[{"_1":2,"_123":-5,"_124":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99,111],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},"mediaId",6314802,"mediaKeyId","2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89","parentId",2382530,"title","League staff recommends opposing new clause in road diet moratorium bill after members raise safety and local-control concerns","audioSeconds",560,"startMs",3160000,"endMs",3720000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89&start=3160&end=3720","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89/thumbnail_3160000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6314802/Utah/League-staff-recommends-opposing-new-clause-in-road-diet-moratorium-bill-after-members-raise-safety-and-local-control-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6314802-414a25b50d679c6733b28f1196c54b25/orig.mp4?Expires=1776628033&Signature=k6SdXPbdDGZ65ZA~tTbRMA~qARhehS3O-iYFHUaHcCbsIJ3AJwEcDVBSvVHiPdcr1bK2E7P4d-wkYXhXgwGL40EzvWW98U8TSkNLPKLLFT8FpwXZNp8umvX526aiPxO2nL1aq~1GlKJXs38Kr9I-NVrs1M3D06y2IJRAb0htZEHE3D0eDDf6rM6urB-kjBqSV-rHxt6Lk0kwVPqld-h-PktKgwIinhSa09qHyWJ3KCCLbqODrOD8oSHYLOrC5npkg46-dUnwOv7gr4l7-EBNMkJdMfgiXs8-9I9OixZOuQY2WpBnvTCGBw2pjMX2iKB4u17CJUyVNJ6vhZwk6d~GRw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","","date","2025-02-24T23:51:47Z","article","League staff updated members Feb. 24 on House Bill 465 and a Senate substitute (SP 195) that would restrict certain local 'highway reduction' actions and require state-level study before implementation. The substitute added a Salt Lake City–specific moratorium element and a UDOT-led environmental/mobility study requirement; staff recommended switching a prior support position to oppose the substitute as drafted.

What the bills would do

As substituted on the Senate floor, the language would: (a) impose a moratorium tied to specified highway-reduction actions (the substitute singled out Salt Lake City), and (b) require UDOT to conduct a mobility and environmental impact analysis for highway-reduction strategies. The League's staff signaled that the new text is broader than originally discussed and could chill local multimodal projects.

Member concerns

Several municipal officials said lane reductions and multimodal conversions have improved safety and traffic flow in local examples, and warned a blanket moratorium would hinder local traffic-safety measures. A committee member asked for city-level data showing which municipalities have implemented or plan to implement such actions to inform advocacy.

Mary Nadalski (council member) said members were seeing a rise in pedestrian incidents and said that was reason for caution about statewide constraints: \"We've seen a recent spike in autopeds,\" she said, noting that traffic-safety measures are a current municipal priority.

Staff view and next steps

Staff said they had worked with stakeholders and legislators in recent days but that the substitute’s targeting raised a principle-of-local-control concern; the recommendation was to oppose SP 195 as drafted while continuing negotiations to narrow the problem the bill seeks to fix. Staff asked members to provide data on which localities have taken specific lane-configuration or multimodal steps.

Ending

League staff will continue discussions with bill sponsors and UDOT; members were asked to provide local data on past and planned roadway conversions to shape amendments.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","February 24, 2025 Legislative Policy Committee","oneSentenceSummary","League staff updated members Feb. 24 on House Bill 465 and a Senate substitute (SP 195) that would restrict certain local 'highway reduction' actions and require state-level study before implementation.","taxTitle","Utah League of Cities and Towns, Utah Lobbyist / NGO, Utah Legislative Branch, Utah","taxId",76712,"location","Utah","headline","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6314805,"LPC opposes proposed changes to judicial retention, citing separation concerns; motion passes",372,4593000,4965000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89&start=4593&end=4965","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89/thumbnail_4593000.jpg","/articles/6314805/Utah/LPC-opposes-proposed-changes-to-judicial-retention-citing-separation-concerns-motion-passes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6314805-d780f0f6c4d884f41f65e8b88eebbdf5/orig.mp4?Expires=1776628033&Signature=YQDDPW-6ppX~b0AUSx3A8KQ5vSK3EP7-4ayDqgjpDbbb-vE~LsodYtFSQMyEtLaSZehfoUkCJ1wd7pH1ckr5g8VJfA-efhPRHxibOlGxo0YCWTyi7itGdJRgYUWuEzQtGfmRbbBEH95749g0X9GjSwsJobCmrLrVLzfRoT6x~P0BA5K-QuxL64PELQYhmzw4yFmchjET50Cd69iJV8-K6AvZhunbO7Q39YhjyXbyFY8i7f8bxaoboiu7H8M-yUv1q7dakLuY2NdiOFQFGNKMiq~-NaXXIyOVE5xmfVUpKg22rbf~1me9kzudU6LWSp~MZqMdcJd5EQ~Pdij0BpggnQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The League's Legislative Policy Committee voted Feb. 24 to oppose two bills that would alter judicial retention procedures and the commission that evaluates judges.

