Arthur Raymond, a writer for the Deseret News, has summarized, in layman’s terms, the proposed Amendments to the Utah State Constitution on tomorrow’s ballot.  Five measures on the ballot change the state constitution on technical and not so technical issues.  See Mr. Raymond’s article in the DesNews HERE.

Many constituents have asked how I’ll vote on the Amendments “A” through “E.”  (Please vote YOUR conscience!)  Click HERE for Ballot Measures.

YES on “A”  Although many of us have always assumed the succession of the Lt. Governor was clear,  this amendment will HELP CLARIFY constitutional language that was recently called into question during legislative debate.   A good example of the application of this might be:  What happens if…say for instance…a certain Republican candidate becomes President of the United States and asks…say for instance…the Governor of the State of Utah to serve in his cabinet and that governor resigns his position as governor?  This amendment would clarify that for the following two years the citizens of the state of Utah would be governed, not by an “acting” executive, but a governor with all the rights and authorities of the office of the state’s chief executive (even though implicitly stated previously).  Hypothetically speaking…of course!  Confused?  That’s why I’m voting YES.

YES on “B”  All “additional” dollars from Severance Taxes in excess of $98.6M annually would be deposited into a “rainy day” fund to protect against state budget shortfalls.  The Utah Taxpayers Association has endorsed this amendment.   Click HERE for further explanation.

YES on “C”  At first, I had problems with this proposal.  After all, Utah has been a state much longer than the Civil Rights federal holiday has existed on our January calendars (third Monday in January).  I do agree there is room for debate.  Starting the legislative general session a week later does allow additional time for better budgetary planning.  We get the final numbers about three weeks into February, which only leaves a few days to formulate the state’s upcoming year’s financial plan…which can be a difficult and tricky thing to do at times.  Also, allowing for a “break” on President’s Day would give legislators the opportunity to touch base with constituents, family, and occupational responsibilities.

YES on “D” In an effort to avoid potential litigation related to redistricting…this is just a technical change to the constitution related to redistricting.

YES on “E”  This amendment gives the state the ability to use SITLA revenues and some Education Fund monies for investing in private company stocks and bonds.  Although, probably not a very good idea in this current dynamic market, things will stabilize out there…eventually…up or down…and this is a viable option for state financial investors to put the “state’s money” (taxpayer money) into higher yield, private funds.   I must say that I’m NOT for this 100% !  Reservations?  Placing the People’s money in “less” stable investments (potentially)…places the People’s money at greater risk.   Good idea?  Bad idea?  You decide…tomorrow.

Please Vote!