, I don't know if there's members of the public that are here to speak to this, but I would hate if they came all the way here and didn't get a chance to speak. So I, I would vote against the motion.
H.B. 382 Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Amendments · Senate Business and Labor Committee · Feb 24, 2026
Presents H.B. 382, which adopts the Uniform Law Commission's assignment for the benefit of creditors act in place of Utah's 1950s-era statute, describing it as a streamlined, non-bankruptcy process for businesses that cannot pay creditors.
▶ Watch at 1:00:26Read what they said
Great. Thank you Mr. Chair, and I appreciate the accommodation. Um, this is a, a relatively simple bill, um, currently in the code Utah has, um, We do have a handout. Did, did you want that passed Out? Yeah, do you mind? Yeah, that might give just a little bit of, um, background and context for members of the committee. So, as I was saying, currently in the code, um, Utah has a statute, uh, that outlines assignment for the benefit of creditors. This is in, um, chapter six of the code. And, um, this is a, um, uh, a method that has been around, uh, for a long time for how a, a company could wrap up and dissolve …
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Teuscher says a constituent had to travel in person to submit a government form, and the bill requires government entities to accept and provide forms digitally, with exceptions for forms requiring a notary, fingerprints, incarcerated filers, or other in-person requirements in law.
▶ Watch at 15:42Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Piute pro tem, um, colleagues, I had a constituent reach out over the interim and, uh, mentioned to me that he needed to fill out a government form in order to get a document, and, uh, found that this department required him to go fill out this form in person. It required him to take a day off of work to go travel halfway across the county to turn in a form and asked why in 2026 is there not some way that we can submit these forms digitally? And that's what you see here in HP 1 47. Um, this bill, uh, ensures that we don't have those unnecessary trips to a government office to handle …
H.B. 216 Child Support Calculation Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Explains that HB 216 would let courts consider Social Security disability insurance and SSI when imputing income for child support, at the court's discretion, and says Utah is the only state that excludes SSDI.
▶ Watch at 1:02:12Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, um, when calculating child support, there are a number of different, um, uh, measures that the court can use to impute income to one or the other spouses. One of the, uh, areas that is currently excluded is, um, social Security disability insurance. Now, social security disability insurance is a program, it's an insurance program for individuals who have worked and paid social security taxes and then have a severe long-term disability. It is meant to replace their long-term wages. Um, and those typic are a lot. Hi. Those payments are typically a lot higher than what you see for supplemental security income. SSI, which is also excluded. So recently I had a, uh, …
H.B. 216 Child Support Calculation Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Says he does not know exactly how the benefit is calculated but understands it is a percentage of prior earnings, higher when there are dependent children, and describes a constituent whose ex-husband receives about $6,000 a month.
▶ Watch at 1:04:53Read what they said
That's a good question and I don't know exactly how it's calculated. I can tell you what I've heard generally is, um, it, it depends on how much money you made before. So it's a percentage of the money that you made before. Um, I know in, in most kind of private areas it looks at about 60% of the income that you were making before in, in furthering that. But if you also have kids, then they add additional amounts of, um, of that insurance that comes to you. So I know in my, uh, constituents case, um, her ex-husband was getting about $6,000 a month in, uh, social Security disability insurance.
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Supports circling the bill to allow more time to understand it before the session ends.
▶ Watch at 2:18:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would support the motion to, to circle I, I'm here looking at the sixth tab. I'm trying to understand it. Uh, I think a little bit of more time makes sense, especially when we still have a couple weeks left in the session.
H.B. 88 Public Assistance Amendments · House floor debate (day 34) · Feb 23, 2026
Teuscher supports the motion to circle, saying more time would help members understand the sixth substitute.
▶ Watch at 2:18:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would support the motion to, to circle I, I'm here looking at the sixth tab. I'm trying to understand it. Uh, I think a little bit of more time makes sense, especially when we still have a couple weeks left in the session.
H.B. 433 Professional Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asks whether any member of the public can submit a request that requires the office to respond and report on whether harm exists.
▶ Watch at 1:01:56Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks for that presentation. So a couple questions I have. One is, if I understand this right, any member of the public then can submit the request, but this requires then for LER to respond to that request actually to determine whether or not harm exists and to do some sort of reporting around that. Is that, is that correct?
H.B. 433 Professional Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asks how many requests the bill might generate, how they would be prioritized, and how a backlog would be handled.
▶ Watch at 1:02:27Read what they said
So, so can you walk me through that a little bit? I mean, how many requests do you think that this might generate? And, um, when you say kind of based on priority, how is that prioritization going to take place? Will the legislative requests have first priority versus the public requests? And if you get a big backlog, you know, how's the, how are we gonna understand that and, and the resourcing constraints that you have?
H.B. 433 Professional Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Asks whether the office needs this statutory authority to respond to public inquiries.
▶ Watch at 1:05:46Read what they said
Can I ask one, one additional question, and that is, um, for that response that you received, or if you were, say, this bill didn't pass, do you, do you feel like you don't have the ability to respond to those inquiries that, that you have? I mean, do you need this statutory, uh, permission to go ahead and do that? Or what, what does this give you that you don't have today?
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 20, 2026
Presented HB 217, which lets anyone report a vehicle stolen at any time but gives rental car agencies a 48-hour window before reporting a rental vehicle stolen, as a compromise reached with law enforcement and rental agencies after a constituent raised concerns about a 10-day demand letter requirement.
▶ Watch at 2:19:22Read what they said
Alright, thank you Mr. Chair. This is a, a very simple bill. Um, over the interim, I had a constituent of mine who actually works for Enterprise Rental car come and, and raise a concern that, um, in some jurisdictions that they were being asked before they could report a, a vehicle stolen. Um, that they wait, uh, 10 days and at a 10 day demand letter. Um, um, and then after that demand letter had been sent out, then they'd be able to report the vehicles stolen. Unfortunately, in today's world, uh, when a rental car vehicle like that is gone for that many days, often it has already left the country, uh, definitely left the state and they …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Moves to adopt House Amendment 1 to the bill.
▶ Watch at 9:37Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Speaker, I move that we adopt House Amendment one in my name.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Explains that the amendment keeps a county that splits obligated to pay bonds levied while the area was part of the original county.
▶ Watch at 9:49Read what they said
I would. Uh, this is a, uh, a recommendation that came from the good representative from Santa Clara. Um, my seatmate tells me that that is, um, across the street from Dixie Downs. Um, but, uh, he had a great suggestion here to ensure that, um, in the case that, uh, a county were to split that, uh, the original county would still be obligated to pay any, any bonds that were levied during the time they were part of the county. And that's what this just clarifies.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Presents the bill, which creates an alternative path for a county of over one million people to split into two counties if cities with at least a third of the county population pass resolutions, requiring a feasibility study and voter approval; says no groups he knows of oppose it.
▶ Watch at 11:03Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, this is an issue that, um, we've been working on for quite some time. In fact, my predecessor before I came into office, uh, had started to work through this issue because there were, um, some people in, in the county that wanted to see if this, if as a county gets bigger and bigger and bigger, if there's a time where it makes sense to take a county and split it into a smaller county. And that's what you see here. Uh, as we've worked through this issue over really the past, uh, six, seven years in house Bill two 12 currently, uh, there is a process and statute that allows for a …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Answers that the constitution already provides a path for splitting a county, requiring a majority vote of the current county, subject to statutory restrictions.
▶ Watch at 15:00Read what they said
Yeah, that's, that's a really great question. Um, and the answer is no. So there already is that path that's set in the Constitution and then according to statute of how it would be raised to the voters. But the, the, um, constitution contemplates the idea of splitting a county. And the constitution requirement again goes that the, the county, the current county all would have to vote in a majority for that split. And then it's subject to whatever other restrictions that we put within statute. Thank you very much. Thank you Representative Cutler.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Summarizes that the bill provides an alternative path and that the decision on splitting Salt Lake County should be left to its voters, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 17:50Read what they said
You, Mr. Speaker. Like I said before, this is a consensus bill, uh, that just provides an alternative path. Um, doesn't necessarily call for any sort of splits, but I I do think it's fair to, to ask the question, especially as a county gets over 1 million people, um, to say what is the right size of that government. And when we look at Salt Lake County, uh, it is one of the largest counties in the United States. Um, it has, uh, a, a large budget over $2 billion, maybe that is the right level. I think that's up for the, the voters of Salt Lake County to decide. Um, but having a path that allows for that …
H.B. 228 Vehicle Sales Amendments · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Teuscher presents the bill, which adds specific branded vehicle titles for flood, fire, gray market, hail, stolen and recovered, and rebuilt damage, requires a national title database check, and applies other states' brands to vehicles titled in Utah, to give buyers more disclosure.
▶ Watch at 29:00Read what they said
Thank Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, over the summer I had a, uh, constituent come to me, uh, that told me about a situation that they were in. They had bought a, a used car for their 16-year-old son. And, um, after a few months of having the car, they started to see sort of polka dots on the car come out. And it kept getting worse and worse as they washed it and sat in the sun. And, uh, as they looked into it, they found that that car had actually been, uh, in a area of the country that had experienced very heavy hail damage. And, uh, later on, the whoever owned the car or whatever re repaired …
H.B. 373 Higher Education Innovation · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Moves to lift H.B. 283, the raw milk amendments bill, from the Health and Human Services committee to the Natural Resources and Environment committee.
▶ Watch at 1:34:58Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tam, uh, two motions. First motion is, uh, I would like to lift House Bill 2 83 raw milk amendments from the Health and Human Services, uh, standing committee to the Natural Resources and Environment standing committee.
H.B. 373 Higher Education Innovation · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Says the raw milk bill would be better served in Natural Resources and that both committee chairs agree.
▶ Watch at 1:35:25Read what they said
Yes. Uh, this is a bill that, uh, would be better served in the Natural Resources Committee. Both chairs are comfortable with that. And, and we're making the motion
H.B. 373 Higher Education Innovation · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Moves to lift S.B. 81, the dyslexia testing amendments bill, from rules and place it on the Senate third reading calendar.
▶ Watch at 1:35:56Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I move that the following bill be lifted from rules and placed at the bottom of the Senate. Third reading calendar, Senate bill 81, dyslexia testing amendments
H.B. 373 Higher Education Innovation · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Explains that S.B. 81 was sent to rules for fiscal impact, a substitute now has a $0 fiscal note, and the bill can be considered on third reading.
▶ Watch at 1:36:20Read what they said
I would. This is a bill that was sent back to rules for fiscal impact because there was a substitute that was adopted in the committee. The substitute now is public. It has a $0 fiscal note, and so we can consider it on the third Senate. Third reading calendar.
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Opposes the bill, citing low municipal election turnout, higher election costs, and the view that delegate-selected replacements usually win later elections.
▶ Watch at 1:38:13Read what they said
Further discussion to the bill Representative Teuscher. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I, uh, as I've been thinking about this idea, I'll say I don't think it's the worst idea in the world, um, that, that being said, I, I, I think there's a couple concerns that I have. One is that you have lower turnout during the municipal election. I don't think the voters are really thinking through or expecting to see someone running, um, for the house or the Senate on that municipal election. So it would be a little bit odd. I I think two, it's gonna increase cost for elections, um, which I don't think is a good thing. Uh, generally I think we want to …
H.B. 443 Amendments to Procedure to Fill A Legislative Vacancy · House floor debate (day 31) · Feb 20, 2026
Opposes the bill, citing lower municipal election turnout, increased election costs and burden on candidates, and doubt that the bill solves a real problem since delegate-selected replacements usually win later elections.
▶ Watch at 1:38:17Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I, uh, as I've been thinking about this idea, I'll say I don't think it's the worst idea in the world, um, that, that being said, I, I, I think there's a couple concerns that I have. One is that you have lower turnout during the municipal election. I don't think the voters are really thinking through or expecting to see someone running, um, for the house or the Senate on that municipal election. So it would be a little bit odd. I I think two, it's gonna increase cost for elections, um, which I don't think is a good thing. Uh, generally I think we want to get more people involved in the process. …
S.B. 122 HOA Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Moved to adopt Amendment #1 to the second substitute.
▶ Watch at 1:14:34Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to move, uh, house Amendment number one in my name. Did I say Mr. Speaker Amendment? Mr. Chair?
S.B. 122 HOA Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Said the amendment restores a provision barring HOAs from regulating basketball standards into the declaration section, matching existing rule language.
▶ Watch at 1:14:53Read what they said
Yeah. Um, I saw the, the substitute today and went through, it looked like, um, one of the things that we worked on last year was, um, putting together appropriate guardrails for the ways that, uh, HOAs can regulate certain private property. One of those things was the regulation of basketball standards. And for whatever reason in the substitute that was, that section was not moved and copied into the declaration section. So this just adds that in the declarations that ensure that, uh, an HOA cannot regulate the use of a basketball standard under the exact same provisions that the statute already reads for an HOA rule.
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Introduces HB 147 and says a constituent had to make an in-person trip to submit a paper government form, so the bill requires agencies to offer an electronic way to submit and request forms that now require in-person or physical submission.
▶ Watch at 1:30:27Read what they said
uh, HB 1 47 for substitute from, uh, Representative Teuscher. Well, thank you, uh, Mr. Chair Committee. This is, uh, my very favorite, uh, committee to come and present in front of. And I, I don't tell that to every committee, so I just want you to know how much, uh, how welcome I feel in front of this committee. Um, this is a very simple bill. Bill, Are you speaking to? I will be speaking to the third sub. And, uh, Mr. Chair, if you don't mind, my intern has a, a great flyer that she's put together that will give a little bit of detail on the bill. Do you mind if she passes that out? That'd be …
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Explains that the original fiscal estimate reflected a reading of the bill that has since been clarified, and says agencies can meet the requirement at little or no cost using existing scanners, phones, and email.
