Utah conservatives to Sundance: Don't let the door hit you on your way out
Some of Utah's conservative leaders are encouraging Sundance to leave following a report that the state's pending ban on pride flags could push the film festival out the door.
The latest: Deadline, citing an anonymous source, reported Wednesday that a state bill to ban pride flags from schools and government buildings could tip the scales as the festival decides whether to relocate.
Sen. Dan McCay (R-Riverton) posted the story on X, claiming that Sundance promotes "porn," "alternative lifestyles" and "anti-LDS themes."
"Sundance does not fit in Utah anymore," McCay wrote. The post was shared by at least one other Republican lawmaker and some prominent conservative activists. Goud Maragani, a recurring GOP presence in Salt Lake County elections, also called on Sundance to leave.
Catch up quick: Until Wednesday, state and local leaders had been trying to keep the 41-year-old film festival after it sought bids last year from other prospective host cities.
Festival organizers had planned to announce the future location within weeks, having narrowed the options down to staying put, Cincinnati or Boulder, Colorado.
To sweeten the deal, lawmakers this month surpassed Gov. Spencer Cox's request for $3 million to keep the festival local, instead budgeting $3.5 million.
What they're saying:"What are they thinking?" a source, identified as a "Sundance insider" told Deadline in reference to lawmakers who passed the pride flag ban.
"Utah is Utah, but this goes to the heart of the community Sundance has worked years and years to develop," the source added.
Neither legislative leaders nor festival organizers responded to Axios' request for comment.
Reality check: Sundance has screened a variety of films, including many children's films, documentaries, Oscar winners and movies that launched some of the most celebrated talents in the industry — or went on to be canonized as pioneering classics of cinema.
By the numbers: Out-of-state visitors spent $106.4 million during last year's festival, which drew over 72,000 in-person attendees, per an economic impact report.
Yes, but: In Park City, where most of the films and events take place, the festival has gotten increasingly mixed reviews as it has grown.
Attendees have complained of traffic, pricey lodging and large corporations and brands taking over the festival's independent vibe.
"Sundance used to have such an artful pulse on the street that went beyond the films. Now it all seems to be gone and replaced with police presence and regulations," a Park City business owner told Variety in a January article.
What's next: The 2026 festival, which could be Utah's last, is scheduled for Jan. 22–Feb. 1.
What we're watching: Whether Cox signs the pride flag ban.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘RHOM's Alexia Nepola & Marysol Patton On Tuning Out Opinions From Viewers & Why Filming Break Helped Some Of The Ladies In The Friend Group
Alexia Nepola and Marysol Patton are back on Bravo as The Real Housewives of Miami return to television. The reality series took an extended break between seasons to break from the yearly filming schedule and see the ladies during another phase of their lives. More from Deadline 'The Real Housewives Of Miami' Season 7 Cast Photos, Trailer & Premiere Date Set At Bravo Bravo's 'The Real Housewives': Every Single Cast Photo In Franchise History Brynn Whitfield Not Returning To 'Real Housewives Of New York City' After 2 Seasons As She Opts To "Walk Away From Reality TV" Season 7 of RHOM picks up after Nepola announces her separation from her husband Todd, with all the girls coming together to support her. Ahead of the season premiere, Deadline talked to Nepola and Patton about what viewers can expect in the new season and how it was returning to film after the extended break. 'I should actually have a body cam on myself [to] document everything in my life. I should really be filming all year round, but thank God I'm not, because… sometimes you do need a little break,' Nepola said. 'It makes sense because sometimes you do need to give some of the ladies in the friend group some months off to develop and have more things going on and whatnot.' Patton says that she wished 'every day' she had a camera on herself and Nepola when cameras were down, but ultimately noted that the extended break helped, saying, 'to have story lines [for] real things. Because the minute you jump into things too quickly, you don't have enough time to have new things going on in your life. Look what happened with Julia – we had a break and she adopted two children. It was [also] big changes in Alexia's life and changes in the friend group as well. Some people got closer, some people you would have expected to be close forever are no longer close. Time does a lot of miracles.' Alexia Nepola on tuning out opinions from viewers The premiere episode of RHOM shows the cast coming together to support Nepola as she announces her separation from her husband. However, things are much different now as Nepola and her husband have patched things up and worked things out. 'It's hard,' Nepola said of watching the episode showcasing a contrasting part of her life. 'But with that being said, I look back and that's the beauty of life, right? How I was going through so much pain and hurt a year ago, and today, I'm filled with hope, and I'm happy and I'm in a much better place.' She continued, 'I'm in a good place right now. But, if I wasn't, maybe the story would be different. As far as my relationship goes, like any other relationship, there's ebbs and flows, and highs and lows. It was very emotional for me.' Nepola is one of the few housewives who lives authentically in front of the cameras and doesn't make life choices based on how viewers might perceive her and says, 'I tune out.' 'I don't feel or think about the consequences, but it's kind of too late because you're in the moment and you're feeling it, and you're doing it,' Nepola adds. 