Tension brews between state auditor and top lawmakers over office relocation
Utah Auditor Tina Cannon speaks to reporters at the Utah State Capitol in Salt Lake City on Friday, March 7, 2025. (Kyle Dunphey/Utah News Dispatch)
Tension is brewing between the Legislature and newly elected Auditor Tina Cannon, who, just 60 days into her tenure, says she's being pushed out of her office at the Utah Capitol Building.
Lawmakers say that isn't true — instead, her staff might be required to move if a bill, sponsored by Sen. Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, passes. By their interpretation, Cannon can still have an office in the main Capitol Building, although she might have to share a reception area with the Attorney General's Office.
Regardless, the relationship between Senate leadership and Cannon, who is tasked with ensuring taxpayer funded programs and agencies are compliant and efficient, appeared fraught on the final day of the legislative session.
'It is disturbing to me that in my plea to follow the legal process, I was told to ignore the legal process,' said Cannon, referring to previous legislation aimed at studying how office space is allocated at the Capitol.
'Her comments were very inappropriate,' said McKell on Friday.
The bill, SB143, makes a number of changes to policies, procedures and office space at the Utah Capitol Building. It passed with unanimous approval in the Senate — but after a late amendment that included language about the auditor's office was adopted on Thursday night, a bipartisan group of 18 lawmakers voted against it.
The provision in question states that, beginning on Jan. 1, 2025 (meaning the bill is retroactive) the auditor's office space would be placed under control of the Utah State Procurement Policy Board until a 'similar space on Capitol hill is assigned to the state auditor.'
After that, the bill states the office Cannon has been occupying 'is under the direction and control of the Legislature.'
The Senate has yet to approve the amendment made in the House — Sen. Heidi Balderree, R-Saratoga Springs, has proposed an amendment that would clarify the auditor's office belongs in the main Capitol Building. It has not been adopted as of Friday afternoon.
Cannon reads the current version of the bill as an eviction notice.
'I was told that senators would like additional space in the capitol and that I needed to make room for them. And my response was … I'm a statewide constitutional officer, I'm also elected, please respect the position that I hold. And they said that doesn't matter, we'll just sweep you out,' she said on Friday.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
When asked about how her conversations have been between Legislative leaders, Cannon said, 'not calm.' She has accused Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, of bullying and hinted to Utah News Dispatch on Friday that she had concerns that the dispute could impact funding for her office, which is controlled by the Legislature.
'I was trying to walk a very fine line, because they control my budget. And I'm sure there will be an impact. I will be watching closely for that impact,' she said on Friday.
Senators pushed back on just about everything Cannon said on Friday. McKell said her comments were 'unfortunate' and 'inappropriate,' while Adams said the suggestion that legislators were using funding as leverage was 'absolutely false.'
'Honestly, I felt like it was really inappropriate for the auditor to try to leverage that into the conversation. It was not part of the conversation,' said McKell.
'To say that she was leveraged into this, that just was absolutely false,' added Adams.
Lawmakers say the conversations around office space have been going on for years, stemming from the construction of a new building on Utah's Capitol Hill. McKell pointed out other statewide offices — the governor, attorney general and legislature all have staff with offices in other buildings.
'We have a new building that's being built, we're going to reshuffle office space, and we do want to look at office space on Capitol Hill,' McKell said. 'It doesn't say that she's being removed from the Capitol. I think we read that differently. But you know, we're going to continue to work on it.'
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans, some Democrats and even ex-Gov. Rod Blagojevich weigh in on ex-Speaker Michael Madigan's sentence
In what's become somewhat customary once an Illinois political titan falls, leaders throughout the state responded with condemnation and called for reforms upon hearing Friday that ex-Speaker Michael Madigan was sentenced to seven and a half years in federal prison and fined $2.5 million on federal corruption charges. House Republican leader Tony McCombie of Savanna and Senate Republican leader John Curran of Downers Grove called for bipartisan ethics reforms in the wake of the sentencing, with Curran specifically requesting committee hearings and votes on potential changes — something that didn't happen this session. Madigan's sentencing was 'a stark and shameful reminder of the corruption that has plagued Illinois government for far too long,' McCombie said in a statement. 'Justice was served — but the damage to public trust runs deep.' But Illinois' last prominent statewide politician who went to federal prison, former Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich, held back on the chance to take a swipe at a bitter nemesis when Madigan was sentenced. Though the two were Democrats, they feuded for nearly all six years Blagojevich was in office between 2003 and 2009. 'When that guy, Madigan, was on the top of the mountain, they were all kissing his ass,' Blagojevich said. 'Now they're going to be stomping all over his grave. And it's really, it's really sort of an unappealing side of human nature.' Blagojevich said Madigan's conviction underscores the systemic problems in politics and government in the state Capitol. 'Is the system in Springfield corrupt, in many ways, absolutely,' Blagojevich said in an interview with the Tribune while insisting he didn't break the law. 'It's a system, I've been saying this from the beginning, it all too often works for itself on the backs of the people.' Blagojevich — whose 14-year federal prison sentence for corruption was commuted by President Donald Trump, who ultimately also pardoned Blagojevich — didn't want to celebrate Madigan's prison sentence despite the two's often-tense relationship. 'I just don't think it's right for me to kick a man when he's down,' Blagojevich said. 'What's happening now to him, I know what it's like. And it's really easy for these politicians to get on their high horses and start kicking someone, stomping on someone.' Senate President Don Harmon, a Democrat from Oak Park who is facing a potential fine of nearly $10 million from the Illinois State Board of Elections for improper political fundraising, said Friday's sentence represented 'a solemn reminder' that the duty of public office holders is to serve 'and that there is accountability for those who do not.'
