Utah Legislature decides not to override governor's vetoes
SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — Gov. Spencer Cox vetoed six bills from the 2025 Utah Legislative Session, and legislative leaders have decided to move forward without convening a veto override session.
This past session, Cox signed more than 550 bills, but six . Cox vetoed S.B. 197 'Property Tax Amendments,' H.B. 306 'Precious Metals Amendments,' H.B. 315 'Elected Official Vacancy Modification,' S.B. 106 'Utah-Ireland Trade Commission,' 'Minimum Basic Tax Rates Amendments,' and S.B. 296 'Judicial Amendments.'
The Utah Legislature has until May 6 to convene a veto override session if they wish to overturn any of the governor's vetoes. However, legislative leaders have decided not to make the attempt.
'Even when our perspectives differ, we appreciate the governor's willingness to find common ground as we build an even brighter future for our great state,' a statement by President J. Stuart Adams and Speaker Mike Schultz reads.
The leaders said they carefully considered the option of holding a veto override session but ultimately decided against it.
'We will focus on constructive dialogue and thoughtful policymaking during the interim to find the best path forward that benefits all Utahns,' the statement says.
Schultz previously told ABC4 that they will continue to discuss the vetoed Judicial Amendments bill that would allow the governor and Utah Senate to pick the chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court.
'We respect the governor's vetoes. Some of them I agree with, some of them I don't agree with,' Schultz previously said.
Lawmakers will convene soon in a special session that Governor Cox . The governor sets the agenda for that session and often gets pitched by lawmakers and others to include their issues in his call. If lawmakers wanted to address anything the Governor is unwilling to put on that list they would need to justify an 'emergency in the affairs of the state' to call themselves.
At the very least, the governor and the legislature have agreed in that special session to address two bills dealing with and that Cox believes have 'unintended consequences,' and reappropriate $3.5 million that was supposed to go to Sundance before they decided to leave Utah.
A date for the special session is unknown, but lawmakers will gather at the Capitol for the first 2026 Interim meeting day on May 21.
Forest thinning might lead to more wildfire danger, researchers say
LIST: Star Wars Day, Ren Fest, and more activities this weekend
U.S. and Ukraine reach minerals deal
House removes federal protection for an endangered species
National Security Advisor may move to U.N. ambassador role
Matthew Drachman contributed to this story.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Proposed RENT Ordinance aims to rein in unfair rental practices
Jun. 9—The Albuquerque City Council is set to consider sweeping new rules that would overhaul the rental process citywide, aiming to protect tenants from hidden fees, housing instability and unresponsive landlords. The bill, known as Renter's Empowerment and Neighborhood Transparency (RENT) Ordinance, would enshrine several protections around almost every part of the renting experience. The bill addresses nearly all aspects of the rental process and would impact every landlord and renter in the city. Statistics from the American Community Survey show that about 44% of households in Albuquerque rent. But it's far from guaranteed to pass. "I think that this council has proven in the past that they're not interested in helping renters very much," said Councilor Tammy Fiebelkorn, who is sponsoring the bill on behalf of the mayor's office. "But recently, we did get two pieces of tenant protections passed." Those two pieces were an ordinance mandating landlords provide cooling for tenants and a bill that created a code enforcement position to respond directly to renters' issues. The bill also faces opposition from landlord advocates. "While the stated intent of this legislation may be to protect tenants, in practice, it burdens responsible landlords, increases operational and legal risk, and would discourage housing investment in Albuquerque," said Alan LaSeck, executive director of the Apartment Association of New Mexico. LaSeck went on to say the proposals ignore the realities of managing rental housing and would lead to reduced availability, higher costs and greater conflict. "Rather than fostering cooperation between tenants and owners, they threaten to drive housing providers out of the market, shrinking our housing supply, increasing rents and worsening the very problem we're trying to solve," LaSeck said. What's in the RENT Ordinance? Shanna Schultz, policy and government affairs administrator for the city, said the bill comes at a time when Albuquerque continues to grapple with a housing crisis. A 2024 Denver-based Root Policy Research report, titled "Albuquerque Region Housing Needs Assessment," found a significant shortage of units for low-income renters. The same report found that residents were spending more than a third of their monthly income on housing and that occupied units, such as apartments and single-family homes, often had more residents than rooms available. "I think we know that building more homes is essential, but that's not enough on its own. It's not the only tool in the toolkit," Schultz said. "We also need to protect the people who are already living in homes." Schultz, who authored the policy proposal, noted that the bill's transparency provisions were among its most significant changes. The RENT Ordinance would require landlords to disclose all costs of a rental agreement in plain language in their published listings. That includes anything on a background check that could disqualify an applicant, as well as minimum credit score or income requirements. "This can help renters avoid surprise charges and do things like budget more confidently, which is very important in this economy right now," Schultz said. There are several other key provisions, including those around repairs. The ordinance grants the tenant the right to arrange for necessary maintenance by a licensed and insured professional. The tenant can also deduct the cost of the repair from their rent payment or receive reimbursement from the landlord when the landlord fails to make a repair. Landlords would also be prohibited from charging fees and additional rent for companion animals, defined in the bill as typical pets not used for commercial purposes. In all, the bill makes changes to rules around security deposits, relocation assistance, the rental application process, evictions, credit reporting requirements, move-in and move-out procedures and methods of payment. It's set to go before the Land Use, Planning and Zoning Committee on June 11. If it advances, it's unlikely to go before the full council until at least August, Schultz said. "Why would landlords also be interested in this? And I think the answer to that is that clear rules reduce confusion and conflict," Schultz said.
