Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sb299 Local Government Registries topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House passes bill limiting municipal registries to avoid creating ‘marriage look‑alikes’
Summary
After extended floor debate and a failed substitute motion, the Utah House passed first substitute S.B. 299, which allows local registries for financially dependent adults but prohibits registries that would create legal status or effects like marriage; final passage was 61–9.
The Utah House on March 5 passed first substitute S.B. 299 (revision to local government), a bill sponsors said is intended to allow municipal registries for financially dependent adults while preventing those registries from creating legal status that resembles marriage.
Sponsor Representative Garn told the House the bill "allows cities to extend employee benefits to adult designees" but expressly forbids any registry from defining or creating a legal status "other than marriage." "No act of the registry is or may be treated the same as or substantially equivalent to marriage," Garn said, framing the measure as protecting the state constitutional Amendment 3.
Representative Noel moved a second-substitute as a narrower alternative that would restore language limited to healthcare benefits and remove a registry system; Noel and supporters argued the narrower approach would avoid unintended consequences and protect the ability of municipalities to provide benefits. "Restoring the reference to healthcare benefits as opposed to benefits generally ... and removing the requirement of cohabitation would be better," Noel read from advisory comments, citing a legal analysis.
Opponents said the first substitute strikes a balance and preserves municipalities' ability to provide benefits without creating new familial statuses. Representative Biskupski cautioned the proposed financial-dependency limit could exclude some individuals who currently receive benefits, while Representative McKiff and others said the bill was crafted carefully and merits support as a reaffirmation of marriage under Amendment 3.
The House first voted on the substitute motion and the motion to substitute failed following a division and subsequent count on the substitute (the motion to substitute failed, recorded as 34 yes, 36 no in one tally). The House then voted for final passage of the first substitute and recorded a final vote of 61 yes and 9 no. The bill will be signed by the Speaker Pro Tem and returned to the Senate for further action.
Floor debate included a mix of policy and social-context arguments and repeated references to municipal practice and the potential administrative consequences of registries. Several members suggested the issue may return to committee for further study next year.
