Senate debates amendments to workers’ compensation bill; lawmakers withdraw several changes and pause action

The Utah State Senate debated proposed floor amendments to Senate Bill 3 on the state workers’ compensation fund, focusing on whether the changes would let the state pursue self‑insurance and how that would affect the fund’s finances and oversight.

Supporters said the amendments would give the state an option to explore self‑insurance. An unidentified speaker told colleagues the fund is "actuarially sound" and that prior research concluded the change would "absolutely" have "no impact on the soundness of the fund." Blaine Palmer, identified in the proceeding as the fund’s director, was cited as concurring that the amendment would not jeopardize solvency.

Opponents pressed process and risk questions. Several senators said the amendments were added late and had not been considered by the interim task force or by the committee that originally examined the bill, with one senator calling the late additions a "flash in the pan." A senator referencing Colorado’s experience warned that some employers there pay much higher rates and cautioned that insufficient study "could be a great impact" on Utah employers.

Lawmakers also debated technical details raised in the amendments: whether audit frequency would change, and whether board composition was being altered. Speakers discussed a prior provision that would have required a national auditing firm to audit interim years and would have reduced how often the state auditor conducts audits; the exact audit schedule and management‑control responsibilities were points of contention.

Speakers provided several financial and program details during debate. A senator asked how large a player the state is in the fund; speakers said the state accounts for "about 2 to 3% of the premiums." A separate explanation put the fund’s balance near $200 million but clarified much of that is allocated to liabilities for injuries already occurred; a catastrophic reserve of about $50 million was noted.

On process, senators voiced concern that the Department of Administrative Services requested the amendments late and that the task force had not reviewed them. One participant said the board of directors "voted not to oppose that amendment" but did not formally support it. Senate discussion included whether the state could study self‑insurance without changing the law; officials said study was possible but that current law requires the state to insure with the fund unless the statute is changed.

After extended debate, the Senate moved several procedural actions. A member moved to dissolve the Committee of the Whole to proceed with the bill; that motion passed. The sponsor asked leave to withdraw amendments 1 through 5, which the body approved, and later withdrew additional amendments so only one amendment (relating to the chairman’s ability to call additional board meetings when requested by a majority) remained. Senator Fordham then moved to "circle" (postpone) the bill until Senator Carnegie and other sponsors could be present to offer clarification; that motion also passed. The Senate additionally voted to circle SB 6 and SB 3 and adjourned until 10 a.m. Monday.

What happens next: With key sponsors absent and several amendments withdrawn, the bill will return to the Senate calendar once sponsors or staff provide the requested clarifications and any necessary amended fiscal notes.