Verona Mauga

This incorporates lessons learned from implementation. Uh, be happy to answer any questions Mr. President.

Can I make a chair or am a motion? Mr. Chair? You may. Okay. I would like to make a motion to favorably recommend SB 2 48 Childcare Expansion Act. That motion is, or would you like to speak to it? Yeah, Just, I support the bill and I appreciate the sponsor bringing it forward. I mean, access to reliable childcare is something that parents face every day, and I think this is a great solution for partnership. Thank you.

I thank you chair and thank you committee. Uh, you know, this is a bill I actually brought to your committee last year and we passed here, um, but it died on the last night. It's a simple fix to our restricted person's statute right now in Utah. If someone is found guilty, um, not guilty by reason of insanity or found mentally incompetent to stand trial, they are restricted from possessing a firearm, but only if it's a felony. This bill closes that gap and aligns us with federal law. Um, if a court has already determined that someone is insane or not competent to stand trial, this just applies that same standard across the board and that's all …

Thank you for your time, Mr. Chair and committee. I, I think just one last point I'll make is that, um, not only do we have a robust, um, system to determine if someone is mentally incompetent or if they're gonna plead insanity, um, but there is also a pathway to receive your, your rights back. And I, I think that's an important note. Um, because sometimes we are, um, sometimes we, there are situations or times in our life where we, we do need additional supports or, or we're incapable of, um, of, of standing trial in our own criminal case. And, um, and then you get better. And so I just wanna point that out that there is …

Thank you Mr. Speaker. I'd like to concur with the changes made in the Senate.

Yes, just briefly. Um, this is my animal amendments bill. The issue that we are trying to solve is that once animals are impounded because they are part of a criminal case, um, they are stuck in limbo at our overcrowded shelters. Um, what our friends in the Senate did was they helped me clean this bill up a lot. And so if you look at the old bill and you look at the new sub, um, it just does a very simple thing. It still resolves the issue that we have, but it just makes it so that now there's an opportunity and options for animals to be placed not only in a shelter, but they can go to …

Thank you. Um, I also just wanna thank everyone who showed up. Uh, you know, it takes a lot to a lot of courage to come and be vulnerable. I appreciate everything you share today. Um, and I also wanna say to the Bill sponsor, I appreciate the improvements in this substitute. It's remarkably better than where it started under Ripley. Um, but my job is to look at how this affects all people. And, and so when I'm looking at this, I'm thinking about our entire state. I'm thinking about my district and I'm thinking about my trans brother-in-law who lives with me. I still have a lot of concerns in this bill. I think it opens us up …

Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, may I ask a question of the sponsor? Yes, thank you. Okay. I, I totally understand why you're running this bill. It makes sense to me. Um, but there are some things that I do have questions about. How do we distinguish between unlawful road obstruction and a protest where people are trying to follow the guidelines, um, but maybe they get stuck in the crosswalk and we know how it is when there's a lot of people crossing at the same time and the light turns. Um, we may have 50 people or so caught in the middle of the crosswalk. Do they now get a felony?

Yes, I do. Is it okay, Mr. Chair, if they present with me? Certainly. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair and committee. Um, HB 1 72 Food Safety Amendments is a bill that actually came from a small business owner, um, Chad Pritchard, who is sitting right here. Um, he expressed to me, um, that certifying multiple food safety managers every three years was being costly. As a restaurant owner myself, um, I could totally relate to it. Spoke with other restaurant owners and, um, this was something they were also fill, filling in their pockets. As I looked into this issue, I learned that the certification exam updates every four years, which is why the national standard for this …

Yeah, this just addresses a gap in our food safety code and, and again, it just aligns us with the national standard. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And committee HB 87 addresses a gap in current law involving animals that are lawfully impounded in connection with criminal animal cruelty cases. When someone is charged with an animal with animal abuse, the criminal case can take months or even years to resolve. During that time, the animal involved often remains in a shelter with no clear legal mechanism to determine long-term placement. This places a strain on already. Overcrowded shelters impact the wellbeing of the animal and can become a significant burden on taxpayers. In some cases, the cost to house and care for a single animal during a case can reach tens of thousands of dollars. This bill creates a defined court process …

Um, I, so this is, I I don't believe so. And, and hopefully I I think there's others in the room who might be able to answer it better than I can. Um, but this actually goes through an actual court hearing. I believe when it has to do with the children, it doesn't, there's a judgment that can be made that doesn't go through trial. And, and this does go through a court procedure,

Well, it does, but it says in line 2 98. Only if, if they have already ordered the animal rights to be forfeited as part of the criminal case. But yeah, you're, if, if, if they do go through that, it does say that.

So, so what we're, what we're wanting to address in this is if the animal is involved in an animal ac cruelty case and it's, it's been abused. And so while the case is pending, the judge, the courts are able to address this part that would normally be addressed. Um, it just makes it so we can address it sooner than later.

Thank you. Um, just a question around possible fiscal or, or legal risks. I mean, any, any time we, um, seek to remove or limit or amend, um, rights to appeal, um, are we opening perhaps any litigation risk in this case?