'I've never done anything for camera. Maybe I should do less. Maybe that's my problem, that I say too much and I do too much, but that's how I am in my real life. The camera just documents it.' Why cast is different from the others The Real Housewives are known to have fiery conversations, but the Miami ladies keep it light and fun, and never seemingly go to a place where they can't come back from. 'I think for the most part, people can be shady, but they're not too nasty, except for one person. We've only got one person with a nasty problem. Other than that, that's a good quota for nine women. Just saying,' Patton says. Nepola adds, 'I feel like we're too nice. I feel like our friend group that we're too nice. I don't really watch any other Housewife show, but I watch clips, and I'm very friendly with many of the other women on the other shows, and I feel like they really go at each other.' Patton notes that she thinks the RHOM cast is different 'because we're all actually friends,' adding, 'When you're not friends with people, you don't care how you treat them, and a lot of these shows are cast with strangers just to fill a spot, and they're not really friends. We're all really friends.' 'And that's why it works for us, you can't lie to the camera,' Nepola says. 'You can really see that we're all friends, and we have so much history and we fight like sisters and we love like sisters, so I think that that's what the audience really loves about our show.' Alexia Nepola and Marysol Patton's take on the feud between Larsa Pippen and Lisa Hochstein The premiere episode of RHOM Season 7 sees a fallout between Larsa Pippen and Lisa Hochstein, which ends with Hochstein kicking Pippen out of her home. 'I'm very friendly with both of them, and I love and care for both of them. So as your friends, it was very hard to watch,' Nepola said about the feud. Patton adds, 'Eventually, we removed ourselves. We were like, 'You guys, have to figure it out. We can't do anymore. I don't want to hear you complain. I don't want to hear you complain. You two need to complain to each other and figure it out.'' If faced with a similar situation about being kicked out of someone's home, Patton says, 'Yo me muero.' ('I would die.') 'Yo me voy,' Nepola adds, saying she would have left. 'It was horrible. I was mortified. I felt terrible for Larsa because she was very upset about it and she was very sad. I mean, just the fact that she went, maybe I wouldn't have even gone to Lisa's house because they were already feeling a certain kind of way about each other. I knew that by seeing each other at some point during the night, that was going to happen.' Patton says she wouldn't have kicked anyone out of her home and says she has even had fellow co-star Adriana de Moura at her place, despite them not being friendly. 'I have had Adriana in my home over three times and handed her gifts, and I've never thought in a moment, how much I don't want you here, that I would actually throw you out of my house, because I would never throw anyone out,' she says. and the cast trips No one does it like The Real Housewives of Miami, and Nepola and Patton teased the trips the cast will be taking in Season 7. Patton teases that the cast trip to Sevilla in Spain was in honor of Alexia, adding, 'Alexia grew up in Spain in her teen years. She was in high school there and she loves it. It was beautiful.' 'It was our best trip. I feel like when we go on trips, you can't even invent the the shit [that] goes down. I don't know what it is, but the energy is different. Everyone's on 10,' Nepola says. 'You'll get to see laughter and you'll get to see tears. You get to see both, which is what makes us human and makes us real, and it makes us relatable because we're going through shit and you can see it, but we also have a lot of fun, and it's just beautiful. Sevilla is a beautiful setting.' Nepola also notes that the cast also goes on a cruise, which was thanks to Patton, who said, 'I might be friends with Richard Branson, so we go on this cruise, and it was great. We had a lot of fun.' Best of Deadline 'Stick' Release Guide: When Do New Episodes Come Out? 'Stick' Soundtrack: All The Songs You'll Hear In The Apple TV+ Golf Series 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Kanye West Has Apparently Changed His Name… Again
Ye has apparently switched up his moniker yet again, nearly four years after he legally renounced his birth name, Kanye Omari West. In business documents obtained by multipleoutlets on Tuesday, the rapper was listed under the name 'Ye Ye.' West's chief financial officer, Hussain Lalani, reportedly filed the documents with the California Secretary of State. 'Ye Ye' was listed as the 'manager or member' of West's companies Yeezy Apparel, Yeezy Record Label and Ox Paha Inc. in the documents, according to E! News. It's unclear whether the 'Power' musician, who has not publicly announced his new moniker, has filed separate documents to legally change his name again. Ye's representatives did not immediately reply to HuffPost's request for comment. In October 2021, a Los Angeles judge approved the 24-time Grammy winner's petition to officially change his name to Ye after he requested the name change in August. Several years earlier, in a 2018 post on what was then Twitter, the artist had written, 'The being formally known as Kanye West. I am YE.' That same year, Ye spoke to radio host Big Boy about the meaning behind the name. 'I believe Ye is the most commonly used word in the Bible,' he said in the June 2018 interview. 'In the Bible it means 'you.' So I'm you, I'm us. It went from being Kanye, which means the only one, to being just Ye — just being a reflection of our good, our bad, our confused, everything. I'm just more a reflection of who we are.' Kanye West Says Wife Bianca Censori 'Ran Away' In His New Unhinged Song Kanye Confesses He Never Wanted Kids With Kim Kardashian John Legend Says Ex-Friend Kanye West's 'Descent' Into 'Antisemitism' And 'Anti-Blackness' Is 'Shocking'