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
SNAP user's testimony causes backlash, cruel feedback
After President Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed the House, it introduced new fears for millions of Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to survive. The bill proposed an estimated $300 billion in cuts to SNAP over the next decade. If that portion of the bill passes the Senate as it is currently written, it would leave 12.6% of Americans potentially unable to afford shelter and food. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter The way it currently works is that states would begin to pay at least 5% of food benefit costs, and up to 25% if they have higher error rates, forcing states to choose between raising taxes, cutting other programs, or limiting SNAP access, per the Food Research & Access Center. Related: Scott Galloway sends bold statement on Social Security, US economy Republican senators pushed back hard on the cuts, leading to June 10 reports that the SNAP changes were being scaled down. The reworked plan cuts the state penalty for error from 25% to 15%, but Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) told Politico that they are "still negotiating." Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota took to social media on June 11 to share a video she surely thought would be of help to advocate for keeping SNAP intact. But her efforts have backfired. The video Klobuchar shared is of a SNAP recipient named Felecia talking about her experience as a mother of four living on SNAP benefits. Klobuchar said, "Today, we heard from Felecia, a single mom of four who works up to three jobs at a time to make ends meet. She counts on SNAP to help put food on the table. This is who Republicans in Congress are trying to take food away from. Listen to her story." In the video, Felecia says, "I would like to tell you my story on how SNAP benefit has helped me," becoming visibly emotional. "When I had my oldest daughter 21 years ago, I was working three jobs," Felecia said. "One job alone, I had to pay childcare. Another one to pay food, which wasn't enough. And one to pay the bills, and I still struggled alive." Related: Social Security income tax deduction hits major roadblock Felecia went on to say that she now has a full-time job as a bus monitor, but she only gets paid once a month, which is why she still needs SNAP. "By the time I get my bills paid, I have nothing left to pay for food and other basic needs. If it wasn't for SNAP benefits, I wouldn't be able to feed my children," she said. The comments on the video exploded, causing it to rake in 75,000 views and make the terms "SNAP" and "Felecia" go viral on X. But instead of garnering empathy, it achieved the opposite effect. People in the thread savagely attacked the mother of four, mostly with comments about her weight. "I'm not saying take her SNAP benefits, but what I'm saying is she doesn't need as much as she's getting," X user currermell said. "Either she's eating it all and her kids are already going hungry, or the handouts meant to sustain her life are having the opposite effect." Related: Walmart issues urgent message about the alarming cost of food "Do you know how many calories it takes to look like her? She's doing fine," X user Rafester said. Some opted to attack Felecia's relationship choices instead of her weight, saying, "Why does she have 4 children and no husband? Life choices matter. Sorry but 4 unplanned pregnancies and no partner present is absolute nonsense," X user fictitiousfruit said. A few rare voices in the thread abstained from insults. "Not a single person wants SNAP taken away from Felecia. Every single person wants SNAP revoked for people who aren't trying or aren't contributing to the country they take advantage of," user Zac DiSalvo said. The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Wyoming lawmakers seek to eliminate SIPA, again, in effort to simplify budget process
CHEYENNE — Wyoming lawmakers will try again to eliminate the state's Strategic Investments and Projects Account (SIPA) in a continued effort to make the state's budget process more transparent for the public. Efforts have been made in past legislative sessions to eliminate Wyoming's many financial 'coffee cans.' In 2024, lawmakers successfully repealed the School Capital Construction Account and its related accounts. This year, the Legislature successfully eliminated the Budget Reserve Account (BRA) through Senate File 168 and nearly eliminated SIPA through the passage of SF 169. However, Gov. Mark Gordon line-item vetoed SF 169 and kept SIPA online. The governor maintained his long-term support of simplifying the state's budget process, but he disapproved of the Legislature's approach in SF 169. Gov. Mark Gordon Gov. Mark Gordon '(SIPA) was originally a compromise between a previous legislature and the then-serving governor,' Gordon wrote in his veto letter. He served as state treasurer in 2013, when SIPA was first created. 