March 3, 2019

"There's commitments by the legislature to make sure that they fund appropriately public education which as you know has been historically my number one budget priority." Governor Herbert

ANNUNCER: KUED presents The Governor's Monthly News Conference, an exchange between Utah reporters and Governor Gary Herbert.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, good morning.

REPORTERS: Good morning, Governor.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: As always, a pleasure to be with you, and thank you for coming to visit with me this morning. I'll give you time for questions, but let me give an opening statement.

As you know, we're about two-thirds of the way through the legislative session. Tempus fugit. Time flies. It's been, actually, it seems to me a very rapid session. I think part of that's because there's been so many big, tough issues to discuss, to debate.

As you know, the legislature's introduced and talked about nearly over a thousand bills, and if history's any indication of what the future's going to be, I expect we'll pass somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 plus bills which puts pressure on us to track and to review, and it's a collaborative effort. I hope the people of Utah appreciate the fact that this legislature and the legislature here in Utah is really just the antithesis of what we see in Washington, D.C. Very willing to tackle tough issues and to work in a collaborative spirit and get things done.

And so I say pass 500 bills, 85% plus of those bills will be passed unanimously or nearly unanimously so there's a lot of collaboration and effort in coming together to find common ground and really do the people's work in a very professional way. We sometimes take it for granted because it always happens here, but again as you see what happens in Washington, D.C. and I can tell you other states are not quite as blessed as we are here. So I just want to pay tribute to the legislature for their good work, for being determined, and having focus on getting things done. 

At the top of that list, I would add is this tax reform, tax modernization as we call it. That's a hard complex issue, and yet there's been a determination by the legislature to say this is the time. We've talked about it for the last two or three different years about things we ought to be doing with tax reform, but we're to the point where we don't want to do it during a crisis, and yet we can see crisis kind of around the corner with the reduction of our sales tax revenue, the inequity of the system itself currently today. I also appreciate the fact that in doing this it will help us to have a more stable, a more simple system that has more fairness and equity in it and also at the same time help to protect the education of our K-12 public education system.

As most of you probably know, more and more money is coming out of the education fund, the income tax only to fund higher education than ever before, and that's because the general fund is producing less proportionate revenue. For example, a decade ago, on average we were taking 46% of the money out of our general fund to help fund higher education. 

Today in this budget, it's down to only 4%. So this change that's taking place which is somewhat radical and complex is going to help us to make sure that we don't rob from the public education bucket to fund higher education, and more funding will come from in fact of the sales tax. I think this is a good step in the right direction. Is the bill perfect? No, but then most bills we pass aren't, but this is certainly a step in the right direction, I think, for us to help have stability and fairness in the system and put us on the road to continued prosperity which is really my focus. Economic Development which really is the rising tide that raises all boats on a pond here in the state of Utah.

Again, I applaud the legislature for tackling tough issues, not kicking the can down the road, and particular efforts on tax modernization. We're not quite there yet, but I think we have a good chance to get this across the goal line before the session ends.

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: So where do they need to go to get to that point where they're on board, where you're on board with them? 

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I'm on board with the concept, and again, most of the things they're doing I applaud. It's been really hard work in the House. There's more people there to get on board with 75 members, and now it's going to shift over to the Senate. 29 members there. I'm sure that many of the members have questions that they'd like to ask to get to a comfort level of getting it passed.

Again, what we have right now out there is a revenue neutral situation, some reduction in income tax with some increase and broadening the base in the sales tax to keep it revenue neutral. I would like to encourage them, in fact, to have a sales tax cut so that there's actually a reduction in the revenue stream to give back to the people of Utah. Talks have been $200 million. The Speaker talked about $225 million. Who knows where that's going to settle down? With the renewed estimates, we have about $200 million less in surplus funds than we originally estimated, but I would hope and I believe there should be and will be a tax cut back to the people of Utah. 

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: Are you okay with the sales tax cut that's proposed in this bill? Do you want it deeper? And how do you feel about the income tax cut?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I didn't propose the income tax cut. Again, I think the optics of it are are we really taking money away from education. I'll be meeting with the education stakeholders to make sure they understand this really will help them. It's kind of counterintuitive, but because we are going to take less money out of the education fund for higher education and put more of that funding into the general sales tax bucket, they will actually have more money left over for public education so that's a subtlety we need to make sure that they understand.