▶ Watch at 1:34:26Read what they said
Uh, is a great question. And, um, I'll tell you, this has, um, been a challenging, uh, fiscal bill to work through with our, our great analysts at the, um, legislative fiscal analyst office. Um, uh, I'll share though it's not public, the original, uh, version of this bill had a $1.7 million fiscal note. And, um, the way they were interpreting the bill was to say that there had, or, or some of our government agencies were interpreting the bill. I, I won't put it, uh, just on the LFA, but, um, was that they would have to create some sort of electronic submission process that was secure and they would have to hire a bunch of developers to …
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Responds that the word fax was intended, and says fax and other electronic means such as email would qualify under the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:36:29Read what they said
I I did say fax and the only reason it came up in my mind is, uh, um, I called the doctor's office today and, uh, needed a form and they said, well, can you fax it over to me? I'm like, I'm not sure I've heard that in like 10 years, but, um, let me, you know, dust off my fax machine and see what I can do. Um, so, so to be, to be fair, um, in the, in the, um, bill, it says, um, electronic means, and, um, I believe a a electronically by email or other electronic means, I think of fax would still qualify.
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Says the bill covers forms not otherwise required by law or court rule to be done in person or with a notary, so candidacy filings that require a notary would still be in person.
▶ Watch at 1:37:14Read what they said
Um, it would include any, uh, any type of form that you would have that, uh, wasn't otherwise, uh, required under federal law, state law, or court rule that it had to be done in person or had to be done with a notary. So when you file for candidacy, it has to be done with a notary. So you'd have to still do that in person.
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Points to the bill's list of electronic submission methods, which is left to local government discretion, and says the bill has a delayed effective date of July 1, 2027.
▶ Watch at 1:37:52Read what they said
Well, I mean, we do give a list, um, in lines 43 through 49 of, of ways that they might be able to do this. Um, so if you read that there, it's at the discretion of the local government, but it could be electronically completing, electronically, signing it, downloading it, completing physically or electronically signing the form and then submitting that, entering the information online, uploading the completed and signed form, uh, sending the information by email. So, so we do try to share that. We also put in a delayed implementation date, so this is, doesn't go into effect until July 1st, 2027. So they have almost a year and a half to make sure that they're compliant …
H.B. 147 Government Form Submission Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Feb 19, 2026
Sums up by saying the bill is a consensus bill with no opposition, that departments were consulted and carve-outs were included for forms requiring in-person steps such as notarization or fingerprints, and that he is surprised the change is not already in place.
▶ Watch at 1:39:54Read what they said
Um, like I said, I think this is a very cons, it's a consensus bill. I haven't heard any opposition to it. I've worked closely with, um, all the different departments to make sure if there was anywhere that they felt like they couldn't implement this, that we've had those carve outs there, you know, for like incarcerated individuals, we talked about the notary. Um, if you're required to submit a fingerprint, those types of things that you do need to do in person, that totally makes sense. But, but quite honestly, I'm surprised that this is not already the case. I know we have a, a lot of great actors, uh, across government that have been trying to get …
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Presents H.B. 519, which lets the state treasurer take custody of unclaimed digital assets and hold them like securities: after three years without activity they become unclaimed, are held for three years, then are converted to cash while owners are still sought. Says the bill has broad support from the treasurer's office, the digital asset industry, and the Uniform Law Commission, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 14:30Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, as many of you know, we have a very robust unclaimed property, um, process in the state of Utah that's run by our good state treasurer. In fact, if, if any of you are interested, you can go to my cash dot Utah dot gov and see if there's any unclaimed property out there. Mr. Speaker, I just, uh, took a look and there's, uh, over $250 for a Mike Schultz, uh, coming from Ogden. So you might want to check that site out. That, that being said, um, one of the things that's increasingly happening in, in our state is as, uh, more Utahans are purchasing, um, digital assets, uh, cryptocurrencies, uh, as that …
H.B. 465 Juvenile Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Rep. Teuscher moves to encircle House Bill 360, a bill on judicial cases.
▶ Watch at 15:46Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tim, um, I move to encircle house Bill 360 6.
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Sponsor explains that H.B. 360 would have district courts hear municipal cases, assign at least one judge per city with no more than one judge per 500 cases, and hold hearings at the nearest courthouse, with a good-cause exception.
▶ Watch at 16:09Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, as you may know, um, in municipal uh, proceedings, there are two different types of cases that that city prosecutors deal with. The first type of case would be those that are heard in a justice court. These are typically your infractions, your Class C misdemeanors, class B, class B misdemeanors. Um, for those cases they're heard in a justice court. But if there's an appeal of that court, because the justice courts are not courts of records, uh, those cases will move to the district court and be heard de novo and be heard in front of the judges at the district court. Um, there are also some cities that choose to directly …
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Sponsor thanks Stoddard for his endorsement and urges members to vote for the bill.
▶ Watch at 20:48Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Uh, notwithstanding, uh, the good representatives, uh, uh, endorsement of this bill, I do hope you vote for it. Um, it is a good bill and, uh, we'll solve a lot of, uh, great issues in our judicial system. Thank you.
H.B. 153 Law Enforcement Officer Employment Amendments · House floor debate (day 30) · Feb 19, 2026
Speaks in support of the bill, saying it codifies Lauder Mill standards and helps ensure officers receive due process in disciplinary actions.
▶ Watch at 37:56Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. I just want to rise in support and, and applaud the good sponsor for his work on this. This is, um, something that has been in the works for a while that he has, um, really led the charge out on. And I know in working really closely with the Fraternal Order Police last year, this is something that was really important to them to ensure that their officers who are putting their lives on the line have the right to due process. And so codifying the louder mill, um, standards, um, just makes complete sense, uh, in this case and ensures that our officers get that right to due process when there's a disciplinary …
H.B. 358 School Scheduling Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Supports the bill, saying school district board members asked for more flexibility in setting school days and that the bill provides that flexibility while keeping required instructional time.
▶ Watch at 42:54Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to applaud the good sponsor's work on this bill. Um, I had heard from city or from, uh, school district board members in my area of wanting to have more flexibility in the way that they were administering school days, that they felt really restrained by, uh, the requirements that we had. And I had opened a bill kind of looking at different options for this, had a good conversation, uh, with Representative Welton and found that he was already moving in that direction. And so he has really taken the bull by the horns here and found a great solution, um, that secures, uh, the, the time that we need …
H.B. 382 Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Amendments · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Presents H.B. 382, which updates Utah's existing assignment for the benefit of creditors law to match a uniform state law from the Uniform Law Commission, describing it as a less expensive alternative to federal bankruptcy for businesses unable to pay their creditors.
▶ Watch at 1:36:46Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, as many of you know, assignment for the benefit of creditors is an alternative to the bankruptcy options that are offered under federal law, um, really for businesses that can't pay its creditors. Now, this, this, uh, this option, the assignment for the benefit of creditors has been around for, um, really since the beginning of our country existing in common law. Um, however, it is something that, uh, Utah codified back in 1953 and, and a number of other states have done that or have relied on the common law to move this, this, uh, process forward. However, um, it was something that was taken on by the Uniform Law Commission to say, could …
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · House floor debate (day 29) · Feb 18, 2026
Sponsor presented H.B. 416 to create a cancer benefit trust fund that would cover firefighters' expenses during the gap between a cancer diagnosis and the start of workers' compensation benefits, managed by a board within the Utah Fire and Rescue Academy, and urged passage.
▶ Watch at 1:40:53Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, you get two for one, uh, today. Um, but I'll tell you this is, uh, of all the bills that we're going to debate, uh, this session. This is one of the most important bills. Um, last year, uh, as many of you know, Utah took the lead in putting together one of the most robust fire screening, uh, firefighter screen cancer screening programs in the country. Now, firefighters have a much higher risk of certain cancers due to their long-term, uh, exposure to smoke and chemicals and other hazardous materials. And, uh, we already have a law that recognizes presumptive cancers that emerge from a firefighter service that, uh, that, uh, are eligible for …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Presents H.B. 223 to move electronic signature gathering to an app-based system, end paper signature gathering in 2030 with reporting to an interim committee, and add driver's license scanning and security provisions.
▶ Watch at 1:25:04Read what they said
Yeah, good to be here. Um, thanks for having me. I do have a flyer that my intern has put together. Do you mind if she hands that out to the committee? No, That's fine. Thank You very much. Well, I, I'm excited to present this bill. Um, as many of you know, I think, uh, all of you were around, uh, in 2022, um, when we created the electronic signature gathering process, um, for initiative referendum and candidate nominations. And at the time, the intent behind this process was to create a more secure, uh, more streamlined, um, process that allowed for still gathering of signatures. This is not something that anyone could just jump online and suddenly add …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Responds that the electronic system already exists, that the bill adds a holographic signature and a record for challenges, and that the process allows signers to remove their signatures later.
▶ Watch at 1:36:03Read what they said
So, um, a couple things. I I do wanna make it clear, and I think you understand this, this system does exist today. So someone can go and gather electronically through this system. This bill just makes it, well, one, it moves to the Sunset that we've talked about, but also it actually adds some of that, um, uh, security, uh, protocols that you're talking about. In addition to signing the, or scanning the driver's license, it does also asks for a holographic signature. The holographic signature is not used for that verification process. But if someone were to challenge, um, that record and it does create a record in immediately, um, in the system that then goes to the …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Says the dates are a goal, that the Lieutenant Governor's office and DTS find them reasonable so far, and that annual reporting would allow adjusting them.
▶ Watch at 1:41:02Read what they said
Uh, yeah. I mean, if that's the will of the committee, I, I think the goal here isn't necessarily to have a certain date to say it's gotta be 2030. The goal here is to say, we've gotta move to this system, and how do we get there and how do we get everyone motivated? Now, I've had conversations with Lieutenant Governor's office and DTS on these dates, and, and so far I haven't heard any pushback. They feel like these dates are reasonable. But what we, what I said before is we've, we've tied in that reporting, the annual reporting back to the government, um, operations interim committee to know if we're on track. And this gives us three …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Explains that the current system is browser based, that the 2028 requirement is an app that stores information offline until connection, and that the app would be developed by DTS.
▶ Watch at 1:42:14Read what they said
this will do is, um, they'll be creating an app. So today's world, if you were to use this, it's browser based. So you'd open your, your favorite browser, internet Explorer, or Chrome or Firefox, whatever it is. You go to the website, you'd log into secure page, you, you, you'd click on whatever petition you're working on, it would bring it up, you know, you'd register who you are as the gatherer. And then it has, you know, the information for, okay, I'm ready to collect the first signature. You know, it's scan in the driver's license and everything, but it's all browser based. And so if you happen to be in one of, uh, Senator Owens areas, let's …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · Senate Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Thanks the committee, says he is willing to revise the dates if needed, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 1:49:46Read what they said
I, I appreciate the discussion. Um, I'm happy to work on some, some revised dates if we need to push this out. And would love your feedback on, uh, on how we can make this a little more robust. Um, yeah, I'll just leave it at that. I appreciate the committee's consideration and urge its support.
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Introduces HB 519, distributes flyers, and says the bill sets rules for digital assets under unclaimed property law; turns time to the treasurer and administrator.
▶ Watch at 46:33Read what they said
Well, thank you Mr. Chair. Thank you. Uh, members of the committee, um, earlier my intern dropped off some flyers, um, with the policy analysts. Do you guys have that you can distribute to the committee? Did you pass those out? Thank you. Awesome. And, uh, with me today, I have our distinguished, uh, state treasurer, Marlow Oaks, and also Dennis Johnson, who is our Unclaimed Property Administrator. I'm gonna turn some time over them in a, in a second, but wanted to give you guys a little bit of background. As many of you know, we have, um, an amazing program for unclaimed property within the state that is, uh, administered by the treasurer in his office. And he …
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Says the three-year period was chosen after working with industry and the treasurer's office, matching the period used for securities.
▶ Watch at 59:55Read what they said
Okay. Thank you. And Representative Shallenberger, if I could just add, we worked really closely with, with the industry as well as with the treasurer's office to figure out where that sweet spot was, and that's where we landed with, um, three years. It's what's everyone, everyone is used to on the security side anyway, and so it just made sense to stick it at three years.
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Explains the amendment makes a small drafting change by removing the word stock from exchange to make the language broader.
▶ Watch at 1:15:01Read what they said
Yep. It's just a, a small change in, in the way that it was drafted. It gets rid of the word stock, uh, from exchange and makes it broader to, to encompass what we're talking about here.
H.B. 519 Unclaimed Property Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 17, 2026
Says the bill is a common sense step and sits within the Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act, which set the three-year period for securities.
▶ Watch at 1:15:50Read what they said
Yeah. Well, um, I think you guys have heard a lot of comment of how this is really a common sense step in the right direction for Utah, so we appreciate, uh, this committee's attention. One, one thing I did want to mention, I, it's clear on, on the flyer, but I didn't talk about it, is this sits within the, um, the Revised Uniform Unclaimed Property Act. And, uh, I've presented on this committee before on, on the Uniform Law Commission, um, act. This is a space that, you know, wasn't something that was contemplated by the ULC at the time. I'm sure we'll see some future, um, clarification from the ULC on this. But, um, but the, the …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Presents HB 218 as replacing the current seventh- and eighth-grade digital skills class with a course on internet, social media, and AI safety, with standards set by the State Board and reviewed on its scheduled seven-year cycle.
▶ Watch at 1:27:31Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, as you know, Utah has taken the lead in trying to protect children, um, from the harms of social media and new technologies that we've seen online. And in fact, in, in some ways it's become a bit of a, a cliche because each year we're doing more and more and trying to lead out. And other states have taken notice and are are watching Utah and following Utah's lead as, as we, uh, really looked at this issue, uh, four years ago and trying to decide the path that we would move forward, um, there were really three legs of a stool that we talked about. The first leg was ensuring that these …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says the bill does not change high school graduation requirements and replaces only the seventh- to eighth-grade class, after working with the State Board of Education.
▶ Watch at 1:30:42Read what they said
Uh, Mr. Speaker, thank you for the question. It is not an original, uh, version of this. Bill replaced the class that, uh, the kids typically take taken ninth grade. However, working closely with the State Board of Education, they felt like it was more appropriate to place this in the seventh to eighth grade class. And so it doesn't affect any high school graduation requirements. It doesn't have the assessment that the original bill had. This simply replaces that seventh to eighth grade class.
