Latest news with #SB73
Yahoo
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Ballot initiatives in Utah now have more requirements after Gov. Cox signs bill
The Capitol in Salt Lake City is pictured on Tuesday, Jan. 21, 2025. (Photo by Spenser Heaps for Utah News Dispatch) As part of a batch of 75 bills he signed Monday, Utah Gov. Spencer Cox approved SB73, which layers on new requirements for ballot initiative seekers. Now law, SB73 requires initiative backers to include in their application for the initiative a detailed description of how the proposed law would be funded and if it would require a new tax. That provision of the bill took effect the moment Cox signed it. The governor did not issue a statement along with his signature of SB73. But proponents of setting new rules for ballot initiatives — including Sen. Lincoln Fillmore, R-South Jordan, who sponsored SB73 — argued during the Utah Legislature's 2025 session that Utah voters need to know the fiscal impact of proposed ballot initiatives. Critics, including the anti-gerrymandering group Better Boundaries, opposed the bill as another piece of legislation that makes it even more difficult for Utahns to exercise their ballot initiative power in a state where it's already hard enough. Utah lawmakers move to set higher bar for ballot initiatives — but voters will have a say in 2026 'It's disappointing to see legislative leaders take on a problem that doesn't exist,' Elizabeth Rasmussen, Better Boundaries' new executive director, said in a prepared statement issued Tuesday. Earlier this week, Better Boundaries announced Rasmussen had taken the place of the group's former executive director, Katie Wright. 'Regardless of political affiliation, citizens should have a fair and accessible path to bring forward initiatives,' Rasmussen added. 'SB73 adds costly, complicated barriers that make it harder for regular people to participate. At Better Boundaries, we'll continue working with Utahns to protect this constitutional process and ensure it remains open, fair, and grounded in Utah's values.' Fillmore, on the Senate floor during debate over SB73 in January, defended his bill, saying it's 'not in any way an effort to limit the ability of citizens to engage in their constitutionally granted legislative power.' 'But it is also very important that when citizens exercise their legislative power, that they do so with their eyes wide open about what the consequences of those decisions are,' Fillmore said. He added the Legislature has a 'constitutional mandate to balance the budget,' and 'the citizens ought to know in advance what we're sacrificing' for a new voter-approved law. Anti-initiative or 'informed'? Utah Senate OKs bill adding new requirements on voter initiatives While the provision in SB73 requiring initiative backers to include more information about how the proposed law would be funded took effect upon the governor's signature, another provision won't take effect until much later — Jan. 1, 2027. However, lawmakers wrote it that way with the intention of leaving time for voters to adjust it, if a proposed constitutional amendment that's also set for the November 2026 ballot gets approved. That delayed provision requires initiative backers to follow the same publication requirements that lawmakers do when they put proposed constitutional amendments on the ballot, which could increase the cost of ballot initiatives by an estimated $1.4 million. However, that could change. Currently, the Utah Constitution requires that constitutional amendments be published in newspapers statewide for 60 days before the next election. Lawmakers want voters to consider changing that, which would impact not just proposed constitutional amendments, but also ballot initiatives. Here's why: Utah lawmakers also passed a resolution and a companion bill that could remove that newspaper publication requirement from the Utah Constitution and leave it up to lawmakers to decide how voters should be notified before an election. They included: SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX HJR10 places this question on the November 2026 ballot for voters to consider: Should the Utah Constitution be changed to strike the language requiring that proposed constitutional amendments must be published 'in at least one newspaper in every county of the state where a newspaper is published, for two months' immediately preceding the election, and should the constitution instead say those proposed amendments be published 'in a manner provided by statute, for 60 calendar days' immediately preceding the next general election? If voters approve the question from HJR10, then another bill — HB481 (which is currently waiting the governor's signature ) — would take effect, setting a state law that requires proposed constitutional amendments and ballot initiatives be published as a 'class A' notice on the Utah Public Notice website or a government's official website for '60 calendar days immediately preceding' the next general election. Another proposed constitutional amendment slated to appear on the 2026 ballot would set a higher bar for certain ballot initiatives. Like SB73, it also targets ballot initiatives that would come with a price tag. Utah lawmakers also approved SJR2, which puts a question on the 2026 ballot for voters to either approve or reject: Should ballot initiatives that would require a new tax or a tax hike only be allowed to take effect if at least 60% of voters approve it? Currently, the Utah Constitution only requires a simple majority vote for ballot initiatives to be enacted as new laws. But that resolution's sponsor, Fillmore, argued it should take more than support from 50.1% of voters to 'raise taxes on the other 49.9%.' Unlike bills, joint resolutions don't need the governor's approval, so SJR3 and HJR10 will be enacted without his signature. It will be up to voters to decide what comes next. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