Yahoo
17 hours ago
- Yahoo
Punxsutawney Phil could deliver Michigan GOP tax cut proposals
PUNXSUTAWNEY, PENNSYLVANIA - FEBRUARY 2: Groundhog handler AJ Dereume holds Punxsutawney Phil after he saw his shadow predicting 6 more weeks of winter during the 139th annual Groundhog Day festivities on Friday February 2, 2025 in Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania. Groundhog Day is a popular tradition in the United States and Canada. If Punxsutawney Phil sees his shadow he regards it as an omen of six more weeks of bad weather and returns to his den. Early spring arrives if he does not see his shadow, causing Phil to remain above ground. (Photo by) As Republicans attempt to regain control of state government next year, I'm reminded of the movie, 'Groundhog Day.' In this 1993 film, Bill Murray plays a cynical weatherman who goes to Punxsutawney, Pa. to film the town's annual Groundhog Day celebration and finds himself reliving the same day over and over again. Likewise, Michigan Republican office holders and those seeking statewide and legislative seats have for decades repeatedly called for tax cuts they say will make us richer and transform the state's economy. They won't, but I'll get to that in a bit. Republicans running for office this year are turbocharging their tax-cut message. Not content to just slash tax rates, some are calling for the elimination of the personal income tax. (Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer is term limited and cannot run for reelection.) Former state Attorney General Mike Cox, who is seeking the GOP nomination for governor, is among those attempting to rebrand the income tax as a 'tax on work' and calling for its demise. Cox doesn't say on his campaign website how or if he would replace the approximate $12 billion the personal income tax annually generates. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX 'Our paychecks should go toward our families, not Lansing's pet projects,' Cox said. Republicans say killing or at least cutting the income tax would put Michigan on a more competitive footing with Florida, Tennessee, Texas and a handful of other states that don't levy income taxes. A bill to trim the personal income tax rate from 4.25% to 4.05% passed the House in March but hasn't been taken up by the Democratic-controlled Senate. 'If we cut taxes now and scale back regulations, we could become one of the nation's strongest economies,' Rep. Bryan Posthumus (R-Rockford) wrote on X this week. The wealthy West Michigan DeVos family is bankrolling a multimillion-dollar effort to return Michigan to GOP control. Former Republican National Committee chairwoman Ronna McDaniel has been named CEO of the newly formed Michigan Forward Network. 'We need to make Michigan reliably red,' McDaniel told the Wall Street Journal. 'We need to become a state like Ohio.' Fun fact: Michigan adopted the income tax in 1967 during the administration of Republican Gov. George Romney, McDaniel's grandfather. But taxes aren't the root of Michigan's long-term economic slide. A recent in-depth study of state tax policies by the conservative Tax Foundation shows that Michigan's tax structure stacks up pretty well with other states. The Foundation's 2025 State Tax Competitive Index ranks Michigan 14th best overall, ahead of every Great Lakes state except Indiana, which ranks 10th. The index is a compilation of personal, corporate, sales, property and unemployment insurance taxes. Notably, Michigan ranks ninth best in corporate taxes, ahead of fast-growing states such as Florida, South Carolina and Texas. The study also describes Michigan's 4.25% personal income tax as 'relatively low.' Ohio, McDaniel's model state, ranks 35th in the Tax Foundation's tax competitiveness index. Michigan has the 33rd lowest state tax burden in the country, an April study by Wallet Hub found. State taxes as a percentage of personal income are lower now than they were 25 years ago, according to the Michigan House Fiscal Agency. Yet as business taxes were slashed and the tax burden on residents fell, Michigan became alarmingly poorer compared to the rest of the country. From at least as far back at 1970 until the mid-1990s, Michigan's per capita income was above or about the same as U.S. per capita income. But it has since fallen to about 88 percent of national per capita income, a revealing state Senate Fiscal Agency chart shows. The stunning decline occurred throughout Democratic and Republican administrations, largely caused by the significant loss of high-paying blue-collar auto and other manufacturing jobs. Most of those jobs aren't coming back, despite the focus on restoring manufacturing by both parties. And there's another problem: most Americans don't want to work in factories. Automaking will continue to be a critical part of the state's economy—unless President Donald Trump destroys it with his foolish trade war. But Michigan won't get wealthier unless it shifts from a business-focused to a talent-and-place-centered economic strategy. Boosting educational attainment, making our cities more attractive to young talent, and developing transit are requirements. Detroit 'would be a different city' with transit, billionaire businessman Dan Gilbert once said. 'And again, it would give us the ability to attract more talent here.' The Tax Foundation and Wallet Hub studies show that low taxes don't automatically translate to high incomes. States such as Illinois, Massachusetts and Minnesota have some of the worst tax climates and burdens in the country, the studies show. But they're also among the wealthiest states in the country. Those states feature a high percentage of college graduates, good public transit, and attractive cities and metro areas. Illinois and Minnesota, both blue states, have the highest per capita incomes among Great Lakes states. They should serve as economic models for Michigan, not Ohio. Otherwise, it will continue to be Groundhog Day in the Wolverine State.
