Voters won’t have an option next year to revamp state liquor laws after the sponsor pulled the plug on the idea in the face of obstacles to putting the measure on the ballot that proved to be insurmountable.
Recently, Jeff Carter, a former liquor broker who had proposed an ambitious overhaul of Utah liquor policy, notified his supporters that he had to abandon his goal of getting on the 2024 ballot with an initiative that would have privatized state-run liquor stores, let some grocery stores get a license to sell liquor and wine and could have let Utahns receive wine in the mail.
It was ambitious from the get-go, and I had my doubts it could succeed — partly because if it made it to the ballot there would be blowback from those in power who keep their foot on the brake when it comes to changing liquor policy.
But mostly I was skeptical because the Legislature has made it really, really hard to clear all hurdles necessary for citizens to get initiatives on Utah’s ballot.
With a Feb. 15 deadline to hold a series of town hall meetings around the state, and then gather more than 134,000 signatures spread across at least 26 of the state’s 29 Senate districts, Carter was already behind the curve. And there’s the money that is needed to get any of these efforts off the ground.
Carter said he spent two years crafting the language of the initiative, but that wasn’t the hardest part of the task.
“I don’t know what the deal was, but not a lot of people wanted to invest money,” Carter told me Tuesday. He had talked to the Costcos of the world and local groceries, and they weren’t willing to donate.
“It’s very disappointing,” he said.” I think Utah is ready for the change. I know I can get the signatures. It’s just going to take money. [The retailers] want it, but they don’t want to pay for it.”
Now, Carter says he will look to get his initiative on the 2026 ballot. Unfortunately, he’s not alone in crashing into the daunting obstacles of Utah’s initiative process.
Clearing hurdles
Proponents of the Clear The Darn Air initiative push — which would have imposed a modest carbon tax to fund air quality programs — jettisoned the effort at the end of July, realizing that there was no way they could gather enough signatures to make it on the ballot.
A plan to ditch Utah’s system of partisan primary elections in favor of putting all the candidates on a single primary ballot, regardless of party, and then moving the top two to the general election never really got off the ground, either. Organizers of that initiative say their plan now is to shift focus, do more voter education and try to get their changes through the normal legislative process.
And an initiative to do away with the new “woke” Utah flag and revert to the stodgy old blue bedsheet with a state seal — a really terrible idea, but one I’m fine with voters deciding — has only gathered a little over 35,000 signatures. And that’s just over a quarter of the number needed, assuming they’re all valid and meet the thresholds in 26 of the 29 Senate districts.
Maybe we think this stuff is easy, especially after 2018 when voters not only got three initiatives on the ballot but passed them all. But it’s really not.
All three of those 2018 initiatives had millions of dollars in backing and sophisticated organizations pushing them. Before they passed, in fact, the initiative process had only been successfully used four other times in 58 years.
Legislators say all the time that they don’t want Utah to become California — where they have had 395 initiatives on the ballot between 1985 and 2020, and between 2010 and 2020 averaged about 10 initiatives a year.
Legislative meddling
But it’s not a bad thing for the citizens of the state to have a voice. Utah’s Constitution is explicit that, “All political power is inherent in the people … and they have the right to alter or reform their government as the public welfare may require.”
When the Legislature makes it so difficult to exercise the initiative power, it impairs that basic constitutional right. And, when the Legislature comes in after the citizens pass an initiative and undermines the expressed will of the people, it effectively renders that constitutional language meaningless.
On that last point — the legislative meddling — there is hope for change.
The Utah Supreme Court is considering whether the Legislature overstepped its authority when it rewrote the 2018 anti-gerrymandering initiative and whether there should be limits on lawmakers’ power to ignore the will of the voters. A ruling on that matter should be out fairly soon — fingers crossed because it needs to happen.
But there also needs to be a broader rebalancing of the division of power between the Legislature and “We the People.”
Because whether the public wants to reform its liquor laws, or clean up the dirty air, or change its election process, or even if we — for some reason — want to revert to an ugly old flag, we at least have an opportunity to use our voice so that the power “inherent in the people” actually means something.
(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Robert Gehrke.
