Latest news with #DanMcCay
Yahoo
19-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion: Changes to SB197 fail to protect low-income seniors
On February 14th, my op-ed was published regarding SB197, the bill that Sen. Dan McCay proposed in the Legislature that within five years would've wiped out any hope for financial relief for low-income senior property owners via Utah's four-decade-old Circuit Breaker program. Evidently, that editorial hit home. The bill was changed, but not enough to fix it. The first change was to exclusively grandfather in anyone who received relief in 2024, but that was it. No one else. A later version added folks who get approved in 2025. But again, just those particular senior Utahns could stay on. Unfortunately, punitive qualifying factors and measures were added for that exclusive group. No new applicants allowed after this year. Anyone not 66 years old by this December 31st is out. If you happen to not qualify for whatever reason, you can't get back on. The sponsor stated he wanted this bill to inspire seniors to move, to downsize and open up housing stock. Not sure where these seniors might move to that makes financial sense for them in this market, but once they do, they're off the program, as this bill states you need to be in the same residence you were in previously to continue. Another thing SB197 does is to lock in the income chart from 2024 without future adjustments for inflation, as has been the policy in the past. That $40,840 figure can be easily exceeded when minimal SSA COLA raises are granted, or when a family member needs to move in to care for their elderly parents. In January of this year, the tax commission proposed a maximum income of $42,623 for this year's Circuit Breaker and Renter Refund programs. Senator Wayne Harper's SB224, which got buried after McCay's SB197 was proposed, had proposed a $46,000 maximum income. Oddly, in SB197, renters can have a maximum household income of $46,000, but not property owners. Why the discrepancy? The $40,840 figure is too low, and being locked in will make qualifying much harder in the future. Consider that the governor's housing advisor, Steve Waldrip, proposed a $45,807 maximum in HB401 in 2022, three inflationary years ago. Yes, so much of this doesn't make any sense, and it gets worse. The new deferral programs SB197 creates are a revamped version of the failed deferral program McCay instituted two years ago that benefited only eight households. In looking over the plans, tax auditors around the state have found many obstacles and pitfalls too numerous to detail here. Some senior Utahns who have a reverse mortgage will be disqualified from deferral, while some Utahns of any age who are not financially strapped will be able to game the system and use it to take out low-interest loans for years and years to come. It's just bad policy. As long-time Chief Deputy Treasurer Phil Conder wrote to the Governor, 'I know of no County Tax Administrators in the State who support this bill. Not from an implementation perspective, financial perspective, nor compassionate perspective.' Another fallacy is that SB197 is meant to stem a program growing unsustainably. Participation in homeowner's credit actually decreased this year and now the number of households participating is fewer than in 2023. The state funding of the 2024 senior homeowner's credit amounted to only 8.6% of the entire Circuit Breaker program. For cost savings, SB197 aims at the wrong target. In 2023, another program had its benefits raised by 90%, and that has resulted in a cost increase to the counties of $22 million dollars in two years. That's where the 'growth' is. Unfortunately, SB197 was circled until the fifth version was unveiled and hurriedly passed with three hours left in the legislative session with a short debate cut off abruptly. Please promptly contact the governor's office at (801) 538-1000 or use one of these links to share your opposition to SB 197. We need county tax administrators to be able to share their accumulated wisdom and help craft a fair and useful deferral program Utahns can be proud of.
Axios
13-03-2025
- Entertainment
- Axios
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.