Background and debate

Speakers warned the proposed changes risked politicizing judicial retention. Roger Choo (League staff) said the selection and review process for judges was designed to remove political influence from judicial appointments and evaluations. \"This basically said that our legislative committee is going to put their effective endorsement on the ballot on this retention of elections,\" Choo said, adding that the change ‘‘deeply bothers’’ him.

Other members raised constitutional and practical concerns about one branch of government influencing retention for another. A committee speaker said the typical public commenters on judicial performance are those upset with outcomes, and noted the value of an independent performance-evaluation commission that solicits assessments from lawyers and litigants familiar with courtroom performance.

Motion and vote

Committee members moved and seconded a change in the League’s position to oppose the bills that would replace the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission (JPEC) with a joint legislative commission and add legislative statements to retention ballots. After a voice vote the chair declared the motion passed.

Why it matters

Speakers argued the bills would increase the risk that judges feel political pressure and would diminish an independent, professional review process that produces contextualized evaluations for voters.

Next steps

The League will register opposition on the bills and include talking points for members who contact legislators.","After extended debate, the committee voted to oppose bills that would replace the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission with a legislative-led review and put legislative statements on judicial retention ballots.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6314809,"State privacy officer outlines broad rewrite of government data privacy law, urges multi-year build of local programs",723,2657000,3380000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89&start=2657&end=3380","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89/thumbnail_2657000.jpg","/articles/6314809/Utah/State-privacy-officer-outlines-broad-rewrite-of-government-data-privacy-law-urges-multi-year-build-of-local-programs","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6314809-9bf6d744300720af177cefd7f23e1260/orig.mp4?Expires=1776628033&Signature=haNOPqA3fCYUjF8EebN3CRJB6c1JiiEsFs-9he8xn73Asyvx3LoiU3nXlOqYyHXomaNXaR9Qse7TSXpV7xxf-tlF4zfhrAiENvxTOMTxtPy81NCur7~xzM~n51phJJZq9pk7e33qLT7v65p1ajowzoIcIIu0c~9u~MvF46-JLrmrKrTws9BBhButNSf9zXmJBGKJt-c-rvH2VLM082YHnt4VWApkEmC6Cp2obUdIzOXCw~L2YYtYdtp~CE7Ojz00KLpvXr70Qp8GNhpAFNsVYzFzQyOtibFLMjaYpQkTnfp829tP5O7UGxc~Z5U1G5gd31KBXhmdlMXAzYSwaOBlkQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The state’s chief privacy officer briefed League members Feb. 24 on a major data-privacy package, HB 444, saying the bill is part of a multi-year effort to modernize government privacy practices after decades of inconsistent implementation.

“Thirty years of noncompliance” and a path forward

Chris (Chief Privacy Officer, Office of Data Privacy) told attendees that audits and assessments have found widespread noncompliance with the Government Records and Management Act and other archival/records provisions. \"We have been noncompliant with the privacy obligations outlined in both GRAMA and the division of archives and record service section of code,\" he said, and that many entities “have not filed a statement in over 20 years with the state archivist.”

HB 444 would consolidate privacy duties, repeal the older Government Internet Information Privacy Act chapter and move new requirements into the Government Data Privacy Act, create a clearer role for a state privacy auditor (renamed from state privacy officer), and require internal privacy reporting by jurisdictions.

Key features discussed

- Notice and classification: The bill clarifies that collecting personal data requires simple notice, and distinguishes personal data that remains public from data classified as private or protected.

- Repeal and consolidation: The state will repeal the older website-privacy chapter and fold duties into one modernized statute so new sites come into compliance going forward.

- Internal reporting and protections: Local entities would prepare an internal report documenting whether they have started a privacy program; those reports would be protected under GRAMA to allow candid discussions. \"This is meant to allow you internally ... to have those sensitive conversations,\" Chris said.

- Vendor/contractor guidance: The bill anticipates industry-standard privacy training and allows contracting language that requires vendors to complete such training; the state office will explore scalable options and may provide services for a fee on request for smaller jurisdictions.