There's commitments by the legislature to make sure that they fund appropriately public education which as you know has been historically my number one budget priority. Again, that goes with my focus on economic development. You cannot have continued economic prosperity if you don't have a skilled labor force that lines up with the demands of the marketplace so the tax that we should cut rather that we should have coming should be in the sales tax arena, I believe, and whether that's my $200 million originally proposed or 150 or 225, that remains to be determined. I think as we work the numbers that number will surface, and I think we'll all be on board.

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: So you're not committed to this 3.10 percentage level that the legislature's proposed in the bill for the sales tax. Would you like it lower or what would you like?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I think that's the baseline where we've got it revenue neutral. We put everything on the table. Fairness would dictate let's put everything out there on the table. We'll see what happens as people now look at it. There may be some modifications and changes there. I think there's an opportunity based on the math to have a reduction of the 3.1% sales tax which we currently have proposed to something below three. Whether that's 2.8, 2.9, I think something lower than that which would give back between $150, maybe $200 million in sales tax cuts. 

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: At the same time, you are proposing to tax, or the legislature rather is proposing to tax a whole lot of things that have never been taxed before. How concerned are you though that every special interest, every group is going to want to carve this bill up like a turkey?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I'm not really concerned about it. I just expect it. I mean, anytime we have a tax and broaden the base by definition means that somebody is going to be taxed that maybe was not being taxed before, but we were closing loopholes. We were trying to adjust to the federal tax policy. There's a number of things that are taking place here that's going to make some adjustments.

The concern for all of us should be what is the optimal tax policy which is fair, has equity across the system, every part of the economy is contributing their fair share, simple to understand, simple to administrate, and in fact, we see we've collected $1.1 billion of surplus money. About 570 of that is ongoing which is we're in record number levels, and so maybe that's a little too much we're collecting. We don't want to over collect. We don't want to under collect either. So there's room for a tax cut to give back to the people of Utah so I expect that's what's going to happen.

LEE DAVIDSON, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Some groups have complained about the process behind tax reform saying it's all been behind closed doors, and some of them feel blindsided. Can you talk a little bit about the process?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: We've been talking about tax reform for three years. I've talked about it in many different forums including my State of the State address. You can go back and read them. I'm sure you have them stacked by your bedside, review them regularly, but we've talked about tax reform and tax modernization, the need to close loopholes and make some adjustments.

We've talked to the business community. I know the legislature had a good meeting with the business community yesterday and again making sure that they understand and explanations are in order for what is taking place and what the goals are. I think the business community wants to have a good tax policy, and at the end of the day, most people are going to be happy to have tax reform.

They're not going to be so happy if it's my business or my part of the economy that's going to be taxed, but that's part of tax reform, and so I appreciate the fact that the legislature is working very hard to find the optimal place to land, and I think as we all should take our special interest hats off and take a look at the broad perspective here. We're going to come together on a good tax policy even the business community even if their own entity's going to have to pay a little more tax.

Overall, their customers will pay less taxes, and what we're on a pathway to do is up to 90% of the people of Utah will actually pay less taxes in the next year than they paid in the past year. That's good news for the taxpayer. And by the way, because we're doing so much on the sales tax, it more impacts those who are lower to middle income people where the income tax reduction is mainly to those with higher income.

So this is going to be across the board benefit to the people of Utah and assure us to continue to have economic prosperity because we'll be a great place to do business. We're going to be a great place to live and raise families, and we're going to continue to have prosperity in the state of Utah because of tax modernization.

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: With this bill that is proposed, if it passes, if you sign it into law, can you promise the Utah families that they will see a tax break, a tax cut?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Yes, I can because when we add up the pluses and the minuses and we end up giving back say $200 million in a tax cut, the people of Utah will benefit. We're going to actually collect less money. It's that simple. It's just a math problem. So I can promise that. I don't know exactly how much it's going to be, but again, my intent is to make sure that we have this broadening the base, lower the rate, and the end result if you add up the pluses and minuses is the people of Utah will pay less taxes than they paid before.

