Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Child Abuse Registry topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Senate advances bill to restrict access and require notice for state child‑abuse registry

Utah State Senate · February 24, 1998
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Utah Senate passed SB168 to limit public access to the state child‑abuse registry, notify people with substantiated findings, and create an administrative appeal path; sponsors said the registry had more than 205,000 names, many unsubstantiated.

The Utah Senate on Feb. 24 advanced legislation (SB168) to change how the state stores and notifies individuals listed in its child‑abuse registry, moving the measure to the third‑reading calendar.

Sponsor Senator Peterson said the registry now contains "over 205,000 names on it," many of which were never notified and in many cases were never substantiated. Under the bill, unsubstantiated entries would be encrypted and removed from routine accessibility; those listed with substantiated findings would be notified and afforded an administrative hearing and access to the courts to seek removal if appropriate. "It takes those that are unsubstantiated and basically makes them unaccessible," the sponsor said during debate.

The measure also adds adoption as an explicitly listed consequence that notification must mention. Sponsors said the bill would require the departments involved to go back 10 years to review and notify affected people; that retroactive window was discussed repeatedly in the chamber. Supporters argued the change balances privacy and public safety by restricting broad access while preserving notice and appeal rights for people with substantiated findings. Detractors urged further study of adjudication standards and protections for victims during any removal process.

Senators adopted sponsor amendments that narrowed exceptions (for example, judges standing for retention were excluded from certain disclosures) and clarified notification and appeal procedures. After debate the Senate called the question and recorded the roll call; the bill passed the floor vote and was placed on the third‑reading calendar.

The next formal steps are third reading in the Senate and, if passed, transmission to the House. The bill’s fiscal note and administrative details were discussed on the floor but will be finalized as the measure proceeds.