- Breach notice flexibility: For large breaches of public data that include personal information, the bill would permit notice via the jurisdiction’s website where individualized notice would be impractical.

Questions from cities

City officials raised operational questions about funding, procurement, and how to ensure contractors comply with training and privacy expectations. Chris said the bill contemplates extensions and exemptions where smaller jurisdictions lack capacity and that statewide training resources will be made available; contracting and procurement scale remain workstreams.

Why it matters

HB 444 aims to provide a consistent framework that municipalities can implement over years rather than months. \"It's going to take a decade plus to do that,\" Chris told the committee, arguing the statute builds the tools and governance structure local governments will need.

Ending

League staff and the Office of Data Privacy will continue technical discussions about implementation timelines, procurement strategies for vendor compliance, and the CAO/records-manager responsibilities spelled out in the bill.","Chris (state chief privacy officer) briefed the LPC on HB 444, a comprehensive rewrite intended to modernize government privacy practices, repeal an older web-privacy chapter, and require internal privacy reporting by local entities.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6314813,"State representative previews revised gravel bill amid local concerns over moratorium and preemption",1020,246000,1266000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89&start=246&end=1266","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89/thumbnail_246000.jpg","/articles/6314813/Utah/State-representative-previews-revised-gravel-bill-amid-local-concerns-over-moratorium-and-preemption","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6314813-ca2ff0d540a282770baa43573a49c761/orig.mp4?Expires=1776628033&Signature=cLFTg24k-5ZLj0BAfX8Ote643f4TafEg7ieRtvaF~-8ccY3vRoiNm0Xl7cEvUQ0vT9LfW09cLCjsbGKptMv7geUNduJdoZuVM7cd5w-1bOgSB7g7kXDf~ej3kIEinx8RK~FI9vakq32fGolIRhrUy8PCLQFJ1VuEtzxZ58XF-PntQHeWwIZckGSZbMvBPPk6GEXSFJVtC7PZpEw8W63-TcE6tOSLWRDauk7~Ydv6vxB-qS2SWdCwZH2NXU8uSfe566QXFhVdbVHeHqgqscZr3V8vIW4KWlM43gHLhdIO4FK3BmhqSEOkeRDBfbzkU~zx5oIqcMMC1olhBOetWAHwSw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Casey Snyder on Feb. 24 previewed a new substitute to a long-running gravel bill and asked League members to review the language before it goes live, saying the measure is intended as a compromise after years of ‘grenade’ bills and a statutory study.

The bill — which Snyder said will be posted publicly shortly — aims to clarify inconsistencies in state mining and local land-use law that have produced repeated legislative conflict. \"Gravel is pretty much the worst area of policy I have ever dealt with,\" Snyder said. \"It's worse than water and I don't know why because it's just rocks.\" She told members she has tried to back politics out of the negotiations and that Salt Lake County has agreed to a neutral posture on the current substitute.

Why it matters: Cities and counties along the Wasatch Front and elsewhere regulate land use, while state mining law and other statutes govern some mines; inconsistent rules have left neighboring gravel operations subject to different regulatory regimes. Local officials told the committee the disagreement has real planning consequences: in some zones, conditional uses now function as permitted uses, and local governments say they cannot amend zoning in affected areas while a moratorium put in place by the 2019 legislation remains in effect.

Discussion and concerns

Paul Larson, Brigham City, told Snyder the 2019 legislation was presented as a compromise that would be followed by additional fixes and a removal of a moratorium that now blocks local zoning changes. “If the moratorium removal is not in part of this bill, I’d move we oppose it,” Larson said, describing a situation in which the east face of Brigham City’s mountains remains zoned MU-160 and subject to conditional-use treatment for sand-and-gravel operations.

Other speakers raised preemption worries. One local official said the part of the bill most troubling is preemption that could exempt private companies from local zoning. Snyder said the substitute attempts to clarify definitions, tighten the “adjacent” concept in mining law, and add language that improves local control, but acknowledged not everyone will be satisfied.

Salt Lake County and local stakeholders

Justin Stewart, Salt Lake County (Mayor's office staff), told the group the county had agreed to a neutral position on the substitute and that, from his perspective, the current iteration represented a workable compromise. Several mayors and city staff said they appreciated being consulted but asked that the legislation explicitly address the moratorium and any statutory preemption.

Next steps

Snyder said she intends to put the substitute live soon and asked for additional review time if needed. She also offered to meet with cities who want to discuss the bill’s history and technical details.

