Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tourism Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House debates Senate’s tourism-branding funding bill as members circle measure for later action
Summary
Lawmakers debated First Substitute Senate Bill 1002, a tourism-branding funding measure that revises prior language and adjusts proposed appropriations; members voted to "circle" the bill for later floor action after extended debate over membership, spending levels and fiscal controls.
The Utah House of Representatives debated First Substitute Senate Bill 1002 on June 22, 2005, a proposal to fund a statewide tourism-branding program and to revise board membership and spending controls. Lawmakers discussed the bill’s history, appropriations and checks on second-year spending, then voted to circle the measure for later consideration.
Representative Michael Foley, speaking in explanation, said the bill revisits language from a prior session (Senate Bill 7) that was invalidated by a drafting/markup issue. He described the program as a board-led branding effort intended to let industry and local communities have input on how the state markets itself. Foley said the original legislative package set aside $18,000,000 for branding (with an intention of $10,000,000 in the first year and $8,000,000 thereafter), but the green/goldenrod amendment copies change those figures (the green copy strikes $18,000,000 and inserts $14,000,000). He said any second-year spending would require affirmative legislative action and would not occur automatically.
Foley also described an industry-cooperative mechanism intended to allow cities, counties and other entities to supplement state funds. He said the bill expands the board that advises branding from nine members to 13 and brings in industry representation, while noting the board would not be an operational policy board for the governor’s office but would have input regarding how appropriated funds are expended.
Representative Allen supported the measure’s approach to creating a performance marketing fund, arguing it would help tourism become more self-sustaining. Allen offered a fiscal claim during debate: “The tax dollars that tourists pay currently is equals $139 for each man, woman, and child in Utah,” a figure recorded in the transcript as his justification for increased promotion.
After discussion and questions about membership, costs and document versions (the House used green and goldenrod copies to compare amendments), Representative Alexander moved to "circle" the bill — a procedural move to take it off immediate consideration and return to it later. The motion to circle passed after a standing division was called.
The House did not adopt final changes to the bill during this session; the motion to circle means floor debate will resume at a later time under the chamber’s scheduling rules.