'The compromise recognized the value of the governor's authority to use some of the funds when making budget recommendations.' Gordon argued the original structure of the bill limited his ability to make budget recommendations. Currently, excess funds from the state's Permanent Mineral Trust Fund (PMTF) account are split evenly between SIPA and the state's main savings account (the Legislative Stabilization Reserve Account, or LSRA). SF 169 originally eliminated SIPA by July 2026 and transferred all excess funds into the LSRA. Wyoming statute prohibits the governor from proposing appropriations from LSRA in excess of the 5% statutory reserve account. In other words, he can't make budget recommendations from this account. 'It is a cagey strategy to undermine a long-standing compromise between the executive and legislative branches and breach the original intent of SIPA,' Gordon wrote. One effect of Gordon's veto removed the split of funds flowing into SIPA and LSRA; now, all excess funds go directly into SIPA, effective immediately. He reasoned this action is necessary, as he expects the state will see greater pressure to fund public schools with the passage of more tax cuts and diversions, along with falling oil and natural gas prices. 'The combined effects of these factors create substantial pressure on the general fund to cover any school funding deficit and still meet the ongoing costs of government,' Gordon wrote, 'as well as provide services to Wyoming families and businesses.' Impact of veto During the Legislature's Select Committee on Capital Finance meeting on Thursday, lawmakers moved to draft a bill similar to SF 169 and, in a sense, make it 'veto-proof.' Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs, who was the primary sponsor of SF 169, said Gordon's veto 'left … quite a dilemma here.' 'The net effect of this line-item veto, if we allow this to stay in statutes the way it currently is, it zeros out the reserve accounts,' Hicks said. Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs (2025) Sen. Larry Hicks, R-Baggs Legislative budget and fiscal staff provided a comparison of the two versions of the bill and their long-term fiscal impacts, based on numbers from the January long-term forecast of the state's fiscal profile. The SIPA transfers 45% of what it retains to the School Foundation Program (SFP) account, the state's main spending account to fund public schools. If the SIPA is entirely repealed, the SFP loses that funding. Before SF 169 was signed into law, the LSRA and SFP were estimated to receive $124.1 million and $369.4 million, respectively, from SIPA over a six-year forecast period. Under the version passed by the Legislature, LSRA was estimated to receive $191.6 million in that same time period. The SFP would receive a total of $111.4 million in the first two fiscal years, and then not receive anything starting in fiscal year 2027 with the repeal of SIPA. Under Gordon's vetoes, the SFP is estimated to receive $470 million over the six-year forecast period, and the LSRA will receive no funding at all. 'But I want to point out that, starting in FY 28 the (PMTF) reserve account can't guarantee the full amount, and it falls short by about $60 million,' said LSO senior fiscal analyst Polly Scott. 'As Sen. Hicks did state … the estimate is that the reserve account is depleted somewhere in (fiscal year 2028).' Under the version adopted by the Legislature, the reserve account's life is extended beyond the six-year forecast, Scott added, because the state is relying on it less. Lawmakers respond State Treasurer Curt Meier noted that the PMTF reserve account is acting the way the LSRA should act. He suggested removing the 1.25% guarantee from the PMTF reserve account into SIPA so it can 'function (as) what it was supposed to do.' 'You're spending money you don't have and then you're trying to catch up … so you can spend it in this year's legislative session,' Meier said. 'Let the reserve account stand on itself, rather than putting more pressure on it than what it can afford to bear.' Then, the Legislature could move the unrealized capital gains into the LSRA, he said. The LSRA already provides $100 million to the school spending account once it drops below a certain threshold. Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne (2025) Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne Chairwoman Sen. Tara Nethercott, R-Cheyenne, suggested also discussing lifting this cap from the LSRA into the SFP at the committee's next meeting in September. For now, committee members voted to draft a bill that eliminates the SIPA, with a provision to remove the 1.25% flow guarantee from the PMTF reserve account, and discuss it at the next meeting. 'The elimination of the SIPA account is important, I think, to the Legislature as a whole, in order to simplify and provide transparency to the budget process,' Nethercott said. 'Because the SIPA account has been butchered. It's been tortured ... and no longer serves its intended purpose, creating a transparency issue.'