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says the advisory council is permissive and would report to the state superintendent, who would report to the Legislature.
▶ Watch at 1:31:32Read what they said
Yeah, Mr. Speaker, thank you for that question. Um, to note the advisory, uh, council is, uh, permissive. So it's only if the state superintendent decides to move forward with that, and then they would report back to the state superintendent. So we felt like that was appropriate because they were the one pulling that committee together and then the, they report back to the state superintendent and then the state superintendent would report back to the legislature.
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Says the State Board would develop course standards and that they would likely be interactive and hands-on.
▶ Watch at 1:32:42Read what they said
That's a great question, Mr. Speaker. These concepts, uh, that are laid out are then, are then asked to be incorporated into this course. But in terms of the standards that would be developed for the course, that would be up to the state board. So I would assume that as they come up with the course standards, that they would try to incorporate this in a way that's interactive and that kids can use and be able to really get hands on. But we're giving that discretion to the state board as they develop the, the standards.
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Gives closing summation, citing a town hall on cell phones in classrooms and the value of State Board standards, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 1:34:19Read what they said
Wow. I don't know how to, to sum it up better than that. Um, I will say I, I completely agree with a good representative from Utah County that said we hope that parents are leading out in this space and they're teaching their kids that is imperative, um, that they had that relationship. I had an experience, uh, a little over a year ago where we were, um, having a town hall that was focused on, uh, really was cell phones in the classroom, but we talked about the harmful effect of cell phones. And we had a number of the SBOs and class officers from Herriman High School there. And they certainly had an opinion on whether or …
H.B. 306 Reinvestment Fee Amendments · House floor debate (day 28) · Feb 17, 2026
Supports the bill, noting it affects which HOAs can use reinvestment fees and describing his experience living in both a low-amenity HOA and a large planned community that uses the fee for community programming.
▶ Watch at 1:47:02Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. And I think maybe just to, to piggyback on the last conversation. I think in addition to what, um, the good sponsor, um, from Davis County was talking about, I think it also adds that capital and intensive infrastructure maintenance to line one 30. So an area where those reinvestment fees could go to pay for. Um, but then the, the lines 60 through 66 is saying that these things are not capital intensive infrastructure maintenance, thus you couldn't use the reinvestment fee to pay for those things. So I, I think that gets at what, uh, the, the good representative from West Valley was, was talking about. That …
H.B. 332 School District Project Financing Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Moved to hold the bill, saying there is a real problem when boards bypass voter-rejected bonds but the bill does not fit large districts, praised Jordan District's cost cuts, and suggested interim study.
▶ Watch at 1:17:20Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd like to make a motion to hold house Bill 3 32 second substitute. That's in order. We'd like to speak to your motion. I would, and I appreciate, uh, the discussion that we've had, uh, the great work, um, from Representative Ox here in bringing this issue forward. I do believe that there is an issue here. Um, I think that when, uh, an issue goes out to voters that voters reject and then it comes back to a school board and they find some way to do the exact same thing, uh, using a different finance tool, that there's a problem there. And, um, I I appreciate the comments from Representative Peterson of saying, …
H.B. 335 County Employment Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Said he supports due process and asked what share of members would move from merit to at-will status if the bill passed.
▶ Watch at 1:38:55Read what they said
Thank you. Uh, and thanks for for your comments here. I'm a huge proponent of due process. In fact, worked really hard with the FOP last year on a bill, trying to get that, that now is advancing with, um, Representative Gwynn. This, this session. Um, I think most of us are, are very, um, supportive of due process and wanna ensure that officers have it, especially because of the line of work that they do and how important that is. So the question I had is with this particular bill, um, what percentage of your members would then qualify as these, the merit versus at-will employees? If this were to pass? I believe the question was asked yesterday. Um, …
H.B. 216 Child Support Calculation Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 13, 2026
Sponsor explains that HB 216 would allow courts to include Social Security Disability Insurance when calculating child support, noting Utah is an outlier in excluding it, and that judicial discretion is preserved.
▶ Watch at 58:28Read what they said
Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the committee. Um, I do have a flyer that my intern has. Do you mind if she passes that out, please? All right. Well, um, earlier this year, I had a constituent reach out and, um, she, uh, had recently been divorced and, uh, explained to me that, uh, as they were going through, uh, the decision of child support, um, you know, she was on a, a fairly limited income, um, her husband, uh, qualified for Social Security Disability insurance, and, um, was that made up the majority of his income. And, uh, under Utah Code, I didn't realize this at the time, but we exclude Social Security Disability insurance from being, uh, …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Explains the Senate changes: signs that only name a candidate and office would be presumed paid for by that candidate without a disclosure, municipalities could not prohibit political signs in park strips adjacent to a owner's property, signs could remain up only during the 14 days after an election, and local governments could still regulate signs that create traffic, pedestrian, or line-of-sight hazards.
▶ Watch at 25:38Read what they said
I would, uh, the Senate and their great wisdom made, um, two changes to the bill. Um, the first change is, uh, as you'll recall, the bill originally, uh, requires all political signs to include a disclosure as long as it is, uh, larger than 18 by 24 inches that says that which, which campaign or candidate paid for the sign. They've added some language that essentially says that if it is a sign that just advertises a candidate, so it just says the candidate's name and the office they're running for, uh, that you can presume that that is the candidate that paid for that sign. Now, if the sign were to send some different message, vote against a …
S.J.R. 5 Joint Resolution Amending the Utah Rules of Civil Procedure · House floor debate (day 25) · Feb 13, 2026
Explains that the joint resolution is the companion to a MacPherson bill and sets court procedure rules for removing eligible cases to the three-judge constitutional panel, and offers to answer questions.
▶ Watch at 30:22Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, this is just the companion bill to the bill that, uh, we recently heard from Representative MacPherson establishing, uh, the rules on how we go about to remove a case, uh, that is eligible to be heard by the three judge panel on constitutional issues. So this just sets up what those rules are, um, in, in the rules of procedure for the court. With that, happy to answer any questions.
H.B. 313 Landscaper Certification Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asked whether landscape contractors need a state license and what a landscape contractor license allows them to do that they could not otherwise do.
▶ Watch at 43:56Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I also really appreciate the work. I think this is looking a lot better, um, than it was. So, so my question is, and forgive my ignorance, but currently is there some sort of licensing requirement for landscapers? Landscape contractors are a specialty license and currently they, they have to do six hours of continuing education every two years, but there is a specialty license they have to earn, um, to receive that designation of landscape contractor. And, and what does a landscape, a landscape contractor license permit you to do that You couldn't do otherwise?
H.B. 313 Landscaper Certification Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Asked Sundloff what requires someone to hold the landscape contractor specialty license.
▶ Watch at 48:51Read what they said
Thank you Josh, for your testimony. I, I have a quick question, not not really related to what you said, but since you're an expert in this space, I, I, similar to the question that I had asked, uh, earlier to Representative Arthur, I'm just wondering about the licensing of landscapers generally.
H.B. 313 Landscaper Certification Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Clarified that the question is not whether to license landscapers and asked where the line is drawn for needing a license.
▶ Watch at 50:38Read what they said
Cut you off. And, uh, just in, uh, because of timing here, but my question, I'm not being critical of whether we should license it or not. I'm just trying to understand Yeah. Like at what point, you know, if I go and, uh, ask my neighbor, I want to mow their lawn and, you know, will you pay me $10? Does that make me a, a landscape contractor that requires a license? I'm where, where is the line drawn today of where you need a license?
H.B. 313 Landscaper Certification Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Said state law lets other providers offer courses that a listed provider approves, so the nursery association can seek approval, and that expanding the list could be considered in the future.
▶ Watch at 52:51Read what they said
Uh, and, uh, further action, Uh, yeah, I actually don't wanna make that motion, but I do want to comment on something that we heard in public comment. Um, there is, in the statute, there is a provision for other people to offer courses as long as they are approved by one of the people on the list. And it sounds like that's already happening that UNLA is offering courses because they have gotten the approval of HBA or somebody else, and they can do that. And so, while I think that there may be some value in the future to think about expanding the list, it's not that hard to be able to contact one of their associations and …
H.B. 202 Acupuncturist Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 12, 2026
He said he was not assured the hour requirements were well researched and suggested the issue be reviewed by the Office of Professional Licensure Review first.
▶ Watch at 1:34:58Read what they said
Yeah, I, uh, appreciate the presentation and the additional information that was shared here today. I think that was helpful to, to hear a little bit more about how they came to the hours. Um, I still am just a little concerned about, uh, you know, ensuring that we've done enough research to know where those lines need to be set. I just, I don't feel assured at, at this point. I think it's something that is, uh, really ripe for review by LER and that they could look at this and come back with recommendations and that we could come and adopt those recommendations. And if maybe that they, they, uh, agree with, um, where this bill is going. …
H.J.R. 24 Joint Rules Resolution - Appropriations Subcommittee Amendments · House Rules Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says Utah's budget process is envied by other states, that the bill may add contention without fixing the problem, and that the issue should be studied in the interim; will likely vote no.
▶ Watch at 1:23:18Read what they said
Um, I'll share my thoughts. I, uh, I I really appreciate the work that, that you've put into this representative and, and the thought to just question, you know, what's the best way forward? And I think you've hit the nail on the head that there is an, an issue here that continues to, to have complaints from members and a solution that, that needs to be there. I I will say, um, in defense of the process, as I've talked to other legislators from across the country, they all seem to be very envious of Utah's, uh, budgeting process. In most states. Regular members don't really have any say. Um, they don't get to dive into it. Uh, a …
H.J.R. 23 Joint Rules Resolution - Policy Development and Impact · House Rules Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Moves to amend line 30 to add 'if applicable' and 'one or more measurable objectives,' saying some bills may not have a good measure.
▶ Watch at 1:39:41Read what they said
I'd like to make a motion, um, and my motion is a motion to amend, um, and the mo the, uh, amendment would be in line, um, 30, sorry, excuse me. Uh, right there. Line 30 after the word and include a comma and then say if applicable, comma. So it would read, identify the chief sponsor's policy goals and if applicable, one or more measurable objectives to evaluate whether or not the legislation effectively addresses the policy problem. And I'll speak to that motion. And, and, and really I think this gets at what you're trying to do, representative. The, the only thing is I I, I do think there's some bills that maybe just there isn't a really …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Presents HB 212, which would add an alternative county-split path for counties over one million people based on city resolutions and a feasibility study.
▶ Watch at 37:22Read what they said
Okay. Can you hear me? Great. Well, good morning everyone, uh, appreciate the chance to be able to present this bill. Uh, this is a bill that, uh, we've been working on for a couple of years to, to get right and, and, um, I'll just say it, you know, it, it, uh, actually a couple years, it might be a, a, a little understating that this is a bill I know that my, uh, predecessor had worked on before. And, um, you know, there's been a lot of input that, that has come into this bill. But, um, before I get started, I've got a flyer for the committee. Do you mind if my intern hands that out? Yes, …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says a petition would need a third of the county's cities to agree on the size of the split.
▶ Watch at 43:34Read what they said
You could, but you'd have to get a third of the whole county cities to agree that that's the size of the split that you wanted.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says the petition must clarify the new county boundaries.
▶ Watch at 44:14Read what they said
Yeah. The, the language says that, uh, they have to, uh, clarify exactly what, what the new boundaries of the county are. Okay. And so that's what they'd have to, to identify and then pass that similar resolution.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Responds that splitting a county does not add a layer of government and describes accountability to voters.
▶ Watch at 45:57Read what they said
Yeah, um, I think, I think that's a interesting question. I mean, I, I think if you follow that, then you would say, well, the, the most streamlined that you could be would have no counties in the state, right? You just have, or maybe one county across the entire state. And that would be the most streamlined, the most effective in economies of scale. We have 29 counties currently in the state, and I think most people are pretty happy, uh, with the size and and scope of the, the county government that they have. So if, if, in this case you were to split, let's say it was Salt Lake County into two different counties, it doesn't doesn't …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Clarifies that he was not suggesting one statewide county.
▶ Watch at 47:56Read what they said
So I wasn't suggesting that we have one county statewide. I, I said duplicative. Not layered. Okay.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says a new county would have the same responsibilities, including the jail, which it could run or contract out.
▶ Watch at 48:33Read what they said
Yeah, good, good question. And lemme just say really quick, maybe Mayor, I wasn't very clear on my answer before, but right now we have 29 counter recorders, right? So this would mean we'd have 30 counter recorders. So it, I, I feel like in the way you frame that question, it's like you're going from one to two, but our entire state is divided into counties and, and it would be most efficient to just have one person doing everything. Like you get a great economies of scale, but there's a reason why we have la those layers of government that are closer to the people. Um, in, in terms of the jail, it would, it would work just …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Explains that the current petition process is hard for large counties and lacks impact information, and that the bill adds a feasibility study for voters.
▶ Watch at 50:48Read what they said
Yeah, yeah. I talked about it at the beginning of my, um, presentation, but currently the way it would work is, uh, any petitioner, any, any resident of the county could decide that they wanted, uh, to split the county. And so they would put together a petition and that they'd go and have to gather signatures, and they have to gather signatures from a fourth of the registered voters within the county. At that point, it immediately goes on the ballot and the, the entire county gets to decide whether or not to split. And so in terms of, of why we need this alternative path, as you get to bigger and bigger counties, the, the idea of gathering …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says a split opposed by two-thirds of the county would fail at the ballot.
▶ Watch at 52:19Read what they said
Well, if two thirds of the county is strongly opposed, then when it goes on the ballot, it will fail.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says the code does not specify how bonds are divided, that the feasibility study would disclose bond information, and that the bill makes such a split more likely.
▶ Watch at 52:54Read what they said
Um, there, as far as I understand, within the code, it doesn't specify exactly how you deal with, with that. Um, I don't see anything in the code that, that talks through that, I'll just say that, uh, in the, in the current code, this, this could happen. You know, if, if they gathered the signatures, they split, they'd have to figure it out. In the same way. This, this doesn't change that possibility at all. If anything, it just adds more information that would go through what those general obligation bonds are. And as part of the feasibility study, they would give that information to the voters so that they had that when they decide to, uh, when, when …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says one or more petitioning municipalities could trigger the process if together they have at least one third of the population.