25-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rhoden vetoes petition signature bill
SIOUX FALLS S.D. (KELO) — A bill changing how groups gather signatures for ballot measures has been vetoed by Republican Gov. Larry Rhoden Tuesday. State Supreme Court hears NOPE case Tuesday In a news release, Rhoden announced he signed 20 election-related bills while also vetoing one, House Bill 1169. HB1169 requires ballot measure petitions to receive at least 5% of signatures from each of the 35 senate districts based on the last gubernatorial election turnout. Last week, KELOLAND News highlighted two voter advocacy groups that said HB1169 would make South Dakota home to the most extreme geographic petition signature requirements in the country. Under current laws, to get an initiated measure on the ballot, a petition needs signatures equal to 10% of the vote cast in the last gubernatorial election for the entire state. 'We would go from having no geographic distribution requirement to the worst in the country,' Matthew Schweich, with the Voter Defense Association of South Dakota, said last week. 'Just one state senate district, if they don't like an initiative, could choose not to sign it and block it, even if the entirety of South Dakota wanted an opportunity to vote on that constitutional amendment,' Schweich noted. 'This bill has a worthy goal: placing safeguards on the process to add constitutional amendments to the ballot in South Dakota, however, I am concerned that this bill will not withstand scrutiny in the courts,' Rhoden said in his letter issuing the veto. 'This bill attempts to change the South Dakota Constitution in statute, and I believe that approach to be misguided.' 03-25-2025_HB-1169-VETO-LetterDownload There was another issue with HB1169, on how to enforce the 5% per Senate district. Currently, the South Dakota Secretary of State office doesn't report election results from the 35 districts, only by county and precinct. Because they don't release that information, people won't know how many signatures they need to collect to reach 5%. Minnehaha County Auditor: 'New territory' with new election laws Rhoden has signed 177 bills and issued two vetoes this legislative session. Here's the list of the 20 election-related bills signed into law: SB 68 requires an individual be a citizen of the United States before being eligible to vote and to provides a penalty therefor. SB 73 requires that an individual registering as a voter when applying for a driver license be a resident of this state for the purposes of voting. SB 75 requires an indication of United States citizenship status on a motor vehicle operator's license or permit, and on a nondriver identification card. SB 89 repeals the requirement that judicial officers be listed on a separate nonpolitical ballot. SB 91 revises the requirements for a petition to initiate a measure or constitutional amendment or to refer a law. SB 92 requires that the director of the Legislative Research Council and the secretary of state review an initiated measure and determine if the measure embraces more than one subject. SB 106 requires an individual be registered as a voter of this state before being eligible to be a petition sponsor for a ballot measure. SB 164 prohibits the use of a deepfake to influence an election and provides a penalty therefor. SB 173 revises the process by which a recount may be requested. SB 185 amends provisions pertaining to the process by which the qualifications of a registered voter are verified. HB 1062 amends provisions pertaining to the maintenance and publication of the statewide voter registration file. HB 1066 revises residency requirements for the purposes of voter registration. HB 1126 modifies provisions pertaining to the compensation of a recount board. HB 1127 requires that notice of a county's canvass, post-election audit, and testing of automatic tabulating equipment be posted to the secretary of state's website. HB 1130 provides permissible dates for municipal and school district elections. HB 1164 revises the process for nominating candidates for lieutenant governor. HB 1184 amends the deadline for filing a petition to initiate a measure or constitutional amendment. HB 1208 designates an individual using the address of a mail forwarding service or post office box when applying to register as a voter or vote by absentee ballot as a federal voter. HB 1256 requires the inclusion of certain information on a candidate's nominating petition or on a ballot question petition. HB 1264 requires the disclosure of an outstanding loan balance on a campaign finance disclosure report. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
11-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Utah lawmakers move to set higher bar for ballot initiatives — but voters will have a say in 2026
The Capitol in Salt Lake City is pictured at dusk on the last night of the legislative session, Friday, March 7, 2025. (Photo by Alex Goodlett for Utah News Dispatch) During a session underscored by efforts to assert legislative control, the 2025 Utah Legislature made moves to set new requirements on Utahns' ability to enact laws via ballot initiatives — but the most significant proposed change can't take effect without voter approval. The Republican-controlled Utah legislature passed two pieces of legislation that would set new limits on ballot initiatives, but one will be going on the ballot in 2026 for voters to consider. The question? Should ballot initiatives to enact laws that would require tax increases be required to receive at least 60% of the vote, rather than a simple majority? Here are two pieces of legislation impacting ballot initiatives that lawmakers passed: SJR2 puts a question on the 2026 ballot for voters to either approve or reject: Should ballot initiatives that would require a new tax or a tax hike only be allowed to take effect if at least 60% of voters approve it? Currently, the Utah Constitution only requires a simple majority vote for ballot initiatives to be enacted as new laws. SB73, if signed by Gov. Spencer Cox, sets new requirements for ballot initiative applications. It would require initiative backers to include in their application for the initiative a detailed description of how the proposed law would be funded and if it would require a tax increase. If they successfully get the initiative on the ballot, it would also require initiative backers to follow the same publication requirements that lawmakers do when they put proposed constitutional amendments on the ballot, which could increase the cost of ballot initiatives by an estimated $1.4 million — though that could change. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX Currently, the Utah Constitution requires that constitutional amendments be published in newspapers statewide for 60 days before the next election. However, lawmakers want voters to consider changing that, which would impact not just proposed constitutional amendments, but also ballot initiatives. Here's why: Utah lawmakers also passed a resolution and a companion bill that could remove that newspaper publication requirement from the Utah Constitution and leave it up to lawmakers to decide how voters should be notified before an election. They included: HJR10 places this question on the November 2026 ballot for voters to consider: Should the Utah Constitution be changed to strike the language requiring that proposed constitutional amendments must be published 'in at least one newspaper in every county of the state where a newspaper is published, for two months' immediately preceding the election, and should the constitution instead say those proposed amendments be published 'in a manner provided by statute, for 60 calendar days' immediately preceding the next general election? If voters approve the question from HJR10, then another bill — HB481 — would take effect, setting a state law that requires proposed constitutional amendments and ballot initiatives be published as a 'class A' notice on the Utah Public Notice website or a government's official website for '60 calendar days immediately preceding' the next general election. Proponents of setting the new rules for ballot initiatives — including Sen. Lincoln Fillmore, R-South Jordan, who sponsored SJR2 and SB73 — argued that Utah voters need to know the fiscal impact of proposed ballot initiatives, and that if they come with a price tag that would require a new tax, those initiatives should only be approved with 'broad' voter support. 'The question that (SJR2) will pose to the voters … is how easy do you want it to be for your neighbors to raise your taxes?' Fillmore said in a House committee on Feb. 26, during the resolution's second public hearing. Fillmore added that 'citizen initiatives are an important part of Utah's government and Utah's constitution,' but he argued it should take more than 50.1% of the vote to raise taxes 'on the other 49.9%.' 'We really need to have a broad consensus for that kind of policy,' Fillmore argued. As for SB73, Fillmore addressed criticisms that his bill will make running ballot initiatives in Utah unnecessarily harder — when it's already hard enough — head on. 'There is nothing in here that makes it more or less difficult to run a citizens initiative,' he said. 'However, it does recognize that Utah's constitution requires a balanced budget.' Utah lawmaker wants to ask voters to set higher bar for ballot initiatives that raise taxes He also argued that voters should change the constitution to take out newspaper publishing requirements because 'there's no need for either the Legislature using taxpayer money or taxpayer backers using donated money to pay to advertise in newspapers that nobody will read.' Digital publication requirements, he said, would be a 'more efficient way' that 'really can spread the word better and do it for far less money, in fact, for literally $0.' However, groups including Better Boundaries (which successfully ran the 2018 ballot initiative that sought to enact an independent redistricting commission) and the League of Women Voters of Utah and Mormon Women for Ethical Government (the plaintiffs that sued the Legislature after it repealed and replaced that initiative, turning that commission into an advisory role that lawmakers could — and did — ignore) spoke against the bills. They argued that together, SB73 and SJR2 would set unnecessarily high and in some cases impossible thresholds for ballot initiatives to succeed. Katie Wright, executive director of Better Boundaries, urged lawmakers to oppose SB73, saying it's part of a yearslong effort to tamp down on ballot initiatives. 'Control' center stage as 2025 Utah Legislature comes to a close 'We have seen over the past decade a concerted effort to make our constitutional right to ballot initiative near impossible to exercise,' she said. 'This bill is just one more roadblock in people's ability to exercise that right that's in our constitution and constitutionally protected.' While speaking against SJR2, Katherine Biele, president of the League of Women Voters of Utah, told lawmakers that voters are 'much smarter than you think,' and they already place enough scrutiny on ballot initiatives, especially costly ones. Additionally, she said lawmakers still have the power to change ballot initiatives. 'You are able to revise any initiative that passes, as you have in the past many times,' she said. Dallin Robinson, while arguing against SJR2, said young voters are 'furious' about recent ballot initiatives in Utah. He didn't name them specifically, but after three ballot initiatives were approved in 2018 — one for full Medicaid expansion, one to legalize medical marijuana, and one to create Better Boundaries' redistricting commission — lawmakers repealed and replaced all of them. Both the Medicaid expansion and medical marijuana initiatives included tax increases. So if they had been subject to the new thresholds outlined in SJR2, neither would have passed. 