LEE DAVIDSON, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: Shifting to another topic. A couple of abortion restriction bills are potentially headed your way. One that would prevent abortions of fetuses diagnosed with Down syndrome and another one that would prevent them after 18 weeks of gestation. Can you talk about those? If you think they're a good idea or they'll help or if they'll cost the state too much money? Are they constitutional?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, we all know that of all the issues we've ever had, at least in my lifetime, there's been nothing more divisive than the idea of abortion and what that means and since Roe v. Wade in 1973, the nation's been divided, still is divided. So I understand the emotion behind it. I think the argument is in reducing the time that's allowed for an abortion is because of the advancements of science, and the fact that the viability outside of the womb is increased significantly since the originally Roe v. Wade decision by courts. I personally wish that we had not had a court make the decision. I side with Ruth Bader Ginsburg who said this decision should have been made legislatively not by nine people in black robes. I think we'd have had less division. We'd probably have better legislation to guide us in that direction.

That being said, advancements in science warrant us to take a review of that, and so I think that's appropriate. Again, when you have a heartbeat after six weeks, it does give me at least pause of the abortion. I'm a pro-life guy, and that's where my biases are. 

The one on Down syndrome I think is somewhat of a message bill from the standpoint of we're saying, you know, if that's the reason that you want to have an abortion, that's probably not a good reason. Now whether that's constitutional or not because basically under the law we have, now you can have an abortion for whatever the reason may be, but again, I think the bill that is being proposed has been modified some to say, you know, we want to make sure that we send the message that all life even if you may even be imperfect and we all are, if you're Down syndrome, that's not reasonable cause to have an abortion, and I think the modification is that if that's in fact unconstitutional, they've taken the provision and said that we won't implement this law unless other states have tested it, and it's been found to be constitutional so that will take some of the risk and the expense out of fighting that on a constitutional basis. 

NICOLE NIXON, KUER: Also these bills have now passed the House. If they both make it to your desk, would you sign two abortion bills in one session?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, I don't know if the number means anything. The key issue is whether the policy is correct and good and defendable or whether there's two, one or none or five, it doesn't matter. So I'll address that like I do all the bills. We'll take a look at it, take a methodical look, weigh the pros and the cons and then decide whether to sign.

MICHAEL ORTON, CAPITAL PRESS CORPS: Speaking of advancements of science, Governor. Bryce Bird was in committee hearing this morning and testified that the state has valid data indicating that anti-idling laws are actually working, but the committee stuffed a bill by Representative Arent today which would give more teeth to municipalities to allow for ordinances to be actually worked and enforceable. Your comments about that.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, again, I come from local government so the local control aspect of that appeals to me. Environmental issues sometimes have broader concern than just the jurisdictional lines. That's why I support the EPA and the Clean Air Act where there's a federal oversight responsibility for environmental issues because pollution knows no boundary. Likewise the state probably has a role to play in oversight on environmental issues. I proposed $100 million into the budget to address particularly environmental issues and reduce pollution. We've done a pretty good job over the last ten years.

We need to make sure we amplify that effort over the next ten years and hence putting a lot of money. That money should go to the Department of Environmental Quality where they can in fact prioritize whatever monies they get at the end of the day with the budget where we can put that money to help reduce pollution. If that's idling is an area of concern that they want to emphasize, so be it. Local communities, if they think that's working and want to emphasize that as part of their local ordinances, I'm okay with that. 

MICHAEL ORTON, CAPITAL PRESS CORPS: What her bill was after was kind of the cutting down of a three warning requirement on an idling ordinance and making it so that one warning would be more sufficient thus giving it more teeth, and therein was the problem, I guess, in the community.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, like anything else that we debate at the legislative level, there's pros and cons. I'm sure that a healthy debate has taken place, and after the discussion and debate, they'll pass a law or not, and then we'll deal with that when it comes, but the concept of reducing pollution and having us all be individually responsible for what we're doing, recognizing that the majority of the pollution that comes out that we see on inversion days here, come from tailpipes, and that's a big deal. So what we can do to reduce the tailpipe emissions is a step in the right direction.