▶ Watch at 54:20Read what they said
No, I think b is that one or more petitioning municipalities adopt it and they have a population of at least one third of the county.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says it is potentially possible, but the entire county would have to vote. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 55:23Read what they said
Potentially. Okay. Thank you Again. The entire county would have to vote and agree to that. I Understand. Okay.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says the bill bars leaving the seceding county with burdens that would materially increase its service costs.
▶ Watch at 56:49Read what they said
Yeah, they, they could, um, in lines 1 0 6, and I think this is maybe getting at what you're talking about with the, the tax issue. Is it, it does say you cannot leave the Seceding County with an area within the Seceding county's boundaries for which the cost requirements or other burdens of providing fundamental county services will material increase over previous years. O Okay. And then, okay. Uh, thank you.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says he has talked with county officials in multiple counties and that bond concerns have not been raised.
▶ Watch at 1:00:09Read what they said
I mean, I've, I've talked to county officials about this in multiple counties, and that is not a concern that has been raised. Okay.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Offers a substitute motion to favorably recommend the first substitute of HB 212.
▶ Watch at 1:01:27Read what they said
I, well, I'd like to make a substitute motion In order 'cause you're a member of the committee. I'd like to make a motion that we favorably recommend, uh, first substitute house bill two 12.
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Argues the bill makes splits harder to do without information and asks the committee to support it.
▶ Watch at 1:01:50Read what they said
I would. So, um, I know there's been a couple comments that, that feel like this path is going to make it easier for a county to split. I, I actually disagree. I, I think in today's world, i, i, it is a very high burden to get a fourth of the count, the signatures in the county, but that's about the number of signatures that a, um, a governor would need in order to get on the ballot. It's something that can be done. And in the current code, you can imagine a viral event where, you know, someone's ticked off because the county has raised taxes or something, and they, they go through with a petition to split …
H.B. 212 County Formation Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Says he is willing to keep working on the bill before the floor and urges the committee's support.
▶ Watch at 1:07:34Read what they said
Sum. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, I appreciate the discussion. Um, like I said, I'm, I'm happy to continue to work on this, uh, between now and the floor. If, if the committee feels like there needs to be some more specific language or there's plenty of time to talk to, uh, different county administrators to, to find out what they feel like the impact of, of having a bond on here is. But let me just be clear. This is a bill that I, you know, is, is largely intact from what I put out, uh, last year, not moving the bill forward to get notice to everyone in the entire state to come forward with any …
H.B. 228 Vehicle Sales Amendments · House Revenue and Taxation Committee · Feb 12, 2026
Presents H.B. 228 second substitute, which lists title brand types, requires branded titles for certain salvage-repaired vehicles, and requires a national title database search for vehicles titled from out of state.
▶ Watch at 1:20:13Read what they said
I will, thank You. Okay, perfect. Time is yours. Well, great. Uh, great time. If you, let me catch my breath really quick, just running from another committee. Um, so, uh, speaking to the second substitute and my, uh, my great intern has a flyer. Do you mind if she hands that out to the committee? Yeah, please. Thanks. Um, all right. So, uh, I had a constituent reach out to me, um, over the summer that purchased a vehicle, uh, that had a clean title. And after several months of rain and, uh, washing the car or whatever, they started to notice that there were spots all over the car. And it was clear that the car at some …
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Sponsor explains that the bill bars municipalities from setting a waiting period before a private person can report a vehicle stolen and limits rental companies to a 48-hour wait.
▶ Watch at 1:11:37Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, colleagues, uh, over the interim I had one of my constituents reach out and we Uintah lunch and uh, it turned out he worked for Enterprise Renter CAR and he explained to me that uh, we had some municipalities in the state that, uh, had a rule within their, um, police departments that, um, they couldn't, uh, report a car being stolen until the company had sent out a 10 day demand letter prior to, um, reporting it as stolen. And this caused some significant issues because often if they wait that amount of time to send out the letter and wait 10 days from when the rental car was supposed to be returned, uh, …
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · House floor debate (day 24) · Feb 12, 2026
Gives closing remarks saying the bill strikes the right balance and urging support.
▶ Watch at 1:15:38Read what they said
Teuscher for summation. Thank You, Mr. Speaker. I agree this strikes the right balance and I urge your support. Thank you.
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Presents HB 360 and introduces Ryan Robinson to explain the court scheduling problem and the bill's proposed solution.
▶ Watch at 1:03:57Read what they said
Thank you so much. I have, uh, Ryan Robinson here, who's the West Valley City prosecutor, and I'm gonna turn some time over to him in in just a second. But, uh, really, uh, pleased to be in front of the committee today to present house Bill 360 6. Now, as many of you know, um, when cities prosecute as the Class B, class C, uh, misdemeanors and infractions, uh, when there's an appeal of those cases, they, they are appealed to the district court and heard de novo. Um, cities also, um, by mandate from the legislature have the ability to prosecute class A misdemeanors. And in the cases when they do that, that also goes and is heard …
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Says he does not know the history and defers to Robinson.
▶ Watch at 1:43:57Read what they said
I dunno the history, I maybe I could defer to Ryan who knows the history of that. I don't know that I have a great answer for that.
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Says the court retains administrative authority under the bill and that the bill returns scheduling to the practice of the past 30 years.
▶ Watch at 1:46:42Read what they said
Well, I, I appreciate the, the discussion that we've had so far, and I, I think clearly the committee can see the impact that this has had on cities. Um, the one thing I just wanted to spend a a second talking about is, is again, the, the court's, um, You know, belief that this, this clearly, uh, interferes with their ability to administer. If you look at the Utah Constitution in Article eight, section 12, uh, it says there is a, there is created a judicial council which shall adopt rules for the administration of the courts of the state. I think that's clear and, and has been interpreted such that, that, that falls within the jurisdiction of the …
H.B. 366 Judicial Modifications · House Judiciary Committee · Feb 11, 2026
Says cities want the bill passed because the court's offer is not acceptable, and that he would withdraw the bill if the courts reach a solution.
▶ Watch at 1:50:36Read what they said
Thank you. I'll just add that, um, I also would, would hope that the courts would be able to come to a compromise of work with everyone. Um, there are two issues as they talked about these, these low volume cases that cities like South Jordan that I represent deal with. They, they don't prosecute the A's and they are severely impacted. And a lot of the other cities, uh, across the county that don't prosecute a's that are, that are impacted. There was talk from the court that they felt like they had a solution here. What I've heard from those cities is that the, the, the, what the court has offered so far is not acceptable and that …
H.B. 165 Critical Infrastructure Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Moves to lift S.B. 131 from the House Political Subdivisions Committee and return it to Rules.
▶ Watch at 2:57:56Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I move that the following bill be lifted from the political subdivision's, uh, house standing committee and return to rules. And that's Senate bill one 31st substitute River Restoration Amendments.
H.B. 165 Critical Infrastructure Amendments · House floor debate (day 22) · Feb 10, 2026
Explains that S.B. 131 was already assigned to the Political Subdivisions Committee and needs to go back to Rules for a fiscal impact review.
▶ Watch at 2:58:16Read what they said
Would. Um, this is a bill that, uh, actually was assigned already to the political subdivisions committee. It, uh, passed the committee was sent back to rules and we loved it so much. We sent it back over to political subdivisions for another hearing and, uh, uh, realized that it needed to go back to rules for fiscal impact, Trying to double check and scrub those Senate bills.
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Presents HB 416, which would create a trust fund to provide immediate benefits to firefighters diagnosed with cancer while workers' compensation claims are processed, overseen by a board within the Utah Fire and Rescue Academy and funded from excess fire insurance premium tax.
▶ Watch at 1:58:51Read what they said
Uh, it's HB four 16 for substitute firefighter, uh, cancer amendments. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, my intern, Molly has a flyer for the committee. Do you mind if she passes that out? That'd be great. Thank you. Alright, well, I am joined here by the distinguished, um, chief Clint Smith, uh, who is, uh, with the Draper Fire Department. And I'll turn some time over to him in, in a few moments, and he'll also be able to answer, uh, any of the questions the committee has. I know this is a tough committee, uh, that might have some really grilling questions. So be ready. Uh, chief Smith. But as you'll recall, um, last year through HB 65, the …
H.B. 416 First Responder Health Modifications · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Responds to concerns about the role of government, saying protecting public firefighters is a key government responsibility.
▶ Watch at 2:12:58Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I appreciate the, the comments that we had. I, I do want to just take one second to respond to the one, uh, comment that was concerned about the proper role of government. Um, I, I can understand that concern if we were talking about, uh, someone who works in the private sector, but I think there's an important distinction here between those public workers that work for the state or often work for political subdivisions of the state. And that the role that the government has to protect those workers, the government is employing those workers to go out and fight these fires to protect each one of us. And I would say not …
H.B. 382 Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Introduces HB 382, a Uniform Law Commission bill on assignments for the benefit of creditors, explains the uniform law process, and invites Edwin Smith to add detail.
▶ Watch at 2:15:06Read what they said
Yeah. Thank You. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I wonder if there is someone online, uh, ed Edwin Smith. Do do we have Edwin? You can join me in this presentation. He's getting promoted. Okay. Yeah. Great. So as, as he comes on, um, he can introduce himself, but, uh, has been involved in the, the drafting of this legislation as an expert in this space, and can answer any of the specific questions, uh, the committee has. But let me, let me just introduce, um, this, uh, this bill. Um, many of you may not be familiar with the term assignments for the benefit of creditors. Um, but, but these laws are state laws that are governed alternatives …
H.B. 382 Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Says the bill has been introduced in several other states, with a dozen or more expected to move it this year, and that Utah's version follows the uniform act, with a possible difference on notice timing.
▶ Watch at 2:24:02Read what they said
Yeah, great. Great question. So, uh, as I mentioned, this is a bill that just passed the, um, uniform Law Commission this last year. So it has been, um, filed in, um, uh, six different states, Arizona, Colorado, uh, Nebraska, Oklahoma. And, um, I'm trying to figure out on the map Alabama As legis, as, as Bills, you mean, Or? Yes. And they, and they're advancing in various stages. We have the first legislative session in the country, so ours is likely to be able to make it to the end, uh, quickly enough. But my understanding is there are, you know, uh, a dozen or more states that are planning this year, uh, to move forward with this legislation. …
H.B. 382 Uniform Assignment for Benefit of Creditors Amendments · House Economic Development and Workforce Services Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Urges support, saying the bill gives Utah businesses a tool to resolve financial distress faster and less expensively, with less disruption to workers and customers than regular bankruptcy.
▶ Watch at 2:28:12Read what they said
Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. I know this is the most interesting bill, which your committee will, will hear this year, but, um, though it is, it is very technical, let me just say that this is a tool that will be a good benefit for Utah companies. Uh, it will allow them, um, in, in the circumstance that this is the right fit for them to be able to get through these situations faster, less expensive, uh, to be less disruptive to workers and customers than in your regular bankruptcy process. And so I really, uh, appreciate, uh, the motion and urgent support.
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Thanked the committee for its patience and said the bill would be brief.
▶ Watch at 2:52:49Read what they said
Thank you for your patience. Sorry about that. We'll, We'll be really quick on this. This is,
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Presented the bill as a cleanup measure: prosecutors filing an information against a judge must also file it with the Judicial Conduct Commission, Commission records are not public records, and the Commission must report its cases annually to the legislature; no opposition was raised.
▶ Watch at 2:52:55Read what they said
This is a really just a cleanup bill for the Judicial Conduct Commission. Um, the, the real substance of the bill is that when a prosecutor files an information against a judge, they must also file it with the JCC. Um, and it clarifies that JCC records are not public records. They're not treated as that today, but it isn't in the grandma statute. So it just makes that clear. Uh, and then it requires an annual reporting of its case to the legislature. So I have the executive director here if you had any questions about the JCC, but that is really all the bill does. There's been no opposition to it.
H.B. 259 Parental Access to Children's Medical Records Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Feb 9, 2026
Asks about the substantial changes from the original bill, and the sponsor explains that the requirement is placed on the companies that supply the providers' record systems, with other states facing the same issue.
▶ Watch at 3:17:16Read what they said
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'm, I'm just curious about, this is a pretty substantial change from the original bill. Could, could you walk us through some of the changes and why, why you did that? Uh, yeah, because, uh, initially it was I was gonna cause the healthcare providers to fix this. Then I realized the healthcare providers are, are using systems that other people are, are creating for them. And so really the place to put the pressure is directly onto them. And, and actually I've discovered that there are several states who are doing the, some doing the same thing because they're having the same problem with this emergency, uh, uh, medical record provider. Okay.
H.R. 3 House Rules Resolution - Abandoning Legislation · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Teuscher supports the bill, saying he abandoned his own bill and that the process would clarify to the public that bills are done.
▶ Watch at 45:07Read what they said
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill having been someone who's had a bill that has gone out there. And I decided not to move forward with it and tried to communicate that as much as I possibly could to everyone. And still seeing a flurry of information and misinformation online of people saying, oh, this is just a deploy. There's a secret plan to be able to move this, this, uh, bill through. And not being able to explain it to people because on our system it just says it's sitting in the committee, it's waiting. Could be heard at any time. There wasn't a good process to move this through. I, uh, …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Moves to adopt the first substitute for H.B. 223.
▶ Watch at 58:02Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I I also move that we, uh, move the first substitute of HB 2 23.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Describes the substitute's changes, including cybersecurity requirements to meet the Lieutenant Governor's requirements, annual reporting to an interim committee, and a coordinating clause with H.B. 32.
▶ Watch at 58:10Read what they said
I would. Uh, this makes it just a couple minor changes. It, uh, changes the cybersecurity requirements to meet the Lieutenant Governor's requirements, uh, as there were some concerns brought up in, uh, committee about that. It also requires the LGS office to report back to the Government Operations Interim Committee, uh, each year. And then it includes a coordinating clause with HB 32.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Explains that the substitute changes the cybersecurity requirements to meet Lieutenant Governor requirements, requires LGS office reports to the Government Operations Interim Committee each year, and adds a coordinating clause with HB 32.
