From Utah’s air quality to how it evaluates its judges’ performance, hundreds of boards and commissions in the Beehive State give input on policies that impact Utahns’ everyday lives.
But under a GOP lawmaker’s proposal to remove political affiliation guardrails on membership, Republicans could have more influence on the most consequential of the red state’s boards and commissions.
In the statutes that organize and instruct their functions, there is typically a subsection that reads similar to, “no more than [number] voting members of the commission are members of the same political party.”
If passed, “Boards and Commissions Revisions,” or HB412, from Rep. Jefferson Burton, R-Salem, would strike comparable lines from the portions of code controlling numerous local commissions, as well as approximately 19 state boards and commissions.
The House Government Operations Committee will consider whether to advance the bill to the House floor on Thursday.
According to Burton, his bill is meant to make it easier for the state and local governments to fill seats on commissions. He said prospective members often don’t feel comfortable discussing their political affiliations.
“There’s nothing insidious here, we’re not doing this to disenfranchise anybody, but we’re just having a hard time filling them,” Burton said. He added, “It may be that [not disclosing party affiliation] will actually help people that have different views to get on the boards.”
There were no specific criteria for selecting the boards and commissions he did, Burton said, except addressing a difficulty in filling seats on boards and commissions. “What we want is the best minds,” he said, “we don’t care where you come from.”
Burton’s suggested transformations of these bodies, which are part of the state’s executive branch, come as legislators are pushing sweeping changes to the judicial branch that would strengthen legislative power.
While boards and commissions largely operate under the purview of Gov. Spencer Cox’s administration, many of the members the governor picks must be approved with the “advice and consent” of the Utah Senate.
The composition of each entity varies, and although some members are appointed by the governor and others by agency heads he has nominated, the Senate president and House speaker typically get to make picks, too.
A spokesperson for Cox said, “We’re aware of the bill. The governor hasn’t had a chance to take a close look at it yet.”
When asked whether that meant the governor’s office was not consulted during the drafting process of the bill, the spokesperson did not respond.
Burton said he hasn’t spoken with the governor about the bill, but added, “He, like me, wants the best people in the room — I don’t think he really cares which party people are from.”
The decisions of many of the impacted boards and commissions could influence how legislative leaders’ priorities this session are executed, from clearing the way for nuclear energy in the state to efforts to build more affordable housing. The bill could also change the makeup of the commission that decides lawmakers’ salaries.
The boards and commissions that would see their sections of code amended include:
Air Quality Board
Board of Water Resources
Water Quality Board
Board of Oil, Gas and Mining
Board of Utah Geological Survey
Waste Management and Radiation Control Board
Public Service Commission
Committee of Consumer Services
Money Management Council
Utah Housing Corporation
Workforce Appeals Board
Labor Commission Appeals Board
Board of Aging and Adult Services
Board of Tourism
Alcoholic Beverage Services Commission
Legislative Compensation Commission
Elected Official and Judicial Compensation Commission
Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission
Commission on Service and Volunteerism
Local county fire civil service councils
Local civil service commissions
Local merit system commissions
A larger Republican presence could remove barriers to the legislative supermajority pushing through its desired outcomes in a number of arenas.
Packing the Waste Management and Radiation Control Board, for example, would give Republicans more of a say in how the state handles nuclear waste as lawmakers seek opportunities to use small nuclear reactors for energy. The state joined a lawsuit against the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission last month, seeking to do away with federal licensing requirements for the reactors.
And as tensions between the judiciary and legislative branch come to a head with lawmakers introducing bills to strip state judges of some of their discretion, implement a higher voter approval threshold for them to stay on the bench and add justices to the Utah Supreme Court, Burton’s bill would open up the possibility of only one political viewpoint being represented in information compiled for voters by the Judicial Performance Evaluation Commission.
Members of the majority have made dissenting political beliefs an issue in board member confirmation hearings before.
In 2023, Cox nominated a former Democratic state lawmaker, who is also a physician, to the Air Quality Board. Suzanne Harrison, who now sits on the Salt Lake County Council, saw her nomination shot down because of her votes against Republican pieces of legislation that she saw as harmful to the environment.
“I am disappointed by this unprecedented outcome,” Harrison wrote in a statement afterward. “This is the first instance of a Utah Senate committee failing to support a Governor’s nomination to the Air Quality Board. By statute, the Air Quality Board members are required to have a variety of industry, governmental, and other backgrounds and expertise, and the statute clearly requires that each member of the board be knowledgeable in air pollution matters.”
Bills similar to Burton’s have previously been introduced in the Legislature. In 2017, when Cox was lieutenant governor, then-Gov. Gary Herbert vetoed a bill that, likewise, would have removed political party affiliation requirements from a number of boards and commissions.
Herbert reportedly initially asked for the controversial bill, saying he felt measures requiring consideration of partisanship were “contrary to the best interests of the public and public policy.” But when lawmakers threw out a Herbert-supported amendment that would have made the bill less severe, his position changed.
As he issued a veto, Herbert said, “I believe that public confidence in these select boards and commissions may be increased through symbolic partisan makeup.”