BRADY MCCOMBS, ASSOCIATED PRESS: Governor, what do you think of the bill coming through that would allow heavier beer to be sold in grocery stores? Any concerns about more DUIs or problems with that?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Not really. I understand the motivation behind it. This seems to be driven by manufacturers. There's our local breweries are probably siding with the bill to not undo it because they have more capacity, and they probably have a longer length of time to ramp up if they need to change their alcohol content. That being said, I don't think we should be leading, and we certainly aren't because we're at the end of the list of states that are allowing for 4.8 beer, but again it's been a little bit of a surprise to me because I have not had anybody ever come to me over the last number of years and say, "You know, I wish my beer had more alcohol content in it."

In fact, we have light beers out that have become very popular because they have less alcohol content. That being said, we have to reflect the market, and I think that will happen whether it's this year or next year depending on if that trend continues and we can't get access to typical beers that we have in the grocery stores today. Again, if that's the case, we'll probably reflect and follow that market demand. We just need to make sure that we are following a market demand of the public and the consumer rather than somebody thinking that this is a better way to make more profit on selling beer in Utah.

BEN WINSLOW, FOX-13: Governor, House committee tomorrow will hear about a proposed ban on conversion therapy for LGBTQ children. The Senate next week will debate the hate crimes bill. What's your position on both of those legislations?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I think conversion therapy, again, how would you define conversion probably is the key issue there, but some of the things being done particularly to young people is seems to be barbaric and ought to be eliminated so I have no problem with some of the anti-conversion methods being banned or the conversion methods being banned. I think that they're not productive. The hate crimes legislation, I think that we always as a society, I believe that there are some issues that haven't had enhanced penalties attached with the crime. You kill a policeman, you have an enhanced penalty. You kill someone you're in prison, you have an enhanced penalty.

So we have the need for certain sectors of society, a group that's being accosted by the harassment killing, criminal activity as one individual, I think that it is in fact okay or at least appropriate for debate on should there be an enhanced penalty.

As that works its way through the legislature, I'm not opposed to it. I understand the concept and actually I'm okay with that as we already have precedence being set, but to take a look at the bill and see it in its completion form whether I support it or not, but we'll be working with the sponsors to see if we get it right which is kind of our methodology. We try to work with the legislature to make sure that they pass bills that we won't veto.

AMY JOI O’DONOGHUE, DESERET NEWS: Governor, there's been some controversy at the session this year regarding a proposed federal designation for the Wasatch canyons. Some people argue that we already have federal land up there. We don't need more federal control. Others argue that this is a way to more permanently protect a precious water shed. Where do you stand on that given the states position in the past with federal designations and the need to have local control in some areas?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, this goes back to kind of the Mountain Accord and what's been derived out of that. Some of my friends are for it. Some of my friends are against it, and I'm for my friends, I want you to know.

AMY JOI O’DONOGHUE, DESERET NEWS: Okay.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: It's not without controversy. Again, I think the need to in fact protect water sheds, as well as the environment in some of these sensitive areas is one that we all ought to agree to. The problem is having local control outside of your own jurisdiction, whether the control from Salt Lake City angles into unincorporated areas which now would be Salt Lake County purview or even across the border into Wasatch County, that's the debate. Who should in fact have jurisdictional control? And probably there needs to be some kind of a coalition put together, and I think there's discussion about that so that what we do is we have fairness. We have all sides represented, and then we make a decision in the best interest of everyone. I think that can happen, and that's what I support.

BRADY MCCOMBS, ASSOCIATED PRESS: Governor, speaking of public lands, Congress passed, er, a bill is moving through Congress that would designate more land for protections and it includes the creation of Jurassic National Monument down in central Utah around the quarry there. What do you think of that proposed national monument?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: It's something that's been proposed for a long time, and people down in Emery County, again, have been proposing something to help them probably diversify their economy as again coal is kind of being phased out, and energy is not as big an economic driver as it once was in Emery County. Tourism and opportunities there to have an attraction and build that side of their economy is part of their long-term plan. They've brought proposals to me. I've asked all the counties, particularly rural counties, to say what are your plans going forward for economic growth and development.

