Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fluoridation Voting Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves substitute letting shareholders of private water companies vote on fluoride
Summary
The Utah Senate approved a substitute to Senate Bill 29 that adds privately held corporate public water systems to the state's fluoridation statute and allows shareholders in those systems to hold a binding vote on whether to add or remove fluoride; the measure passed the floor vote and moves to third reading.
SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Senate on March 2 approved a first-substitute to Senate Bill 29 to extend the state's fluoridation notice and voting provisions to privately held corporate public water systems, allowing shareholders of those systems to vote on whether to add or remove fluoride from their water.
Sponsor Senator Stoll said the change corrects an oversight in the code and protects what he described as the property rights of shareholders in corporate water systems, not a declaration on whether fluoridation is good or bad. "This bill is not about whether fluoridation is good or bad," Stoll said. "It's about the rights of shareholders in a privately owned water system to choose whether to fluoridate or not to bring it to a vote."
Supporters and opponents framed the debate around who counts as a voter and whether private systems are functionally separate from municipal systems. Senator Jones and others asked whether users who do not hold shareholder shares (for example, sublessees or multiple users per connection) would be excluded from the vote; Stoll acknowledged those concerns and said the provision reflects the corporate structure for the systems covered. The sponsor and others cited a Division of Drinking Water list identifying roughly 172 privately held corporate public water systems in Utah and said the substitute simply extends the voting mechanism that government-owned systems already use.
Opponents argued the bill could undermine countywide referenda on fluoridation. Senator Christensen urged deference to the ongoing litigation involving Holiday Water, saying that particular system has interconnections with municipal supplies and that courts should resolve contested questions of status. "It's about a countywide vote being taken," Christensen said, pressing that the courts are already considering the matter. Stoll and other backers said the substitute adds procedural safeguards, including a consumer-notification requirement and a provision that wholesale suppliers are not required to change fluoride levels to accommodate a private system's vote.
After extended questioning and a summation from the sponsor emphasizing shareholder choice, the Senate called for a third-reading roll call. The recorded vote showed 20 yeas, 8 nays and 1 absent; the first substitute to Senate Bill 29 passed and was placed at the bottom of the third-reading calendar.
The bill text requires notice to system users about fluoride levels and clarifies the definition of the regulated supplier so the shareholder-vote mechanism applies to the intended class of private corporate water systems. The sponsor said the Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment Interim Committee recommended the change. The measure now awaits final consideration on third reading.