What the bill does not yet do

Snyder said the substitute does not finish the longer-term work: next year she intends to introduce a clarifying regulatory bill to resolve which state and local authorities regulate particular mines. She said the current measure is an attempt to reach a pragmatic, stopgap resolution.

Ending

The League’s staff will circulate the substitute when it is posted and convene additional stakeholder meetings. Snyder asked cities that wish to engage further to contact her office for follow-up conversations.","Representative Casey Snyder described a new substitute to a contentious gravel bill and asked local officials to review it; mayors and city staff raised concerns about a 2019 moratorium on local zoning changes and about potential preemption of local land-use authority.",{"_33":112,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":113,"_41":114,"_43":115,"_45":116,"_47":117,"_49":118,"_51":119,"_53":120,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":121,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":122,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":56,"_74":56},6314797,"LPC votes: minutes, UEOC sunset, judicial-retention opposition, HB542 position change and bill tracker ratified",6322,46000,6368000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89&start=46&end=6368","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2382530-1506d95cfecfdf9eb63354ed00d62a89/thumbnail_46000.jpg","/articles/6314797/Utah/LPC-votes-minutes-UEOC-sunset-judicial-retention-opposition-HB542-position-change-and-bill-tracker-ratified","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6314797-50353bad6e1453976d6195daf29d1f46/orig.mp4?Expires=1776628033&Signature=QOlV5vkyqoGcCSs1rgyHUnP-gK9Kcdz6T80CjWlToVOy9qGA8QfKkQIgN3pExx6iR7fkbl5lv5fCZTMKLG9WRnt54g5Nmtnw3KsZOsIpyKh45axRvkx~HcJg9Bef5Gd6hUiPMmx2MKo1sWo~Hf9CRCNQuISJK3PU1mXcRdeAz~M7f3BJ4TlXpxxu3SiUnnkyd~xQE8Gt~KafZKItRyK2fLTXdU9OgQXCieBWNMInKECKgXVTbNoA3gZkzB824neAorHuaCHh1-RE7SPa~g1l7KwXhUjRR7c3Iuc3NTaBuuKsarspzOhmBhfDaw6hM0Ye-oiI2G0JnrFtry~XlZJ94A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The League Legislative Policy Committee recorded several formal actions during its Feb. 24 session. Key votes and outcomes follow.

Approved February 18 minutes

- Action: Approval of the minutes for the Feb. 18 meeting.
- Outcome: Approved by voice vote.

UEOC (Unified Economic Opportunity Commission) sunsetting

- Action: Motion and vote to support sunsetting the Unified Economic Opportunity Commission (UEOC) and related changes that move some functions into the Governor’s Office of Economic Opportunity.
- Outcome: Motion passed by voice vote; League position recorded as support for sunsetting.
- Notes: The committee discussed transparency concerns and whether the commission had operated sufficiently within open-meeting rules; after discussion the committee voted to support the sunset.

Judicial retention bills (HP 4501 and HP 512)

- Action: Motion to change the League position to oppose the bills that would replace JPEC with a legislative commission and add legislative statements to retention ballots.
- Outcome: Motion passed by voice vote; League recorded opposition and staff will register the position with the Legislature and produce talking points.

HB 542 (economic development / UEOC transition)

- Action: Motion to change the League’s position on HB 542 from support to neutral to allow negotiation about a permanent League seat on the new GOEO board.
- Outcome: Motion passed by voice vote; staff instructed to pursue seat for League on GOEO board.

Bill tracker ratification

- Action: Motion to ratify the League’s current bill tracker (positions on ~260 tracked bills).
- Outcome: Ratified by voice vote.

Adjournment

- Action: Motion to adjourn.
- Outcome: Meeting adjourned.

Why it matters: Several of these actions change the League’s formal positions for ongoing negotiations and advocacy during the final days of the legislative session. League staff will update the tracker and notify members of talking points and next steps.","During the Feb. 24 meeting the Legislative Policy Committee approved minutes, voted to support sunsetting the Unified Economic Opportunity Commission, voted to oppose judicial-retention bills, changed its position on HB 542 to neutral, and ratified the bill tracker.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

League staff recommends opposing new clause in road diet moratorium bill after members raise safety and local-control concerns

LPC opposes proposed changes to judicial retention, citing separation concerns; motion passes

State privacy officer outlines broad rewrite of government data privacy law, urges multi-year build of local programs

State representative previews revised gravel bill amid local concerns over moratorium and preemption

LPC votes: minutes, UEOC sunset, judicial-retention opposition, HB542 position change and bill tracker ratified