Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Protection Registry topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate adopts tighter child‑protection registry penalties and gives agency fee authority in close vote
Summary
The Utah Senate on Feb. 23 passed second substitute Senate Bill 206, which changes how the child-protection (‘‘Unspam’’) registry is funded and policed, increases penalty potential and lets the division set fees; supporters say the changes incentivize adding children to the list, while critics — including the attorney general’s office — warned of contract and legal risks. The bill passed 17–11.
The Utah Senate on Feb. 23 narrowly approved second substitute Senate Bill 206, a package of amendments to the state’s child‑protection registry that alters fee authority and raises penalties for misuse.
Sponsor Senator Dimitrych said amendment No. 2 "clarifies how the registry is set up and the contact points," and described the change as aimed at growing the registry beyond its current size. He said the amendment makes violations more costly: "If you violate that registry, it costs you a hundred times more than a normal [fee]," and said the department would administer penalties and fees.
Senator Stevenson, a floor supporter, stressed the registry’s limited reach to date: "Right now, we only have 2,000 names on the registry, and it's been in place for 6 months. Nobody knows about it." He argued the bill creates financial incentives for vendors and the contractor to expand outreach and protect more children's addresses.
Opponents raised legal and contractual concerns. Senator Bell summarized positions communicated by the Office of the Attorney General and the Division of Consumer Protection: the substitute measure "is opposed by the Utah attorney general's office" and could jeopardize the existing contract with the vendor, undermine privacy safeguards and increase the likelihood of litigation. Bell warned the change "will make it more difficult to prosecute senders who continue to target Utah's children," and said the amendment risks "reward[ing] the big business of the adult industry while sacrificing protection of Utah's children."
Senators pressed for administrative clarity during debate. When asked where penalties would be directed, the sponsor answered that "the money goes to the department" to support registry operations. Supporters replied they expect a larger registry would reduce risks and make the vendor financially viable; critics said shifting fee structures mid‑contract could invite contract challenges and litigation.
After extended debate and a recorded roll call, the Senate approved the second substitute, as amended, by a 17–11 vote (1 absent). The measure will be transmitted to the House for its further action.
The final Senate action recorded that the bill, as amended, had received 17 yes votes, 11 nay votes and one absent, and was referred to the House.
