Utah legislature, Governor in talks to amend at least two 2025 vetoes, House Speaker says

SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — The Utah legislature and Governor Spencer Cox are in talks to change at least two of the bills that Cox vetoed in the 2025 legislative session — one giving him the power to appoint the Chief Justice of the Utah Supreme Court, and the other dealing with the flow of local education dollars.

“We are still having discussions and want to resolve both issues,” said House Speaker Mike Schultz in a text message to ABC4.com.

“I believe we have some consensus in some areas and there is more dialogue that still needs to happen in other areas,” Shultz said.

Schultz did not elaborate on any details of what needed to be sorted out with the two bills, but said that the legislature was still passionate about those two bills in particular, and likely had the votes to pass them “with a few minor changes.” He said that the body wanted to work “collaboratively”, as opposed to a veto override.

“We’re always in conversation with the legislature to try to find compromises on a broad array of issues that matter to Utahns,” said Rob Carroll, Governor Spencer Cox’s Director of Communications, when asked for comment about the discussions.

Neither Carroll nor Shultz would elaborate on the timing of special sessions, so it’s unclear whether these issues would be added to the special session Cox has said will happen in May, or in a separate special session after the legislature has met for some Interim meetings.

‘I must respectfully decline,’ Cox veto of the Chief Justice bill:

In vetoing S.B. 296 — Judicial Amendments, Cox said that appointing the Chief Justice (with Senate confirmation) was a “tempting” power and difficult to reject, but that his main issue was the frequency of the reappointment.

“Supporters of the bill correctly point out that the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. If that were all the bill did, it is something I could support,” Cox said. “However, this bill takes a very meaningful and problematic additional step: requiring the appointment process to occur every four years. This means that, unlike the selection of the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of the Utah Supreme Court would be required to go through a political appointment, a Senate confirmation committee, and full Senate confirmation processes every four years.”

The veto came after a tense legislative session between the judicial and legislative branches, where lawmakers took aim at the judiciary after a summer of controversial rulings on Amendment’s A and D, but ultimately brokered a deal to halt a few bills and let others progress in exchange for the State Bar and high court’s non-opposition.

After the veto, top legislative leaders accused Cox of undermining the “good faith” compromise.

Cox vetoes reroute of property taxes for education

Senate Bill 37, or “Minimum Basic Tax Rates Amendments,” would have changed how property taxes are collected and redistributed for education. Supporters argued it allowed for budget flexibility and equalization among schools, critics called it akin to “money laundering.”

The current process that supplements funding for public schools includes local school districts collecting a minimum basic rate of local property taxes.

Instead of locals collecting and distributing that money, the bill would have allowed the state to collect those taxes in the state’s general fund to then be “equally” redistributed back out — and replacing the state’s general fund using Income Tax dollars, which are Constitutionally earmarked for education.

The sponsor, Senator Lincoln Fillmore (R-South Jordan), argued that it creates more budget flexibility with general fund dollars, and the state could “equalize” funding for schools that don’t collect as much money because of lower property values and higher enrollment. Areas like Park City have high property taxes but fewer kids.

Cox vetoed the bill, citing accounting and legal concerns, as well as the perception that it “sends the wrong message” to the public and educators.

“Moving restricted property tax funding into the general fund creates significant technical and legal questions,” Cox’s veto letter reads. “For one, it’s not entirely clear whether these property tax dollars, once they land in the general fund, still carry the restrictions that have always protected them for education use.”

Utah State Auditor Tina Cannon, the Utah State Board of Education, and other education stakeholders also objected.

“When it comes to trust, nothing is more critical or sacred than the way we handle taxpayer dollars,” Cox wrote.

Senate President Stuart Adams disagreed with the veto. He argued that it “stabilizes the funding system, ultimately providing better support for all of Utah’s students.”

Critics also saw the bill as a “workaround” to Amendment A — which was vetoed by the State Supreme Court over publication issues in the summer of 2024.

Amendment A would have asked voters to remove the Constitutional earmark on Income Tax dollars — allowing them to be used for all state needs, but prioritizing education funding based on enrollment and inflation. In exchange, the state statute would have eliminated the state sales tax on food.