So after a long time on many issues of public plans, we have this bipartisan proposal that's been passed in the Senate, now in the House, and I expect it will pass, too, and that's a good thing. I like to see collaboration, cooperation, and compromise, and I think this is good precedent. I hope that the Congress continues to look at that as an opportunity, and again, for many of the ten public land bills that we've been proposing for a number of years, we have virtually universal support for it. There's a few that are not happy with it, but I think most all people are, and I think this is a step in the right direction.

LEE DAVIDSON, SALT LAKE TRIBUNE: A bill is coming to you that would allow Energy Solutions to store depleted uranium. It's been controversial on different levels including donations to Energy Solutions, I mean donations from that company to lawmakers. What's your feelings on that bill, and do you plan on signing it?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Well, like any entity out there, they have the ability to support their candidates of choice so I don't fault that. There's similarity to philosophies that you say, "I like what that person represents "so I'm going to give them a campaign donation." So let's just take that off the table.

What we ought to be driving this is good policy. What's the science behind it? And what are the end results going to be? For example, the question should be are we bringing in radioactive material, is it going to be stored safely, and is there some kind of a public hazard out there? I think Energy Solutions and its different iterations over time has proven to be a good corporate citizen and storing those radioactive materials safely.

If in fact they want to bring in depleted uranium now which seems to be part of the underlying driver here and with the NRC talking about reclassifications of radioactive material, it probably is a timely discussion, but what we want to make sure is and what is in the bill as it's been modified now is let's make sure that we believe as a state that we can in fact store this safely. That's going to be determined by the Department of Environmental Quality which receives no donations. They're going to do an assessment of whether depleted uranium can be stored safely now and forever. That's the first thing.

The second thing which I think is really critical that I've asked for them to in fact put into the bill is we need to make sure that the federal government whatever they classify things to do, I don't ca... I do care, but whatever they do, I want to know that they're going to take over the responsibility for the long-term care and maintenance of that facility. Now I've talked to them a number of years ago about doing that. There's been an indication of a willingness to do that. We're putting this in the bill that says if you're going to store depleted uranium out there then that means that the federal government's got to by agreement in writing say we're going to take on the responsibility for the long-term care and maintenance of the Clive facility now and forever. If they don't do that, you cannot store.

It actually is making it a little harder to bring in depleted uranium because if under this reclassification for example, if the NRC ends up saying that this is class A waste, we have to take it regardless so I think in many ways, this will help protect us and the public safety and put the federal government on the hook for long-term care and maintenance. That's a good thing for the people of Utah.

ERIK NEILSEN, KUED: Governor, we have about 30 seconds left. There have been a number of earthquakes down in Bluffdale, and I'm wondering if you've been briefed on that, and how we feel as a state of emergency preparedness?

GOVERNOR HERBERT: I have. It's a reminder to all of us that we live in an earthquake zone. I don't know if everybody realizes, we have between 500 and 600 earthquakes a year here in Utah. Most of them small, thankfully. We've had a little bit of concentration around the Bluff area, but rather than panic, we ought to be prepared, and that's the key issue. Our Be Ready Utah program which we designed here when I was Lieutenant Governor is a great template for us to be ready individually, family wise, business wise, education system wise, so that whatever happens, we're prepared and ready. I don't think that anybody needs to panic, but everybody should be prepared. Make sure you got your 72 hour kits ready to go in case we do have the big one.

By the way, we'll have the Great Shakeout coming up here I think in April. Again, preparation, tabletop exercise which helps us prepare to make sure that we are ready for whatever happens in the future of a natural disaster type. 

ERIK NEILSEN, KUED: Governor, thank you very much for joining us this week.

GOVERNOR HERBERT: Great to be with you all.

ERIK NEILSEN, KUED: Thank you.

ANNOUNCER: This has been The Governor's Monthly News Conference. An archive of transcripts, video, and audio is available online. Please visit KUED.org. Thanks for joining us.

Return to home page