Axios
08-03-2025
- Politics
- Axios
Here are 12 bills headed to the governor as Utah wraps 2025 legislative session
Utah's 45-day legislative session came to a close Friday. What we're watching: Gov. Spencer Cox has until March 27 to sign, veto or allow bills to pass without his signature. He declined to say during a Friday press conference which bills were on his veto list. Here are some of the bills headed to his desk: 🏳️🌈 Pride flags would be banned from being displayed in schools and government buildings under HB 77. The big picture: The bill's Senate sponsor, Sen. Dan McCay (R-Riverton) argued the legislation would neutralize government buildings and classrooms from political speech. The latest: The bill has received staunch pushback from LGBTQ+ and civil rights groups. In a statement, Equality Utah said the bill targets free expression and that it would support legal action to fight it in court. 🗳️ Any citizen-led initiatives that raise taxes would have to win 60% voter approval, rather than a simple majority, under a state constitutional amendment proposed in SJR 2. Case in point: Medicaid expansion and the medical cannabis program that passed in 2018 would have failed under this amendment. Since it's a constitutional amendment, SJR 2 would still have to get voter approval in the 2026 general election. Meanwhile, citizens who initiate a ballot measure would have to foot the bill to print the measure in newspapers, as required by the state constitution, under SB 73. 📱 Cell phones and smart watches would be prohibited in classrooms under SB 178 unless a school district establishes exemptions. 🗳️ Starting in 2026, voters would have to include the last four digits of their driver license or state ID on their mail ballot instead of their signature, per HB 300. To vote by mail, Utahns will have to opt-in before 2029. 🌿 Want to grow dank weed? Under HB 343, you'd have to submit a plan to the state to show your farm won't stink out the neighbors. ⛕ State transportation officials would be allowed to veto some of Salt Lake City's traffic-calming street design efforts under a measure in SB 195 that specifically targets Utah's capital city. 🍸 Bartenders would be allowed to sample cocktails using the " straw test" method in SB 238 to ensure quality. ⚖️ The governor would appoint the chief justice of the Utah Supreme Court if SB 296 passes. Justices currently elect the chief justice by a majority vote. 🌫️ Halogen emissions — a big contributor to winter inversions — would be subject to more study and regulation under HB 420. 👶 Infants could be relinquished to the state without penalty up to 90 days after birth, rather than 30, under SB 57. 🍱 Kids in public schools would have expanded access to free and reduced-price lunches under HB 100. 🚱 Utah would become the first in the nation to prohibit adding fluoride in public water systems if Cox signs HB 81. Zoom out: The move comes soon after U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. opposed the practice.
Yahoo
07-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
New poll: Do Utahns support bill to help deport immigrants convicted of crimes?
The Utah Senate voted with the House on Thursday to partially reverse a 2019 criminal sentencing law that some Republicans said has made the state a 'magnet' for illegal immigration. The bill, HB226, would remove impediments for Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials to immediately deport immigrants convicted of dangerous crimes, according to the bill's proponents. But it would target immigrants who are otherwise legally present in the state, the bill's critics said during a contentious floor debate on Thursday. By increasing the maximum jail time for certain class A misdemeanors back to 365 days from 364 days, HB226 would enable judges to trigger a federal policy that makes noncitizens — regardless of residency status — immediately deportable if they are convicted of crimes with a sentence of at least one year. Increased enforcement of this deportation policy under President Donald Trump appears broadly popular among Utahns, according to a new Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll. The poll, conducted in late February by HarrisX among 805 registered voters, found that 89% of Utahns, including 95% of Republicans and 72% of Democrats, support the deportation of unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. who have committed crimes. A majority, or 57%, of Utah voters said they support the deportation of all unauthorized immigrants in the U.S., whether or not they committed a crime after entering the country, while 38% were opposed. The mass deportation of unauthorized immigrants was supported by 7 out of 10 Republicans and opposed by 7 out of 10 Democrats in the state. Survey data and immigration court filings suggest there are at least 145,000 unauthorized immigrants in Utah. The poll found that Utahns are much more hesitant to support the deportation of unauthorized immigrants when they consider their likely family connections. When asked whether there should be exceptions to deportation policies, 69% of Utahns said unauthorized immigrants who are married to U.S. citizens should be exempt and 45% said unauthorized immigrants who are children under the age of 18 should be exempt. While debating HB226, floor sponsor Sen. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, and Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City, disputed whether the bill marked a departure from the Utah Compact on Immigration, an agreement that immigration policy must promote the rule of law and avoid separating families. 'This is a huge policy change that I don't think matches what the Utah Compact said about Utah welcoming the world,' Escamilla said. 'My biggest concern is, what's going to happen to a family that has been here — they own property, a home, they're working, they're legally here.' Central to Thursday morning's debate was whether HB226 violated the due process of legal immigrants by making them subject to immediate ICE deportation, while not changing the policy for immigrants who entered the country illegally and who are already eligible for deportation proceedings. Defenders of the bill made the case that if noncitizens are committing serious crimes then they should not remain in the country. 'I recognize as well that it does affect those that are legally here working but that's why we went and narrowed it like we did,' Sen. Calvin Musselman, R-West Haven, said. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Candice Pierucci, R-Riverton, would increase the maximum class A misdemeanor sentence to 365 days only for offenses against an individual, which include child abuse, sexual misconduct and threats against law enforcement. Pierucci's bill would codify law enforcement practices of coordinating with federal immigration authorities before releasing an unauthorized immigrant convicted of these crimes to ensure they are not returned to Utah communities after their sentence is complete. The Deseret News/Hinckley Institute of Politics poll found that 80% of Utah voters, including 91% of Republicans and 54% of Democrats, think local law enforcement should help deport immigrants who have committed crimes in addition to crossing the border illegally. Another 56% said local law enforcement should help ICE deport immigrants who are in the country illegally, but who have committed no additional crime. This broader mandate was supported by 71% of Republicans and opposed by 71% of Democrats. In addition to outlining coordination requirements between police and ICE, HB226 would also require law enforcement to submit the immigration status of arrested individuals to courts and would give judges the presumption that individuals are considered a flight risk for bail if they are not lawfully present in the country. 'We know that federal policy is broken,' McCay said. 'The question is, is there a way that we can take this magnet status away for illegal immigration to avoid some of the cost?'