'This is an undemocratic bill,' Robinson said about SJR2. 'This bill silences the people of Utah. And the people of Utah are not as dumb as you think. We understand tax policy, and we are absolutely confident enough to speak and vote on our own tax policy.' In that House committee, Rep. Jason Thompson, R-River Heights, argued in favor of SJR2, saying it's a question that voters should have a chance to weigh in on. 'I too find it ironic that where this Legislature is trying to give the people of this state the opportunity to have their voice heard by having this put on the ballot, that the Legislature could be attacked in the way that it's being attacked, saying that it's wanting to quiet the voice of the people of this state,' he said. 'I reject that notion.' However, Rep. Andrew Stoddard, D-Sandy, argued against SJR2, saying it would place higher requirements on ballot initiatives than the Legislature when it comes to passing laws that would come with a price tag. 'It's unfair for us to say, 'Hey citizens, you require a higher threshold when you're raising taxes. We're not imposing the same requirement on us as legislators,' Stoddard said. Both SJR2 and SB73 passed the House and Senate along mostly party line votes, with Democrats voting against. The other proposals (HB481 and HJR10) to change publication requirements, however, passed with unanimous support from both bodies. Both SB73 and HB481 now go to the governor for his signature or veto. Cox, however, does not need to weigh in on resolutions, so SJR2 and HJR10 will be enacted without his signature. Lawmakers' had their crosshairs on ballot initiatives during the 2025 session that ended at midnight on Friday as part of the ongoing fallout from a Utah Supreme Court decision over the summer in the League of Women Voters of Utah and Mormon Women for Ethical Government's redistricting lawsuit. The ruling asserted the Legislature does not have unfettered power when it comes to altering 'government reform' ballot initiatives. That unanimous July 11 opinion explicitly said 'this does not mean that the Legislature cannot amend a government-reform initiative at all,' but rather it made clear that lawmakers' power to amend certain initiatives has limits and that the Utah Constitution protects 'government reform' initiatives from being overridden by lawmakers without a compelling government interest. Amendment D ballot language was misleading to voters, Utah Supreme Court affirms And yet, fearing that ruling will turn ballot initiatives into 'super laws' that lawmakers can't change and that it will open the floodgates to 'outside money' and California-style lawmaking in Utah, Republican legislative leaders set out to do something about it — after their first plan of action, Amendment D, crashed and burned. The courts voided Amendment D — which would have enshrined the Legislature's power to alter any type of voter-approved ballot initiative — after lawmakers both failed to follow newspaper publication requirements in the Utah Constitution and after characterizing the proposed constitutional amendment's effect in a misleading way on the November ballot. Now, until voters potentially change those publication requirements, Utah lawmakers want ballot initiative backers to adhere to the same constitutional requirements they face for proposed constitutional amendments. Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, has repeatedly characterized unchecked ballot initiatives as a threat to Utah's future. He has argued that the current balance of Utah's democratic republic form of government has served the state well and that the Utah Supreme Court's ruling upset that balance. Utah Supreme Court's 'watershed' redistricting ruling has major implications. Now what? In his opening speech on the first day of the 45-day session, Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, urged lawmakers to act to preserve the state's 'republic,' while promising 'I will do everything I can to keep it.' 'We cannot let unelected special interest groups outside of Utah run initiatives and override our republic, destroy our businesses, demean, impugn and cast aside those who are duly elected to represent their neighbors and friends in Utah,' Adams said. 'We cannot let the Utah Dream die. We will not let initiatives driven by out-of-state money turn Utah into California.' Citizen initiative backers, however, argue that setting higher bars for ballot initiatives will have the opposite effect by making it impossible for every-day citizens to exercise their power, leaving only well-resourced groups to have any chance of success. 'Together with SJR2, (SB73) really makes it nearly impossible for grassroots efforts to succeed while large, well-funded interests can still navigate the system,' said Helen Moser with League of Women Voters of Utah, in a House committee hearing. Moser argued that Utah 'already has safeguards to ensure responsible initiatives.' 'These extra barriers,' she said, 'only silence the people.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
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
04-03-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
SF driver exam station closes after losing power
SIOUX FALLS S.D. (KELO)– The Sioux Falls Driver License Exam Station has closed its doors temporarily because of a loss of power. No vote option for driver's license under SB73 Acording to a post on social media from the South Dakota Department of Public Safety, the Sioux Falls Driver License Exam Station has lost power and is unable to help customers at this time. The station closed at about 2:45 p.m. Tuesday. The post added that the Department of Public Safety will provide updates as soon as possible. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