▶ Watch at 58:10Read what they said
I would. Uh, this makes it just a couple minor changes. It, uh, changes the cybersecurity requirements to meet the Lieutenant Governor's requirements, uh, as there were some concerns brought up in, uh, committee about that. It also requires the LGS office to report back to the Government Operations Interim Committee, uh, each year. And then it includes a coordinating clause with HB 32.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Presents H.B. 223 as an electronic signature gathering path using ID scans, citing cost savings, verification, and offline collection, with the paper path sunsetting in 2030.
▶ Watch at 58:56Read what they said
You, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues. As you'll remember, um, back in 2022, this legislature passed, uh, HB two 18, which created an electronic signature gathering process for initiatives referendums and candidate nominations. Now, at the time, uh, this was brought because as some communities decided that they wanted to move forward with some from referendums of local decisions that their, their counties had had made, they found that just the printing process in terms of getting those, um, packets together and having to print out all the information was significantly prohibitive. Uh, in fact, in one, uh, potential referendum that was trying to be run in Salt Lake County, they estimated it would cost over a million dollars just to print …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Explains that HB 218 from 2022 created an electronic signature process for initiatives, referendums and candidate nominations, that HB 223 uses ID scans to verify signers, sunsets paper signature gathering in 2030, and allows offline collection, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 58:56Read what they said
You, Mr. Speaker. Colleagues. As you'll remember, um, back in 2022, this legislature passed, uh, HB two 18, which created an electronic signature gathering process for initiatives referendums and candidate nominations. Now, at the time, uh, this was brought because as some communities decided that they wanted to move forward with some from referendums of local decisions that their, their counties had had made, they found that just the printing process in terms of getting those, um, packets together and having to print out all the information was significantly prohibitive. Uh, in fact, in one, uh, potential referendum that was trying to be run in Salt Lake County, they estimated it would cost over a million dollars just to print …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Responds that the process has not yet been used, and that some groups fear the ID requirement will reduce signers.
▶ Watch at 1:03:40Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That's a wonderful question. Uh, as far as I understand, no one has used this system yet because they, they have a paper, uh, paper method that they're used to. They go out and do that, and they're afraid, uh, that in adding the ID requirement that there'll be less people that want to sign the petition.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Responds that no one has used the system yet and that some petition groups fear adding an ID requirement will reduce signers.
▶ Watch at 1:03:40Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That's a wonderful question. Uh, as far as I understand, no one has used this system yet because they, they have a paper, uh, paper method that they're used to. They go out and do that, and they're afraid, uh, that in adding the ID requirement that there'll be less people that want to sign the petition.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Explains that identity is verified by scanning the back of an ID within the app.
▶ Watch at 1:05:06Read what they said
Yeah, just as part of the app. The, the verification process comes when you show your ID and scan the back of it. And that, and that way they instantly verify your identity.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says identity is verified in the app when the signer shows and scans their ID.
▶ Watch at 1:05:06Read what they said
Yeah, just as part of the app. The, the verification process comes when you show your ID and scan the back of it. And that, and that way they instantly verify your identity.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says other forms of identification are accepted but require manual review by the clerk's office.
▶ Watch at 1:06:19Read what they said
If you don't have a driver's license, there's a variety of other ways that you could verify your identification, but those process then require the manual review of the clerk's office to ensure that it really is you.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Says other forms of ID are allowed but require manual review by the clerk's office to confirm identity.
▶ Watch at 1:06:19Read what they said
If you don't have a driver's license, there's a variety of other ways that you could verify your identification, but those process then require the manual review of the clerk's office to ensure that it really is you.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
Gives closing remarks urging support, arguing the electronic process ensures signers are who they claim and reduces fraud and clerk burden.
▶ Watch at 1:10:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, uh, appreciate the great conversation that we've had here and the issues that, uh, that we're having to weigh. Um, I think it's important to note that when we're engaging in gathering signatures for an initiative, a referendum, or to get a candidate on the ballot, that is an electoral process. And I think it's a little interesting that, that people would feel is in, in the words of, of some of the people that you just heard, that it's too personal or invasive, uh, for someone to have to pull out their id. This they, they are engaging in law making. And if they don't care enough about the petition that's in front of …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House floor debate (day 21) · Feb 9, 2026
In summation, argues that ID scanning prevents fraud and forged signatures, says people will adapt to electronic signing as they did to cars, and urges support.
▶ Watch at 1:10:15Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, uh, appreciate the great conversation that we've had here and the issues that, uh, that we're having to weigh. Um, I think it's important to note that when we're engaging in gathering signatures for an initiative, a referendum, or to get a candidate on the ballot, that is an electoral process. And I think it's a little interesting that, that people would feel is in, in the words of, of some of the people that you just heard, that it's too personal or invasive, uh, for someone to have to pull out their id. This they, they are engaging in law making. And if they don't care enough about the petition that's in front of …
H.B. 425 Local Government Fees Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Moved to favorably recommend House Bill 425.
▶ Watch at 52:39Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, I move that we, uh, favorably recommend House Bill 4 25.
H.B. 425 Local Government Fees Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Spoke in favor of the motion, saying the bill provides a good framework and thanking the sponsor for bringing stakeholders together on a compromise.
▶ Watch at 52:51Read what they said
I would, um, thank you, Mr. Chair and, and want to thank Representative Peterson. I remember, gosh, probably three years ago in interim meetings, uh, when you first brought this forward. And I was still a little skeptical about, you know, where, where these guardrails were set and whether we were really, um, opening up a door kind of Pandora's box that we didn't necessarily want to, to open that maybe it would be better leaving it a little more, uh, nebulous, uh, so that cities weren't going out and charging more of these fees. But as I've seen her do this work over the last three years, I've just been thoroughly impressed with, um, where we've gotten to. I …
H.B. 347 Artificial Turf Placement Modifications · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asks what happens if an education agency does not follow the bill's notice requirements, and whether other entities or code requirements apply to artificial turf installations.
▶ Watch at 59:54Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, could you tell me representative, um, if I, I mean, I see the, um, requirements on lines 100 to 1 0 1 that say that an LEA governing board may not improve installation of artificial turf until the re the re turf until the requirements of this section have been met. What, what would happen if they didn't follow this regulation? What would be the remedy Right now with what had happened in my community? And, and to be clear, this bill is something that in this community, it's already happened. It doesn't do anything to, uh, help what's happened in this community. It's for other residents around the state where, um, my constituents feel …
H.B. 347 Artificial Turf Placement Modifications · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Says the notice may not solve the problem and suggests more study and stakeholder work on buffer zones before the bill advances.
▶ Watch at 1:25:38Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I don't, I don't necessarily agree or don't necessarily disagree with, um, the good representative here from Cottonwood Heights. Um, that, that this isn't a very large ask of the LEAs. Um, the, the thought that kept going through my mind as I heard the, the impactful, um, comments from, from the public was, I'm just not sure this bill really is gonna solve, solve the problem that, that we're hoping it's gonna solve. Um, I can imagine in my own situation, if I received a postcard that said that the school across the street was going to be putting in artificial turf, I'd be like, oh, okay, great. That might be a good thing …
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Asks the sponsor to respond to concerns raised by the title industry.
▶ Watch at 1:50:09Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to give, um, the sponsor a chance to respond to some of the concerns that were raised by the land and title. I'd be interested in his thoughts On that. Thank you very much for that opportunity.
H.B. 319 Electronic Records Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Feb 6, 2026
Supports the motion, saying the bill allows counties and recorders to try new approaches with this technology.
▶ Watch at 1:54:46Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I also support the motion to favorably recommend, uh, I said as the co-chair of the blockchain digital innovation task force for three years. And we, uh, talked about this very idea and wanting to move it forward. So I applaud the good sponsor in, in, you know, taking the, the bull by the horns and finding out an elegant solution that, that doesn't force us down in an alley, but allows us to be able to innovate and to try things out and, um, and, and take advantage of the, the great opportunities that this technology brings. Um, I, I found, uh, as, as I think we heard from, from both the good representatives …
H.B. 214 Firearms Liability Amendments · House floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
Presents H.B. 214, which he says clarifies loopholes in the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act so that firearm manufacturers are liable only for their own wrongful conduct, and offers to answer questions.
▶ Watch at 40:52Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Uh, as many of you know, under the protection of Lawful Commerce and Arms Act, or the PC P-L-C-A-A, it shields gun manufacturers, uh, distributors and sellers from most civil lawsuits, um, when they're, when they've legally made and sold their firearms that are then later used in a crime. Now what what we've seen is some enterpri enterprising, uh, attorneys across the country be able to take advantage of loopholes, uh, in the PC P-L-C-A-A, uh, especially under consumer protections or broad interpretations of the predicate exception that allow for these types of suits to move forward. So what HP two 14 does is essentially cleans up those loopholes to ensure that, uh, manufacturers are …
H.B. 214 Firearms Liability Amendments · House floor debate (day 17) · Feb 5, 2026
In closing, says lawsuits remain allowed for gross negligence, recklessness, or intentional misconduct, and urges support for the bill.
▶ Watch at 46:02Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I appreciate, uh, the discussion here to some of the concerns that were raised by the good, uh, representative from Salt Lake County. Lawsuits are still allowed if there is injury or death as a result of omission by the manufacturer, that that constitutes gross negligence, recklessness or intentional misconduct. Again, if they are bad actors, if they're out advertising and trying to get people to use their guns in a way, uh, that is un torn, they certainly are still liable for that. But what we're trying to do is protect companies, especially Utah companies that manufacture these weapons that are putting out a product that are doing it in a safe and responsible way, …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House Education Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Presents HB 218, which replaces an existing seventh and eighth grade digital skills course with content on online safety and emerging technology, and gives background on the bill.
▶ Watch at 32:07Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm sorry. We do have a handout that, uh, you've provided to the members of the committee, so we'll get that handed out. Thank you very much. Um, and thank you for accommodating my schedule. Always happy to be in front of the Education Committee. Um, just wanna give a little bit of background. Uh, as, as many of you know, I worked, um, closely with, um, the governor's office and, uh, Senator Cullimore and Senator Mikel a few years ago in looking at social media regulations for minors. And at the time, we, uh, identified that there was a real problem. Uh, there were no states in the nation that had really taken any steps …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House Education Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Says the bill replaces an existing required digital skills course, that the state board would develop standards on the new topics, and that the course review cycle is already underway; confirms the fiscal note is zero.
▶ Watch at 37:51Read what they said
Great. Great question. So there's a current digital skills course that's offered for seventh and eighth graders that they have have to take. So this will replace that course. The course itself will be new because it's teaching new, new topics that weren't being taught before, but it's replacing that existing class that already fits into their Schedules. And so I see the fiscal note is zero, correct? Correct. Because when I first read this, I thought of how teachers sometimes resent new courses in districts that everybody wants to, you know, financial literacy. I can think of a lot of things over the years. So you're, so this would not be an entirely new course, but you've just put …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House Education Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Says the new course would not start until the 2027-2028 school year and the bill gives the board direction to begin developing the skills.
▶ Watch at 39:21Read what they said
Uh, great question. So the, it, the course would not start until the 20 27, 20 28 school year. Um, and so this just gives them the direction to start creating the skills that then would come in the next school year where the, the course would
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House Education Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Says the bill gives the state superintendent flexibility on whether to create the tech council and sets out what it would cover if created.
▶ Watch at 40:05Read what they said
Yeah, so we, in, in working with the state superintendent, um, we wanted to give them, you know, the flexibility that, you know, they can have this tech council or not have the tech council. Obviously without this statute, they could have a tech council on their own, but if they move ahead with the tech council, uh, trying to help them understand, um, uh, what, what they would review and, and cover. And so that's, that's what you see in the bill. That's what they were all comfortable with in the language. And so we kept it in there. Yeah,
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House Education Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Says the bill sets concepts for the state board to consider rather than standards, and the board will still develop the standards through its normal process.
▶ Watch at 41:23Read what they said
Yeah, and I mean, I'm not sure that what we're doing here is giving standards, and I may have used that word before, but what we, what we have on line 29 are concepts that they want to include. So they'll still develop the standards. Um, that's what the, the state board is set to do and the, and their, their committees and as part of their normal process. But we want them to think through these types of things like digital protection, social media awareness, digital privacy, cybersecurity fundamentals, those types of things. And I could see your point to say, well, those might change over time, and that's right. But this is, this is, I think, an important …
H.B. 218 Digital Skills Amendments · House Education Committee · Feb 4, 2026
Explains the amendment removes two lines on concepts not suited to middle schoolers and makes cleanup language changes requested by the committee.
▶ Watch at 51:09Read what they said
Thank you. I'll, I'll just say really quickly, um, when this bill originally came out, it was, um, focused at a high school, like a ninth grade class. And, um, so we had a teacher reach out, uh, that teaches middle school and made the suggestion that now that it's going to be in a seventh or an eighth or eighth grade class, there were a couple of the concepts that probably weren't ready for middle schoolers. And so that's what you see in this amendment here, taking out, uh, lines 53 and 54. And then there just some cleanup language that, um, that the education committee had asked for. So, appreciate all the great input that I've received on …
H.B. 392 District Court Amendments · House floor debate (day 16) · Feb 4, 2026
Spoke in support, saying multiple judges would bring legitimacy to decisions that pause laws and urged support.
▶ Watch at 17:29Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I rise in support of this bill. Um, I really applaud the good work of the sponsor of this bill and his efforts to try to find the correct solution here to a problem that we're seeing across the state. And I think that that problem is that right now in the way that these, the, the court, uh, process is set up is that it, it's too easy for one judge in one part of the state to step in and put a law that has been passed through the elected representatives and Senator Vickers and signed by the governor of all members of the state on hold. And so when those types of important …
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Sponsor presents H.B. 186 as a cleanup of Judicial Conduct Commission provisions, covering complaint filing by prosecutors and the Administrative Office of the Courts, notice requirements, records classification, and an annual case report to the Legislature.
