Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Concurrence Calendar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House advances wide slate of bills on concurrence calendar; many pass on final votes
Summary
The Utah House of Representatives concurred with Senate amendments and voted for final passage on a broad set of bills spanning economic development, transportation and regulatory cleanup. Several items passed with unanimous or strong majorities; a handful drew amendment or separate debate.
The Utah House on March 2 moved a cluster of bills through concurrence with Senate amendments and final passage votes, advancing measures on economic development, transportation and statutory housekeeping.
Among the items, second substitute House Bill 313 (the Bell Economic Development Initiative for Higher Education/JobsNow) was reconciled with Senate appropriations after members noted funding was reduced from an initial $2,000,000 request to $1,000,000; the House concurred with Senate language and the second substitute passed on final vote. First substitute Senate Bill 80 (special service district expansion) passed on voice and recorded votes after sponsors said it applies mainly to counties receiving federal mineral lease funds and would allow certain economic-development uses while prohibiting new tax increases for that purpose.
Other concurrence and final-passage actions on the calendar included first substitute House Bill 338 (deleting a vague cross-reference), Senate Bill 190 (county officer amendments), second substitute House Bill 104 (Spyware Control Act), House Bill 259 and House Bill 260. Several of the bills recorded roll-call tallies: House Bill 3 13 (second substitute) recorded 57 yes, 0 no; first substitute House Bill 3 38 recorded 50 yes, 16 no; first substitute Senate Bill 80 recorded 65 yes, 0 no; Senate Bill 190 recorded 60 yes, 6 no; first substitute Senate Bill 8 recorded 54 yes, 16 no; second substitute House Bill 104 recorded 66 yes, 1 no; and House Bill 2 59 recorded 67 yes, 2 no.
Many of the concurrence items were described by sponsors as technical cleanups or narrow policy clarifications; for instance, sponsors said a cross-reference in one bill was removed because it was vague, and amendments to a concealed-weapon permit code clarified that required classes must be in-person rather than delivered electronically. The House referred passed measures to the Senate for signatures where required.
The session concluded with clerical business, placement of additional concurrence calendar items (including a tourism task force study bill), and a formal motion to adjourn.