Yahoo
14-02-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion: SB197 threatens the financial stability of Utah seniors
In five years, low-income seniors throughout Utah, many on fixed incomes, would no longer be able to get any tax relief on their property taxes if Sen. Dan McCay gets his way with SB 197. That's right. Read that sentence again and let it sink in. Almost 10,000 senior households in the state rely on this relief to help them get by. That could easily be 15-20,000 people. They are your parents, your elderly friends and neighbors, struggling to keep up with rising prices and medical costs while living on fixed incomes. This is the first time legislation has been proposed to destroy this senior benefit in the over 40 years it's been working for low-income senior Utahns in danger of being taxed out of their homes, which is the reason it was created by the Legislature. If SB197 passes, the fiscal note says taxpayers might save $4.55 per year in taxes, while costing seniors $930 per year in critical help. What's smarter and more compassionate? That $4.55 per year gets 204 times the return to support our seniors. I think Utahns, with a history of charity, goodwill and caring see the sense in that equation and would be willing to contribute $4.55 once a year to support our low-income seniors. Is it really worth just over a penny a day to force our grandparents from their homes due to increased costs and inflation? A better solution is Senator Wayne Harper's SB224, keeping the program intact with slight improvements to keep up with inflation and rising costs. What's amazing is that it will cost taxpayers only 68 cents per year, according to the fiscal note analysis! This is the bill the 10,000 Utah households who received this help and those Utahns who support humane tax policy need to support. A prompt call to your legislators and the governor to support SB224 is absolutely critical. This program is also essential for widows and widowers. Let's remember what happens when a spouse passes when a couple is living on Social Security: you lose the income your spouse was getting, resulting in a severe ongoing cash crunch. Many times medical issues precede the spouse's passing, often impacting the bank account these seniors rely on for co-pays, medications and higher premiums. Why is this even being proposed? Past reports showed the state's share on the Circuit Breaker program was less than 10% of the cost, with the rest being borne by Utah's counties. Sen. McCay apparently laments chipping in anything, and the fiscal note on Sen. Harper's SB224 estimates that amount will be $4.5 million, a bargain compared to what else our tax dollars go to. How is it that 15-20,000 low-income seniors don't deserve critical relief when last year, just 10,000 students were awarded 18 times that amount, $82 million, through the Utah Fits All Scholarship program? Oddly, in 2023, McCay's committee mandated an increase in costs to the counties of over three times that estimate, resulting in a $14 million cost increase in just one year. SB197 is also more costly. Many tax administrators around the state are not happy with the deferral program that allows people to not pay their taxes until ownership is transferred. They fear the unpredictability when the numbers of households deferring their taxes vary and their annual budgets fluctuate, while deferral will simultaneously create the need to hire more administrative staff to implement the program when 10,000 households are forced on to it. The deferral program was implemented in Salt Lake and Weber counties in 2023. Dozens applied, but only one household between those two counties benefited. Last year it went statewide and only seven households benefited, while about 10,000 households got homeowner's credit. This failed program is being revamped and the newest experiment is being forced onto the seniors of our state while denying them any opportunity for actual financial relief. So now you get to make the choice: show love to 10,000 senior low-income households for 68 cents per year, or reap $4.55 in yearly savings. Please call.