▶ Watch at 7:28Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker colleagues. This is actually just a simple cleanup. Bill. Many of you are aware of the Judicial Conduct Commission. This commission is established in the Utah Constitution and is made up of members of the legislature, members of the court, and, uh, attorneys that are nominated and non-attorneys, uh, nominated by the governor. Uh, this 11 member independent fact-finding body investigates any allegations of judicial misconduct by state, county and municipal judges. And so this has been in place for, for quite a period of time. Um, our two representatives, uh, from this body, I have the pleasure of serving on the, the JCC along with, um, representative Grant Millard, uh, who serves in that. And …
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
In closing, says Utah is unique among states in having legislators serve on the Judicial Conduct Commission and that the bill will help the process work better.
▶ Watch at 12:00Read what they said
I'll, I'll be brief Mr. Speaker. I was just gonna say something that's interesting about the way that we have, uh, the Judicial Conduct Commission. All 50 states have some process where you can file an investigation, but Utah's unique in that it's the only body where legislators also serve, uh, on the Judicial Conduct Commission. And so it's interesting when we go and talk to other states about that process. Um, it, it's curious and, uh, from the perspective of the executive director of the JCC here and talking with a lot of his colleagues across the, the country, he finds that to be a real advantage that that we have in Utah. And, uh, something that we're modeling …
H.B. 60 Water Rights Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for questions.
▶ Watch at 34:09Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Yes. Representative Shallenberger, will you yield?
H.B. 60 Water Rights Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Asks the sponsor who determines whether a proposal is detrimental to the public welfare, citing the approval language in the bill.
▶ Watch at 34:09Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Yes. Representative Shallenberger, will you yield? Yes. Representative Teuscher. Great. So, um, Mr. Speaker, I just have a, a quick question, uh, in regards to the, the last, um, comments from the good, uh, representative from Cottonwood Heights. So the question was, who would determine whether or not something is detrimental to the public welfare? So as I read the bill on line 61, it says, the state engineer shall approve an application if there's reason to believe that. And then you go down, it says the proposed plan would not prove detrimental to the public welfare. So could you answer that question? Who makes that determination …
H.B. 60 Water Rights Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Asks who determines whether something is detrimental to the public welfare, citing line 61 of the bill.
▶ Watch at 34:15Read what they said
Great. So, um, Mr. Speaker, I just have a, a quick question, uh, in regards to the, the last, um, comments from the good, uh, representative from Cottonwood Heights. So the question was, who would determine whether or not something is detrimental to the public welfare? So as I read the bill on line 61, it says, the state engineer shall approve an application if there's reason to believe that. And then you go down, it says the proposed plan would not prove detrimental to the public welfare. So could you answer that question? Who makes that determination of whether or not something is or isn't detrimental to public welfare?
H.B. 60 Water Rights Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Says the bill clarifies the criteria the State Engineer may consider and states support for the bill.
▶ Watch at 35:21Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, I think the current statute, along with the the clarifications in this bill make it very clear who would make the decision of whether or not it's in the public welfare. All this bill changes, uh, as was mentioned in line 2 0 5, not taking it away from the state engineer, but clarifying that when the state engineer is making that determination that they can only consider certain things. And those are the things that the good representative, um, from Utah County has mentioned. It's the effect of the proposed plan on the beneficial use of water or the quantity, quality or availability of water and other factors as specifically directed by statute. I …
H.B. 60 Water Rights Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Says the bill makes clear the state engineer may consider only specified factors when deciding on public welfare, and says they will support the bill.
▶ Watch at 35:21Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, I think the current statute, along with the the clarifications in this bill make it very clear who would make the decision of whether or not it's in the public welfare. All this bill changes, uh, as was mentioned in line 2 0 5, not taking it away from the state engineer, but clarifying that when the state engineer is making that determination that they can only consider certain things. And those are the things that the good representative, um, from Utah County has mentioned. It's the effect of the proposed plan on the beneficial use of water or the quantity, quality or availability of water and other factors as specifically directed by statute. I …
H.B. 120 Tail Light Obstruction Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Moves to reassign HB 270 from House Business and Labor to House Health and Human Services.
▶ Watch at 1:09:19Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. I move that the following bill be lifted from the House Business and Labor Committee and reassigned to the House Health and Human Service Committee, HB two 70, healthcare Worker Post-Employment Amendments.
H.B. 120 Tail Light Obstruction Amendments · House floor debate (day 15) · Feb 3, 2026
Explains the reassignment is for committee workload balancing.
▶ Watch at 1:09:40Read what they said
Uh, Mr. Speaker, uh, this bill was originally assigned to Business and Labor. Unfortunately, um, health and Human Services that's meeting tomorrow has a very light agenda and business and labor has a very heavy agenda. So, just for load balancing purposes, we agreed to move this bill around.
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Presented HB 217, which would bar political subdivisions and police agencies from enforcing rules that delay or restrict reporting a stolen vehicle, and described the 78-hour limit with exceptions for evidence of theft; introduced Anna Faber of Enterprise Mobility.
▶ Watch at 26:25Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Always happy to be in front of this committee. Um, my intern has a flyer. Do you mind if she passes that out? Yes, I think, did we? Thank you very much. Alright. So, um, a few months ago, I was, uh, uh, approached by one of my constituents, uh, who worked for Enterprise, uh, rental car. And, uh, he presented a problem that they were dealing with. Um, he said that, uh, based on the requirements of the Salt Lake City Police Department, they were unable to report a car that wasn't returned as stolen until after a number of hoops had been jump, uh, jumped through, including one of them, that they had to …
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Said he did not know Salt Lake City's policy for private vehicles and that the bill would prevent such a policy.
▶ Watch at 34:21Read what they said
It's a, it's a good question. I don't know. Salt Lake City, uh, police department's policy for, uh, private vehicles and if it's different, I think their policy was specific to those rental company vehicles that they were requiring the 10 day demand letter because they were looking at it as really contractual dispute rather than it being a criminal dispute, um, even though it could eventually turn into a criminal dispute. Um, so again, I don't know what Salt Lake City's policy is for, you know, just a private theft, but this would ensure that they couldn't have such a policy.
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Said the reporter must in fact believe the vehicle is stolen. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 35:33Read what they said
I it actually does have to in fact be in your mind at least stolen.
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Said Salt Lake City had no issue with the bill when asked whether it supported it. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 35:42Read what they said
I was just gonna say before I go, uh, Representative Thurston, I asked Salt Lake City if they supported the bill and they had no issue with this bill.
H.B. 217 Stolen Vehicle Amendments · House Transportation Committee · Feb 2, 2026
Said the bill sets no conditions on police triage or on later prosecution, which is up to the district or county attorney. · speaker not certain
▶ Watch at 36:14Read what they said
That's exactly right. And it also doesn't put any conditions on how it's prosecuted later on. So that would be up to the DA's office or the county attorney if they decide to prosecute a crime.
S.B. 33 Office of Professional Licensure Review Sunrise Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Explained that the bill would pass this committee and then be sent back to the Rules Committee.
▶ Watch at 21:21Read what they said
Just in response to Representative Dunnigan, I, I think the, the rule, the way it works is it will pass this committee and then be sent back to rules. Does that make Sense? Okay. Respond. So that's how we, that's how we take the workload bills.
S.B. 33 Office of Professional Licensure Review Sunrise Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Described how a bill would move between the two chambers and through the Rules Committee, and how sunset bills would be combined into one bill.
▶ Watch at 22:01Read what they said
Yeah, so it will, it will pass the originating chamber. It'll come to the other chamber. It will go to committee after committee. It gets automatically signed back to rules. Then there's a check between both houses to green light, those that are gonna move forward. And with the Sunset bills, our plan was then it would combine into one bill with all the sunsets That sun Sunset.
S.B. 33 Office of Professional Licensure Review Sunrise Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Moved to place the bill on the consent calendar with the sponsor's consent.
▶ Watch at 27:15Read what they said
Motion that we put this on the consent calendar with the consent of the sponsor. I would appreciate that if the committee's willing. Okay.
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether the designation is at the discretion of the landlord or housing operator.
▶ Watch at 34:55Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Just a couple quick questions. Um, so if I understand this, this is at the discretion of the landlord or of the, um, dormitory board and house rental property, et cetera. Is that correct?
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Asked whether a landlord could still choose to allow transgender individuals in single-sex housing.
▶ Watch at 35:12Read what they said
Okay. So could there also be a situation where, um, a landlord decides, even though they are still, um, designating this as single sex housing, uh, that they choose to, to not, you know, be in compliance with this law or not, not follow this, and they could say, well, we're still going to allow, uh, transgender individuals to
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Confirmed the bill does not force private landlords to act and would only apply where a landlord chooses to limit housing by birth sex.
▶ Watch at 36:08Read what they said
Yeah. But how, however, in, in those ca so, so two things, lemme just make sure. So one is this law is not forcing private landlords to do anything. Correct. Okay. And then the second question is then in, in your scenario, so someone signs a contract, they signed up for, let's say all women apartment and they show up and there's a transgender woman, this would not protect them in those cases unless the landlord had exercised the right to say that we're, we're only going to allow for those that are women based on their designation at birth. Correct. Okay. Thank you.
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Moved to favorably recommend H.B. 404.
▶ Watch at 1:05:49Read what they said
I'd like to make motion that we favorably recommend house bill 4 0 4 4.
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Opposed the motion to hold, saying a notice clarification he and Rep. Wilcox discussed can be handled as the bill advances.
▶ Watch at 1:07:09Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I'd de oppose, uh, the substitute motion. Um, I though I would like to see a slight clarification, uh, on the notice requirement. And Representative Wilcox and I have been talking about that. I think we can easily handle that in advance as bill today.
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Pointed to lines 133-143 showing current Utah law lacks the federal exception and said the bill adds that same exception to state code.
▶ Watch at 1:13:31Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Uh, chair. I just wanted to draw people's attention as part of this discussion to lines, uh, 1 33, um, kind of through 1 43 of the bill. This is current code that says it is a discriminary discriminatory housing practice to do any of the following because of a person's race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familiar status, source of income, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity. And then it says, refuse to sell or rent after making the offer of a bonafide offer. Um, refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental or otherwise deny or make unavailable a dwelling for any person. So though may be, though there may be exceptions under the federal …
H.B. 404 Sex-Designated Housing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Urged support, explaining that the federal-law exemption limits the bill to small owner-occupied rentals, landlord-selected shared housing, and educational or institutional housing.
▶ Watch at 1:19:03Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I agree with the, the comments of Representative Wilcox here and, and appreciate the, the sponsor for bringing this forward. I, I do think this is, um, just moving along the intent of what, uh, legislation in the past had, had tried to do. And, um, I, I think there, there were some comments during public comment that talked about how there was a fear that this was making things way too broad. And I think there, as, as a good sponsor has talked about this, has been very narrowly tailored to apply to just a small group of housing that is already gender segregated. Um, and if you look at, uh, lines 2 0 …
H.B. 268 Towing Notice and Ownership Rights Modifications · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Spoke in favor of the motion, saying the bill ties the tower's storage fees to sending notice within two days and that the rebuttable presumption protects the lienholder or owner.
▶ Watch at 1:31:43Read what they said
Yeah, I, I'd like to speak in favor of the motion as well. I mean, I, I think it makes sense that if they're required to give notice within two days, if they give notice later than that they're not, uh, entitled to storage for that long period of time. And I think to representative Thurston's questions earlier, um, in lines like 3 85 and kind of on it talks about that, uh, the lien holder or the owner could demand immediate release and possession of the vehicle if they, they can't prove that they actually sent that certified letter. Um, and there is that rebuttable presumption that you talked about. So I think it's more than just a bill …
H.B. 203 Non-Compete Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Teuscher asked whether the 14-day notice requirement would prevent employers from hiring someone quickly with a non-compete.
▶ Watch at 1:56:40Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a, a quick question. Um, and maybe you spoke to this and I just missed it, but, um, line, uh, uh, 1 0 8, it talks about when, uh, these non-competes when you have to give notice of it. And, um, just curious, uh, it, it sounds like here that unless you were to give them 14 days notice before they started working, um, then it really couldn't go into effect. So I'm, I'm trying to think of a scenario where maybe you want them to start tomorrow. It's like, well, sorry, it, you know, we couldn't have you start tomorrow if we wanna have a non-compete, we're gonna have to have you wait two …
H.B. 203 Non-Compete Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Teuscher said higher-paid people are sometimes hired quickly and suggested the sponsor reconsider the 14-day wait.
▶ Watch at 1:58:22Read what they said
I think, I think that is typically true, but there have been situations, you know, and where I've seen people be hired in my profession where we need someone fast and they're making more than what we're talking about here. And it would just, I don't know that we're necessarily requiring a non-compete, but I'd hate to tie the hands of business, you know, maybe we need a CEO tomorrow, we're gonna hire you, but here's a non-compete. And it's like, well, sorry, you gotta wait 14 days. Anyway, I, I think there's something there that you might wanna think
H.B. 203 Non-Compete Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 30, 2026
Teuscher said a family member in a receptionist role was asked to sign a non-compete, agreed there is a problem, but said the bill may go too far and he will vote yes hoping for further negotiation.
▶ Watch at 2:38:02Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I agree with Representative Thurston. Um, I recently had a family member reach out to me that, um, essentially is a, an executive assistant, you know, receptionist person who said that their company's asking them to sign an non-compete. As I looked at it, I thought, you know, I, I don't think this would be enforceable in court. That being said, most people would sign that, and then they're, they're beholden to that employer, right? They use it to, to keep them in that job and, and not allow them the freedom and mobility that we want, that that free market, um, that we have, uh, in our state. In fact, I was looking at …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Presents HB 223, which sunsets paper signature gathering in 2030, requires the app to scan driver licenses, and adds offline signature collection, citing lower cost, integrity, and easier verification.
▶ Watch at 36:05Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, really appreciate being in your illustrious committee here. Um, this bill, house Bill 2 23 is one that should look very familiar is we, we had several interim meetings, uh, on this bill. And kind of, uh, based on the feedback that I got from the committee, have made the changes to, to, um, I think go the direction that we're looking for. So, um, I have a, uh, a flyer for the committee, if you don't mind if I could have my intern pass that out. You Bet. Of Course. Okay. Thank you Mr. Chair. So, uh, as many of you know, in, in 2022, uh, the legislature created an electronic signature gathering process …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Explains that identity is verified by scanning a driver license at signing, not by signature comparison, and that signatures can be reviewed if challenged.
