Estimated read time: 3-4 minutes
- Utah senators approved a bill requiring fiscal impact statements for ballot initiatives.
- The bill passed mostly along partisan lines, with Democrats opposing it.
- Critics argue it complicates citizen initiatives; supporters aim for fiscal transparency.
SALT LAKE CITY — Utah senators approved a bill that would require sponsors of citizen ballot initiatives to complete a fiscal impact statement on how they would pay for any changes enacted through the initiative.
The measure passed Friday along mostly partisan lines, with only one Republican and all Democrats voting against it. SB73 sponsor Sen. Lincoln Fillmore, R-South Jordan, described the process by which bills proposed by elected officials go through a fiscal analysis to inform representatives of the costs associated with the policy prior to its passing. He said his bill is meant to bring the same process to citizen-led ballot initiatives.
"When the citizens of Utah are exercising their legislative power contained in the Constitution, this bill just ensures that both legislative bodies have similar processes when placing items for approval before the voters, when it comes to informing the voters about what's in the bill and how much the policy would cost," he said.
"Sometimes citizen initiatives can look like sunshine and rainbows, and that's great," Fillmore added. "People want sunshine and rainbows, but what if having sunshine and rainbows means we have to eliminate ice cream?"
SB73 would also require that sponsors of citizen initiatives strictly adhere to rules directing the Legislature to publicize the text of proposed constitutional amendments in newspapers across the state for several months prior to the election.
However, Senate Democrats argued that the policy will make it more difficult for citizen initiatives to get on the ballot. They also said they see the move as a reaction to a state Supreme Court ruling last summer affirming the right of citizens to use initiatives to alter or reform their government. Many Republican lawmakers decried that ruling, and some have proposed making it harder to pass such ballot initiatives.
Fillmore has also proposed a constitutional amendment that would raise the threshold for passing any initiative that levies a new tax to 60%, up from the simple majority currently required.
Speaking to Fillmore's proposal to require fiscal analyses on ballot initiatives, Sen. Kathleen Riebe, D-Cottonwood Heights, said she agrees that voters should be aware of the impact of initiatives but disagrees with how it's being proposed — particularly in light of the initiative ruling.
"I think it's a very raw subject in my community," she said. "I believe the voice of the people is important and that this is going to hinder their ability to run an initiative for something that they have gotten enough support behind. I feel like it's our job to find the money — not their job to find the money — because we have a better understanding of the budget. ... I believe this is onerous. ... It prevents the average citizen from being a part of the government."
Republicans largely backed Fillmore's proposal on the Senate floor, with all but West Valley Sen. Daniel Thatcher voting in favor.
Sen. Scott Sandall, R-Tremonton, said he believes initiatives should be used sparingly because they cannot go through the same deliberation and amendment process that legislative bills are subjected to.
"It would be well to remind ourselves in this debate why the initiative process is so problematic in a republican form of government," he said. "I heard Democrat colleagues talk about collaboration and trying to make things come together. It's often hard to do that in the initiative process."
SB73 passed the Senate 20-7 and now heads to the House for consideration. Fillmore's proposed constitutional amendment, SJR2, has yet to receive a public hearing but was assigned to the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee on Thursday.
