Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wildfire Prevention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves bill letting utilities adopt wildfire-prevention plans after amendment dispute
Summary
The Senate passed the third substitute of House Bill 66 allowing electricity providers to develop wildland-fire prevention plans and seek cost recovery; an amendment to add a rebuttable presumption preserving access to courts was debated and failed on a standing count.
The Utah Senate approved the third substitute of House Bill 66 after extended floor debate over liability, incentives for utilities and judicial access.
Sponsors said the legislation authorizes electric utilities to create wildland-fire prevention plans and allows cost recovery for measures tied to those plans. Senator Sandel, speaking on behalf of the bill, said the approach aligns with Utah's prevention goals: "The more effort we put into the front end to prevent wildfires will save the state considerable dollars on the back end."
Senator James Hilliard moved an amendment that would add a rebuttable presumption intended to preserve a plaintiff's right of access to courts while clarifying the evidentiary posture in claims tied to utility plans. Hilliard argued that without the amendment the bill risked undermining Utah's long-recognized constitutional right of access to courts and cited past cases where broad immunity had been problematic.
Opponents of the amendment, including sponsors and Senator Okerlund, said the substitute—drafted with input from the Attorney General's Office and utilities—does not grant governmental immunity, applies only to property damage (not loss of life), and is designed to incentivize proactive infrastructure work that could prevent catastrophic fires. "I don't think we want to take away this incentive to be proactive," Okerlund said.
Several senators voiced concern about ratepayer impacts, reimbursement timing from federal programs, and whether utility insurance and rate structures effectively socialize prevention costs. Senator Hinkins argued that federal reimbursements and litigation delays can complicate state reimbursements and that the bill could shift costs to ratepayers.
The Senate held a vote on Hilliard's amendment; the motion to amend failed on a standing count. The Senate then voted to pass the third substitute of H.B.66; the clerk announced the vote as 24 ayes, 4 nays and 1 absent. The bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.
Floor debate referenced the Attorney General's Office as participating in substitute drafting and emphasized the bill's narrow focus on property-damage prevention and cost recovery. The most significant unresolved floor issues were the breadth of protections for utilities and the potential effects on litigation and ratepayer exposure.