▶ Watch at 41:51Read what they said
Yeah, no, that's a really great question. And actually a flaw with the paper process, right? Because we're capturing those signatures electronically at the DMV and then we're comparing it to what they sign on a physical piece of paper. This though, though, through the electronic gathering process, it does collect a holographic signature. That's not what verifies the signature. What verifies the signature is the person showing up with their own id. And once it scans that driver's license, that's the verification process. And it's instant. Now for some reason, it were to be challenged or there was some sort of fraud that was alleged, you could go back and look at the signatures, but the verification process happens …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says the bill includes language prohibiting such misuse and compares offline collection to the paper status quo.
▶ Watch at 43:04Read what they said
Yeah, it's a, it's a good question. Um, there is specific language in there that doesn't allow for that. Um, and but
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Argues that offline collection with later upload is more secure than paper copies or photocopies.
▶ Watch at 43:12Read what they said
But what I was gonna say is compare it to the status quo. Status quo is a piece of paper where someone signed and gave all their same information. Right? So how much easier is it rather than hack backend, hack the system? 'cause you happen to be in a place that can't submit automatically versus taking a picture or a photocopy of the piece of paper. So it's a much more secure process than we have today.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says direct upload already happens where there is internet, and offline capture is needed in areas without service.
▶ Watch at 43:55Read what they said
And I agree. So where they have internet access, that's the way it would just go direct. And that's the way the app works today. Mm-hmm. The problem is, let's say you're out in, um, Representative Monson area and you don't necessarily have internet access. So now you can't capture those signatures at all. And so this would allow for that capture of signatures, but as soon as you're back in internet area, then it would
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Describes the Olympia Hills referendum, where printing paper packets was estimated to cost about $1 million.
▶ Watch at 45:01Read what they said
Yeah. So let me give you an example. And this, this happened, you know, shortly after I got elected, we had the Olympia Hills decision that was in Salt Lake County. So the county came in, decided that they were going to permit a huge development, even though all of the cities around it didn't like it, most of the citizens around it didn't like it. So they, the, the grassroots organizers said, all right, we're gonna run a referendum what the county tried to do. And as they started to calculate just the cost of printing packets, they found that they would have to raise $1 million. That was with complete grassroots support, just printing the packets because of …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says government should not give options that lose the benefits of electronic gathering, citing administrative burden, integrity risks, and cost.
▶ Watch at 46:46Read what they said
Yeah. No, and I think it's a legitimate concern. Um, my answer would be this is we're, this is not the private market that we're dealing with, right? The private market would come up with lots of innovative ways and people would just gravitate to whatever made the most amount of sense. This is government and we're saying exactly the way that you have to do it. Now we could give, give two options, um, but then we lose all the benefits of what we're, we're trying to get to. And think about all that administrative burden. Think about the risks of integrity that we just heard about and how many lawsuits have been filed over whether or not a …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says he does not know the time savings and suggests county clerks could estimate them.
▶ Watch at 47:58Read what they said
I, I don't know off the top of my head, but I know we've got some amazing county clerks that are here and, uh, that always love my bills. And I'm sure they, they could give you a better sense of what they think the savings might be.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says offline function is not available now but the bill requires it by 2028.
▶ Watch at 49:08Read what they said
It doesn't today, but that's what is mandated in this bill. So by 2028, they have to add that functionality.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says paper ends after 2030 and that the legislature can extend the date in future sessions if needed.
▶ Watch at 49:18Read what they said
No, no more paper After, after 2030. 2030. So 2028, we'll have that functionality. We'll still have two years before we phase it out. And, and like I said, uh, Mr. Chair, the, we're, we're putting a line in the sand, you know, if we need more time, there's plenty of, of sessions between now and then to, to kick it down the road. Um, but this is getting us to where I think we need to be.
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Says the bill should advance, arguing a goal date encourages people to try electronic signing and that the date could be moved later.
▶ Watch at 1:10:09Read what they said
No, thank, thank you. Um, I obviously, uh, think that Bill should advance, but, um, what I, what I wanted to say it similar to what Representative Welton had talked about, I think it's really important to have a goal out there. And as you heard from the Lieutenant Governor's office, people aren't naturally moving over to the digital platform because they're, it's what they've always done in the past, and they're afraid, especially under short timelines, that if they try something different, then maybe it won't go quite the same way that they had. And so when we passed this bill in 2022 and we saw that people weren't using this path that we created despite the advantages, that's …
H.B. 223 Electronic Signature Collection Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 29, 2026
Summarizes that paper voters have a process if they lack ID and that the bill is needed to develop the offline solution and let anyone use the electronic system.
▶ Watch at 1:17:24Read what they said
I'll, I'll be quick and not rehash anything that we've already talked about. One thing I did want to clarify and I, I talked to, um, to Mr. Hatch about this as they came down. Um, there is a process in place if you don't have id. Um, and that process is laid out in the code. It's already set up with the electronic process that you have today where they gather a lot of information, they still gather the signature and then it does go to the clerks where they have to verify it, unlike the instant verification that you have with the id. Um, so just wanna make sure that that is clear. And then, and also say …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Presents HB 33 and summarizes its provisions on political sign disclaimers, attached objects, utility poles, removal after 14 days, and municipal sign confiscation procedures.
▶ Watch at 1:12:44Read what they said
Great. Thank you Mr. Chair for handing that out. And so great to be in front of this committee again. Um, I know a few of you when you looked at this bill came and said, Hey, didn't we already pass this bill? And, uh, you did pass this bill out of your committee, but, uh, it didn't get to the, uh, the final board at the end of last session. And then we, um, had a couple, uh, interim committee meetings talking about that. And there's a, a couple, uh, additional things that we added. It was a good bill and now it's an even better bill. So happy to, to talk about HB 33. Let me just say …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Says a sticker changing a district number is allowable, but a sticker that changes the sign's message is not.
▶ Watch at 1:20:42Read what they said
Yeah, it's absolutely allowable. That's it. It's, it's only if you're changing the message of the sign message.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Says the test is the intent of the sign's message, which would be to reelect the candidate.
▶ Watch at 1:21:07Read what they said
Yeah, and it says the intent of the message on the sign. Certainly the intent would be to reelect Scott Sandal.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · Senate Government Operations and Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 28, 2026
Says the paid-for disclosure may be in small print, on the back of the sign, or on a sticker, as long as someone next to the sign can tell who paid.
▶ Watch at 1:23:06Read what they said
but we, yeah, right above that in line, um, 1 0 4, it says, the text described on that sign essentially may be printed in small type or affixed to the back of the advertisement. So you can put it on the back, you can put it on the front, it could be a sticker, whatever you want. It's just if someone is standing right next to the sign who they'd be able to figure out who paid for this sign.
H.B. 98 Residential Notification Amendments · House floor debate (day 9) · Jan 28, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for a question.
▶ Watch at 1:01:16Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a question? Representative? Nu, will you yield to a question?
H.B. 98 Residential Notification Amendments · House floor debate (day 9) · Jan 28, 2026
Asks whether the notice is given before or after the municipality approves the facility.
▶ Watch at 1:01:22Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm just wondering this notice that goes out, does that happen before or after the, uh, residential facility has been approved by the, uh, municipality?
H.B. 98 Residential Notification Amendments · House floor debate (day 9) · Jan 28, 2026
Expresses concern that notice after approval gives residents no remedy through city leaders, may cause community frustration, and says the bill needs more work.
▶ Watch at 1:02:01Read what they said
Mr. Speaker, just one concern that I have here is that if we, uh, are giving notice after everything has been done, the public will receive this notice. And if they have concerns about what's happening, there really is no remedy for them to go back and, and talk to their city leaders because it's already been approved. Um, I, I'm, I'm afraid that it will cause even more angst from the community instead of trying to solve the problem that they're like, well, why are all these people out here congregating that we didn't have before? Now they're gonna get a notice that it's happening. They're gonna call their city council members, and their city councils will say, members …
H.B. 202 Acupuncturist Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Asked why the bill gives the licensing division such broad rulemaking authority over requirements, examinations, and informed consent.
▶ Watch at 1:04:52Read what they said
Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. One, one quick question I have for you. Um, under the qualifications, uh, for this alternative path, um, you have kind of as a third catchall that they meet any other requirement the division makes by rule. And, you know, there's, there's a couple other, uh, areas of the bill where you give some rulemaking authority in terms of, um, an examination. Um, what essentially telling them they get the doppel gets to decide whatever examination has to be passed. And then in, in four above also establishing procedures to collect a patient's informed consent. So I, I Uintah look at some of the other licensing sections to say is this, is this normal that …
H.B. 202 Acupuncturist Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Said the broad rulemaking authority seemed out of the norm and asked if the division was present.
▶ Watch at 1:07:06Read what they said
Thank you. Yeah, Mr. Chair, I don't know if we have anyone from Doppel who's here or might be able to speak to this, but it, it does seem maybe a little bit out of the norm to give such broad making authority. Got I
H.B. 202 Acupuncturist Licensing Amendments · House Business, Labor, and Commerce Committee · Jan 27, 2026
Supported holding the bill, favoring deregulation but asking for comparisons with other states and a narrower grant of rulemaking authority.
▶ Watch at 1:37:08Read what they said
Thank, thank you, Mr. Chair. I support the motion, um, like the, the chair mentioned. I think this is probably the step in the right direction. I, I'd like to see us move towards more deregulation and like Mr. Sheway said, ensure there are licensing requirements, meet the, the minimum standards for health and safety, um, and not be overly burdensome in the way that we are doing that. I, but I, I kinda share the concern that I, I have no idea if this is still too burdensome, if it's not burdensome enough. Um, so as you prepare information to come back into this committee, whether it's this session or you work on it in the interim, and then …
H.B. 107 Vehicle Sales Tax Amendments · House Revenue and Taxation Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Presented the second substitute to HB 107, which would add a non-refundable income tax credit funded by late registration fees, and explained the fee, the account, and the cap, and asked for discussion without action today.
▶ Watch at 1:08:04Read what they said
Yep. That's right. Mr. Chair. Thank you, uh, members of the committee for giving me some time today. And, uh, I do have a flyer, if that's okay, Mr. Chair, to hand out to the members of the committee. Yeah. Is that okay? Yeah, will do. Yep. Thank you. All right. And, uh, as the good chair, uh, mentioned, um, uh, because there was a substitute that just came online a few minutes ago, it, uh, it moves in a little bit different direction from sub one, and I want to explain that. And so I, in, in an effort to try to have the work done in committee and work through it and make sure that you're all comfortable …
H.B. 107 Vehicle Sales Tax Amendments · House Revenue and Taxation Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Explained that the cap is set after the year by dividing the fund among the prior year's applicants, so the amount may differ from what was anticipated.
▶ Watch at 1:18:41Read what they said
Yeah. So, so they look at it in, in retrospect. And so they say, okay, how, how much do we have in the fund now? How many people applied for it last year? Divided it out? Divided Out. And, and that's where it's capped at. We don't know what the exact amount's gonna be. Some years it might be a little bit more, some years it might be a little bit less than what they had anticipated. And then that would go into the calculation for the next year of what the cap is.
H.B. 107 Vehicle Sales Tax Amendments · House Revenue and Taxation Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Defended the late fee as an incentive to register on time and said enforcement by cities and highway patrol has been limited.
▶ Watch at 1:21:12Read what they said
Um, first talking about the, the fee itself, and I, I get the concern. I mean, but I do also think people need to pay the registration on time, right? And right now there is just, there's no disincentive other than the possibility of getting a, a ticket. But, um, I think our cities and highway patrol are not very motivated right now to, to give tickets for that. They're Juab, they're overworked and need their, their attention is another places than pulling people over for expired registration. And people realize that, and that's why you're seeing a huge increase in the number of people that just aren't paying the registration. So I think it's fair to say, look, even …
H.B. 107 Vehicle Sales Tax Amendments · House Revenue and Taxation Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Said the restricted account would generate data to refine the cost estimates, and that the credit could encourage buyers to report accurate sale prices.
▶ Watch at 1:22:35Read what they said
Four. And we have some really great fiscal analysts, but I think they're very conservative in their estimates. And that this is part, part of what I'm trying to do here is if we keep this in a restricted account and look at it, we'll actually get some real data and we may come back in and say, oh, it's not nearly as expensive as we thought we would, and in the future year we just come and fund it and get rid of this, this income tax credit altogether. But this will give us the data that we need to kind of move in that direction. One other thing, and we talked about this last year with the bill, …
H.B. 214 Firearms Liability Amendments · House Public Utilities and Energy Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Introduces HB 214, describes a constituent's concern about lawsuits against gun manufacturers, and says the bill clarifies the federal predicate exception in Utah law and the substitute tightens how courts should interpret it.
▶ Watch at 1:28:01Read what they said
Well, thank you Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Um, before I get started, my, um, great intern here has a flyer for the committee. Do you mind if she hands that out? That would be fine. Awesome. Thank you. And then, um, I, I just have to say, I, uh, I love being in front of my, my favorite, um, public utility, energy and guns committee. Um, it's, it's the, it's the best place to be. So I appreciate, um, you guys taking on that important responsibility and, uh, um, hopefully it, it helps with the, the load balancing and the other committees. So, um, I wanted to just give a little background here in a, in a second …
H.B. 107 Vehicle Sales Tax Amendments · House Revenue and Taxation Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Explained that the buyer's bill of sale sets the sales tax, that the credit is non-refundable, and that claims are subject to audit.