San Francisco Chronicle
34 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Iowa governor rejects GOP bill to increase regulations of Summit's carbon dioxide pipeline
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds on Wednesday rejected a bill that could have introduced more complications for a massive carbon-capture pipeline project routed across several Midwestern states, issuing a rare veto in the Republican-controlled statehouse. The legislation was designed by Iowa House Republicans to increase regulations of Summit Carbon Solutions' estimated $8.9 billion, 2,500-mile (4,023-kilometer) project that cuts across Iowa and already has an approved permit in the state. But the bill provoked loud opposition from members of Iowa's powerful ethanol industry, which argued the project is essential for Iowa's agricultural dominance, for farmers and for construction jobs. And it exposed a rift within the party over how to protect property rights. 'While I shared the bill's goal of protecting landowners, good policy should draw clear, careful lines. This bill doesn't,' said Reynolds, a Republican, in the explanation of her veto. 'It combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets.' Despite her veto, Reynolds said she was 'committed to working with the legislature to strengthen landowner protections, modernize permitting, and respect private property.' Iowa state Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, a Republican who supported the bill in the House, said Wednesday that her commitment is too little, too late. 'If she was willing to work with us on this, where in the world has she been the last three years?' Kaufmann said. 'She is clearly not siding with the constitutional rights of landowners but rather she's siding with special interests.' Summit has said it has invested nearly $175 million to enter into voluntary agreements with landowners in Iowa and more than $1 billion on the project overall. In a statement, Summit thanked the governor for a thoughtful review of the bill and said their goal is to proceed with voluntary agreements with landowners. Even with the relief from Reynolds' veto, Summit will likely have to readjust plans after South Dakota's governor signed a ban on the use of eminent domain — the government seizure of private property with compensation — to acquire land for carbon dioxide pipelines. Summit's permit application was also rejected in South Dakota. The project has permit approvals in Iowa, Minnesota and North Dakota but faces various court challenges. The Iowa bill would have prohibited the renewal of permits for a carbon dioxide pipeline, limited the use of such a pipeline to 25 years and significantly increased the insurance coverage requirements for the pipeline company. Those provisions would likely have made it less financially feasible for a company to build a carbon dioxide pipeline. 'We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project,' Summit said Wednesday. 'At a time when farmers are facing increasing pressures, this project opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America's energy dominance for the long term.' Rift in Republican-controlled statehouse Republican House Speaker Pat Grassley said after Reynolds' veto that he would pursue a special session to vote on an override, saying in a statement that the veto 'is a major setback for Iowa.' The Iowa Constitution states that a request for special session from two-thirds of both chambers, or the governor, can bring lawmakers back to Des Moines. Two-thirds of both chambers would need to vote for an override for the bill to become law without the governor's approval. 'We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners' in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain,' Grassley said. Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver suggested that would be unlikely in his chamber. Thirteen Republican senators had joined with 14 Democrats in voting in favor of the bill, but 21 Republicans and one Democrat voted against it. 'Based on the votes on that bill in the Iowa Senate, a significant majority of our caucus supports a better policy to protect landowner rights. I expect that majority of our caucus would not be interested in any attempt to override her veto,' he said. As the legislative session wound down, a dozen Republican senators insisted their leaders bring the House-approved bill to the floor for a vote after several years of inaction. The stalemate ended in a long and divisive debate among the Iowa Senate's Republican supermajority, with senators openly criticizing one another and exposing the closed-door discussions that got them there. Summit's project and its critics The Summit pipeline was proposed to carry carbon emissions from ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota to be stored underground permanently in North Dakota. By lowering carbon emissions from the plants, the pipeline would lower their carbon intensity scores and make them more competitive in the renewable fuels market. The project would also allow ethanol producers and Summit to tap into federal tax credits. The pipeline's many critics have for years begged lawmakers for action. They accuse Summit of stepping on their property rights and downplaying the safety risks of building the pipeline alongside family homes, near schools and across ranches. Lee Enterprises and The Associated Press reviewed hundreds of cases that reveal the great legal lengths the company went to to get the project built. In South Dakota, in particular, a slew of eminent domain legal actions to obtain land sparked a groundswell of opposition that was closely watched by lawmakers in Iowa as well. A group of landowners released a statement Wednesday calling the veto a slap in the face. 'Big money, greed & self interest won the day,' said Jan Norris, a landowner in southwest Iowa whose neighbor is in the pipeline's route. 'Our property rights are for sale to the highest bidder.'