Yahoo
3 days ago
- Yahoo
McCAUGHEY: Democrats waging war on small-town values and property values
Across the U.S., Democrats are waging war to crush a lifestyle they abhor. Call it small-town America: Single-family neighbourhoods, quiet streets, town centres stamped with their historic character and almost no signs of the vagrancy and homeless encampments that plague cities. Democrats want you to have none of this. If you've worked for years to save up for a home in one of these havens, forget about it. The Democratic Party is using brute legal force to remake towns using a cookie-cutter formula that forces each to have the same proportion of houses and apartments, the same mix of low-, middle- and upper-income residents and the same reliance on public transit, all controlled by state politicians. Any town that resists gets shamed as 'segregated', though this isn't about race, and 'snobby.' On May 31, the Connecticut legislature passed H.B. 5002, which should be called the Destroy Connecticut Towns Act. It's headed to Gov. Ned Lamont's desk for a signature. The new law dictates how many low-income and moderate-income apartments each Connecticut town must provide and mandates that towns also foot the bill for the schools, parks, public transportation and other services low-income residents will need. Local taxes will soar. The bill explicitly says its purpose is to ensure 'economic diversity' in each town. This is about social engineering, not remedying housing shortages. Democrat Bob Duff, the state senate majority leader, says 'it's extremely important … that we don't segregate people based on a ZIP code.' Everyone, regardless of income, should have the opportunity to choose to live in any town. The bill mandates that the wealthiest towns, mostly in lower Fairfield County, provide most of the new housing, even though that raises the cost. Land costs less in other towns and lower-income people, who this bill is supposed to serve, are more likely to find bus transportation and affordable stores in these other towns as well. Connecticut lawmakers are nixing local rules. Ordinances that protect the appearance of a town have to be overruled. The bill states that multifamily buildings of up to 24 units will no longer have to provide off-street parking. Envision cars lining every residential street. Towns will also be forced to welcome vagrants who want to sleep in parks and public lots. The bill outlaws 'hostile architecture,' meaning park benches with armrests and divided seating, or stone walls with spikes on top that deter sleeping in the rough. Instead, the bill launches a program of mobile showers and mobile laundry services on trucks to serve the homeless wherever they choose. Picture the mobile showers pulling up to Greenwich Common Park on the town's main street, or Waveny Park in New Canaan. How can kids walk around town with their pals if there are homeless encampments? Judge Glock, director of research at the Manhattan Institute think tank, points out that the homeless amount to 1% of the population in Los Angeles but commit 25% of the homicides. Inviting the homeless means inviting crime and drugs. Californicating the small towns of Connecticut by encouraging public camping and vagrancy 'is frightening,' says Glock. New York Democrats are also taking aim at small-town living. A bill sponsored by state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal would outlaw local towns from setting minimum lot sizes over one-eighth of an acre near the town centre and a half acre everywhere else. Postage stamp sizes. Riverhead, New York, town supervisor Tim Hubbard is vowing to sue. 'We're trying to keep our community as rural as it can be … We don't think the state should be zoning our town.' Hoylman-Sigal chooses to live on the west side of Manhattan, but who is he to impose a population-dense lifestyle on small-town New Yorkers? Similarly, in New Jersey, Democratic Gov. Tim Murphy is pushing lawmakers to override local ordinances and impose the same kinds of 'reforms' as those in the Connecticut bill. In all these states and across the country, small-town Americans need to fight back. There is no constitutional right to live in a wealthy town with single-family homes and leafy, quiet streets. It's something you earn. Once you've purchased a home, you have the right to protect its value. It's time to put blue-state politicians on notice that their battle to destroy our suburbs and small towns will be resisted at the voting booth and in court.