▶ Watch at 1:30:22Read what they said
Yeah, good, good question. If, if you did that and they brought the bill of selling, then that person buying the car now would have to pay significantly more taxes, even though they're gonna get $5,000 under the table. Does that make sense? Because they do have to, on that bill of sale, they do have to go into the DMV and present, here's what I bought the vehicle for, and that's what they base the sales tax on for the, for that vehicle. Um, in terms of on the tax form, I, um, again, it's a non re non-refundable credit. So it's based on taxes actually paid in the state of Utah. And they, and that you owe some …
H.B. 107 Vehicle Sales Tax Amendments · House Revenue and Taxation Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Thanked the committee for feedback, said he could return to version one of the bill, and suggested a pilot or sunset to gather data before funding the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:33:46Read what they said
I, I appreciate the, uh, the feedback here and if you guys have any other great ideas on how we might be able to fund this. Um, we've just been racking our brains and we, I can bring the, I can go back to version one of the bill and we can all say, yep, we love this, and then it doesn't actually go anywhere. So I'd love to see us actually make some movement and test this out. Um, you know, maybe one thing we could do is, you know, put a pilot together or some sort of a Sunset to just be able to gather some of that data and see is it really gonna cost the state …
H.B. 214 Firearms Liability Amendments · House Public Utilities and Energy Committee · Jan 26, 2026
Says the bill clarifies existing practice to prevent fringe lawsuits and is not a shift in policy.
▶ Watch at 1:41:24Read what they said
I appreciate the discussion. Um, uh, good chair. I was just gonna say my last name is tesser. Just tesser. Tesser. Like, usher. What did I say? Tuscher tuscher. I apologize. But, Um, like I said earlier, um, this really isn't a shift from the way that we have been treating this for a long period of time. It, it really just is clarifying so that we don't get any of those fringe lawsuits in in our state.
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 23, 2026
Presents H.B. 186, which clarifies JCC records, requires prosecutors and the Administrative Office to file certain complaints with the JCC, and adds a legislative reporting requirement.
▶ Watch at 44:00Read what they said
Thank you Madam Chair. Uh, members of the committee. Um, we do have a, uh, a handout here. Do you mind if I intern hands that out to the committee members, Please? Thank you. I'm joined here with, um, Alex Peterson. He's the Executive Director of the Judicial Conduct Commission. And, uh, really excited to have a fellow member of the commission here with, um, Representative Miller, uh, who knows about the Comm, the Commission. Um, many of you may or may not have a lot of familiarity with the Judicial Conduct Commission. So I just wanna spend a couple minutes, uh, talking about the commission. And if you do have any questions about the commission, we've got the expert …
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 23, 2026
Praises the commission's process and Peterson's leadership, and says other states are interested in Utah's approach.
▶ Watch at 54:25Read what they said
to Representative Teuscher. Yeah, And I think, I think that's a great, uh, uh, summary there. I'll just add one, one thing. I had the chance to go to the, the national, uh, judicial conduct, uh, commissions, uh, conference and hear about the trends in different states and comparing, um, uh, each state who takes a little bit different approach at ensuring that judges are following the ethical standards. Um, and it was really interesting to me to see how Alex and Utah was really leading out in a lot of these discussions. And other states were very interested in our approach and wanting to learn from us. And, uh, I think we're well served here by, uh, the commission …
H.B. 186 Judicial Conduct Commission Amendments · House Judiciary Committee · Jan 23, 2026
Says the records are already protected under current law and that the bill clarifies this and protects complainants' personal information, as with the Prosecutorial Conduct Commission.
▶ Watch at 1:12:06Read what they said
Thank you. I appreciate the motion. Let me just take a moment now to, to talk about the, the grandma issue. I, I think it's important for everyone to understand that whether we pass this bill or don't pass this bill, the records currently held by the JCC are protected from Grandma. This is simply clarifying it in the statute. Um, but, but there's other statute that covers it right now, and that's the way that they've been acting, um, really since the, the beginning of the j ccc. So if there is a, a, an intent to change the policy, um, you know, members of the public can come and work with their legislators to change it. They can …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Presents H.B. 33, which updates political sign rules on attached messages, signs on utility poles, removal within 14 days after an election, and city storage of collected signs.
▶ Watch at 54:22Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Speaker. Um, colleagues, as you look at this bill, uh, a number of you have come to me and said, Hey, wait, wait a second. Didn't we already pass this bill? And we did pass this bill out of the house unanimously, but, uh, unfortunately it didn't make it to the end of the row in the Senate. Um, it is a great bill. It is a bill that came out of some of the complaints that we heard in the 2024, uh, election where there were some shenanigans with political signs that we hadn't really seen in the state before. And so this cleans up some of the language around political signs and what can happen. …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Confirms that cities and counties must keep collected signs safe for five business days and give notice to the campaign.
▶ Watch at 1:00:50Read what they said
That is correct. So if, if you go to, um, lines 2 64 through the, really the end of the bill in, in 3 25, it outlines that process, but it, it says quite clearly that, uh, a county or municipality, uh, that gathers the, the signs has to keep them again, safe for five business days and give notice to the campaign, um, either to the phone number that the candidate has provided or if there's not a phone number to try to reasonably contact the campaign.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Says the bill applies to both counties and municipalities.
▶ Watch at 1:01:43Read what they said
That's, that's a great question Mr. Speaker. It does. So, uh, like I just said, it, uh, it applies to counties and municipalities.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Says the park strip language was removed from the bill to keep it a consensus measure after concerns from cities.
▶ Watch at 1:02:15Read what they said
Yeah, great question Mr. Speaker. Um, we did hear that feedback of people wanting to clarify the question of whether or not you can place political signs in a park strip. And, uh, an earlier version of the bill, um, said that a municipality cannot prohibit a candidate from placing the park strip. However, as we worked with the cities back and forth, they had some serious concerns about that and to continue to make this a consensus bill, we decided to pull out that language and just move forward with the con the, uh, the parts that were consensus.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House floor debate (day 4) · Jan 23, 2026
Summarizes the bill as a transparency measure and urges support, hoping it reduces sign problems seen in the last election.
▶ Watch at 1:02:53Read what they said
Uh, like I said, this is a, a great bill for transparency. Makes a lot of sense to get in place for this upcoming, uh, year. And we hope that it will decrease the number of shenanigans that we saw in the last election. I urge your support. Thank you.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Presented HB 33, which adds a payer disclosure requirement for larger political signs, prohibits attaching objects to signs that obscure their message, allows removal of noncompliant signs, requires removal within 14 days after an election, and sets rules for city and county storage of seized signs.
▶ Watch at 33:03Read what they said
Can you hear me? Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. I do have a flyer that, uh, my intern Molly has. Do you mind if she distributes that? Please do. Great. I, I've had a a couple of you come up to me and, and say, what, I'm trying to understand this bill, didn't we pass this last year? And, uh, the answer is yes, this committee did, uh, favorably recommend this bill and, uh, recommended it, uh, through the house. Um, unfortunately, it's one of those bills that, uh, just didn't make it to the Senate board. And, uh, so first up here, um, it's also a bill that you heard, I think, uh, two or …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said such changes would be prohibited because they obscure the sign's message, even if they are humorous.
▶ Watch at 39:07Read what they said
They would. So, because that obscures the intent to message of the sign that would be prohibited, Even if they're funny.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Explained the bill requires a paid-for disclosure on the sign itself, not a report of sign costs.
▶ Watch at 39:52Read what they said
It's, it's not declaring the cost of signs, it's saying that there has to be a paid for disclosure on the sign itself.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said the individual who defaced a sign would have to be proven responsible, and that criminal prosecution would require a very egregious case.
▶ Watch at 41:23Read what they said
No, they, they would have to prove it was an individual on that campaign that did the, the descent. And, and like I said, I, I think I mentioned this in interim, as I've talked to cities about this, they, they like to stay a mile away from any of these issues because if you were to prosecute one candidate for something, or you were to take away one candidate signs, then it may look like you're favoring one or the other. And so, um, the, there really are not. There has to be a very egregious case for them to bring a criminal prosecution in, in a, for any of these, this section of code.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said the bill allows removal only of signs physically attached to or obscured by another sign, and that disputes over sign placement are already governed by current law.
▶ Watch at 42:48Read what they said
Yeah, it, it's a good question because, you know, when we originally were looking into the, the bill, we were looking at kind of sign placement. You know, so what happens if I put my sign up and then an inch in front of it, you put your sign, so now you can't see my sign. Um, and is there a way that we could regulate that? And based on, um, you know, the research that O-R-R-G-C had done and, and the case law on this, there really isn't a way for states to regulate that. The, the remedy is for you to pick up your sign behind it and then put it back in front of their sign. Um, …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said that conduct would already violate current code and the bill would not change that, and that such situations may require legal advice.
▶ Watch at 44:53Read what they said
Uh, that's a good question because certainly that conduct that you're calling for would violate the current code so that this, this code wouldn't change that at all. So I guess the question would come down to whether or not, um, the language in, um, uh, let's see here. It's lines 2 0 8 through, uh, 2 22. So, um, let's see here. And it's in one B, so I would say no. So essentially you're only allowed to remove the sign if it still is physically affixed or attached hides blocks obscures your sign is what I would say. Okay, thank you. But again, it, you know, that's where maybe you'd hire a lawyer or something or just kind …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said there is no criminal penalty for a missing disclosure; a sign without the statement may be removed and must be deposited with the city, where the campaign can recover it.
▶ Watch at 46:15Read what they said
This? Yeah, great question. And I have a follow up after that. So there is, um, um, I believe so. So I'm just looking here. So, um, on the sign itself, I was just checking to see if there is a criminal penalty associated with it. And I, I don't think there's any criminal penalty associated with it. The remedy is, um, if you go to lines, um, two 16 through 2 22, so it says that a person can remove a political sign if it's the size where you're supposed to have the, the statement. And it doesn't include that statement. But then it says that, that a person that removes that sign, this is in 2 23 through …
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Said the candidate would not be penalized but would need to collect the sign and add the disclosure sticker.
▶ Watch at 47:44Read what they said
That's true. Will he be penalized with that? Yeah, He wouldn't be penalized, but he'd probably have to go collect that sign and put a sticker on it.
H.B. 33 Political Signs Amendments · House Government Operations Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Commented that he was surprised by the County Clerks' neutral position and thanked the committee for its support and input.
▶ Watch at 51:47Read what they said
I'll just say I'm still a little shocked by Ricky's comments and, uh, I, I didn't know they, they couldn't not oppose a bill. So this is, this is great news for me. And I'm, I'm gonna have to work with that group a little closer now. But no, I, I appreciate your support of the bill and all the, the input that you guys have given, um, over the last couple years.
H.B. 85 State Sovereignty Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Teuscher asked the sponsor to answer the public commenter's question about the definition.
▶ Watch at 52:13Read what they said
Thank you Mr. Chair. I, i curious in the answer to the, the last, uh, public comments question. Do, do you have an answer to that? Mr. Chair? Would, can she respond
H.B. 85 State Sovereignty Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Teuscher pointed out that the definition appears to be new language in the bill and asked where it came from.
▶ Watch at 52:41Read what they said
So when you say it's incurred code, do you mean you, you took a definition, it was somewhere else in code? 'cause it, it does look like new language in lines, you know, three, four Oh It right there. You're right three. Just say that in there.
H.B. 85 State Sovereignty Amendments · House Political Subdivisions Committee · Jan 21, 2026
Teuscher supported the favorable motion, saying the bill has little substantive effect but no identified harm, addresses public concern about international organizations, and was well vetted last year.
▶ Watch at 58:26Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Um, I, uh, support the motion, uh, to favorably recommend. I, I agree generally with, um, representative Arthur and Representative Dunnigan that have said that, I, I don't think this has much substantive effect because I, I just don't believe that in Utah we would base any emergency solely and exclusively on some directive from an international organization. Uh, that being said, I don't, I don't think anyone has presented any sort of harm. In fact, most of the people who spoke against the bill have said, I don't think this does anything bad. It, it only, um, doesn't really do much. Uh, with that in mind, I think it's fair to say that there is …
H.B. 29 Unfair and Deceptive Pricing Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Asks the sponsor to yield for a series of questions.
▶ Watch at 1:06:48Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the sponsor yield to a series of questions? Representative Clancy, will you yield to a series of questions?
H.B. 29 Unfair and Deceptive Pricing Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Asks whether optional or conditional rental charges, such as guest fees or carpet cleaning fees, not listed in a rental advertisement would violate the bill.
▶ Watch at 1:06:56Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So the question I have is, um, on, on the handout, you talk about renters often face junk fees like application fees, payment fees, even fake charges like a January fee. And I, I certainly wanna make sure that things are clear for renters. In, in the bill itself, it says a supplier, which would include a lessor, um, shall clearly and conspicuously disclose the total price when offering, displaying or advertising the price of a product. So I'm trying to understand how those fees would tie into some contract for rent. So for example, if a, uh, someone who's renting, um, a, a condo, if they say the rent is a thousand dollars per month, …
H.B. 29 Unfair and Deceptive Pricing Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Asks whether a non-refundable portion of a deposit would need to be disclosed in the original advertisement.
▶ Watch at 1:09:00Read what they said
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So just to follow up on that, let's say there's a portion of the deposit that's non-refundable, because that is not a choice that would have to be disclosed in the original advertisement for the property.
H.B. 29 Unfair and Deceptive Pricing Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Supports consumer protection but worries the broad disclosure language could expose less experienced sellers to large fines, and asks the sponsor to consider carve-outs.
▶ Watch at 1:10:09Read what they said
I, like I said before, I, I generally, uh, support these types of consumer protection, um, bills. I think it's important that consumers really understand what they're getting into when they go to purchase something. I am, I'm a little concerned of just the broadness of this language that a supplier shall clearly and conspicuously disclose the total price that for maybe some of the less, uh, savvy, uh, lessors or those selling something that they might get themselves into a situation where they might be violating this law and then be subject to a large fine. So I'm not necessarily AP opposed to legislation, but I, but I would, uh, ask the good sponsor to maybe think through that …
H.B. 13 Municipal Services Fees and Political Subdivision Lien Amendments · House floor debate (day 1) · Jan 20, 2026
Says the body has questions about the bill and wants the sponsor to have a chance to answer them.
▶ Watch at 1:48:15Read what they said
Yeah, I think there's some, some definite questions that Bo, that body has for this bill, and I'd like to give the good representative a chance to get those questions answered and, and, uh, and, uh, try to resolve some of the issues that are there.
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.