Simone Lawson
Utah Amendment A, also known as the Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment, was a proposed amendment to the Utah Constitution that aimed to remove the constitutional mandate on how revenues from income taxes and intangible property taxes are spent. The amendment would have allowed tax revenue from these sources to be used for purposes other than public education funding once the requirements for such funding were met. This amendment sparked controversy, with some arguing that it would protect constitutional protections and allow for more flexibility in revenue allocation, while others opposed the removal of the earmark for education funding, deeming it essential to the state's future. Ultimately, Amendment A faced legal challenges and was ruled invalid by the 3rd Judicial District Court due to a procedural issue, resulting in votes for it not being counted.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Name | Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment |
| Year | 2024 |
| Amendment to | Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution |
| Objective | Remove the constitutional mandate on how revenues from income taxes and intangible property taxes are spent |
| Impact | Allow tax revenue from intangible property and income to be used for other purposes once the requirements for public education funding are met |
| Status | Certified for ballot on November 5, 2024, but ruled invalid by the 3rd Judicial District Court due to non-compliance with state constitution |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
- Amendment A proposes removing the earmark for income tax revenue for education
- The amendment would have allowed tax revenue to be used for other purposes
- It would have provided for a budgetary stabilisation account
- Amendment A would have amended Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution
- The amendment was ruled invalid and votes on it would not be counted
Amendment A proposes removing the earmark for income tax revenue for education
Utah's Amendment A, also known as the Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment, was a proposed change to the state's constitution that aimed to remove the mandate on how revenues from income taxes and intangible property taxes are spent.
Currently, under Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution, all revenue from income taxes and intangible property taxes must be used for public education, higher education, children, and persons with disabilities. The amendment, if passed, would have allowed tax revenue from these sources to be used for other state purposes once the requirements for public education funding were met.
Supporters of the amendment, such as State Senator and amendment sponsor Dan McCay, argued that it would provide continued constitutional protections while allowing for more flexibility in how the state allocates its resources. House Majority Leader Mike Schultz emphasized the state's constitutional duty to balance its budget and believed that the amendment would empower citizens to decide on the allocation of funds.
However, opponents of the amendment, including Utah House Democrats, argued that education funding is essential to the state's future and should not be compromised or used as a bargaining chip. They emphasized the importance of stable funding for education and the potential negative impact of diverting tax revenue away from this critical area.
Despite being certified for the ballot in Utah as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment, Amendment A faced legal challenges. On October 9, 2024, the 3rd Judicial District Court ruled that the measure was invalid due to a failure to meet the state's constitutional requirement for publication in a state newspaper 60 days prior to the election. As a result, votes cast for Amendment A would not be counted, similar to the fate of Amendment D, which was also voided by the courts.
Amending the Constitution: Who Holds the Power?
You may want to see also
The amendment would have allowed tax revenue to be used for other purposes
The Utah Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment, or Amendment A, was certified for the ballot in Utah as a legislatively referred constitutional amendment on November 5, 2024. The amendment would have amended Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution, which states that all revenue from income taxes and intangible property taxes must be used to fund public education, higher education, children, and persons with disabilities.
The proposed amendment would have removed the constitutional mandate on how revenues from these taxes are spent. It would have allowed taxes on intangible property and income to be used to maintain a public education funding framework provided through state law. This framework would have used a portion of revenue growth for Uniform School Fund expenditures for changes in student enrollment and long-term inflation. Additionally, it would have provided a budgetary stabilization account.
In essence, the amendment would have allowed tax revenue from intangible property and income to be used for other purposes once the requirements for public education funding were met. State Senator and amendment sponsor Dan McCay (R) stated that the amendment would "protect and provide continued constitutional protections but then allow for...revenue in the income tax fund to be used for other state purposes once we fulfilled our responsibilities for growth, and for student enrollment and long-term inflation."
However, Utah House Democrats opposed the amendment, arguing that "education funding is essential to our state's future and should never be used as a bargaining chip." On October 9, 2024, the 3rd Judicial District Court ruled that the measure was invalid due to a failure to meet constitutional newspaper publication requirements. As a result, votes on Amendment A would not be counted.
States' Rights: The 10th Amendment Explained
You may want to see also
It would have provided for a budgetary stabilisation account
Utah's Amendment A, or the Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment, was a proposed amendment to the Utah Constitution that would have removed the constitutional mandate on how revenues from certain taxes are spent. Specifically, it would have amended Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution, which states that all revenue from income taxes and intangible property taxes must be used to fund public education, higher education, children, and persons with disabilities.
The amendment would have allowed for taxes on intangible property and income to be used to maintain a public education funding framework provided through state law. This framework would have consisted of two parts: first, using a portion of revenue growth for Uniform School Fund expenditures to account for changes in student enrollment and long-term inflation, and second, providing a budgetary stabilisation account.
The budgetary stabilisation account would have been a dedicated fund to support public education financially. It would have been used to stabilise the budget for education by providing additional funds when needed, such as during economic downturns or unexpected expenses. This would have ensured that the state could maintain its commitment to funding public education even during difficult financial times.
However, it is important to note that Amendment A was ruled invalid by the 3rd Judicial District Court on October 9, 2024, as it was not published in a state newspaper 60 days before the election, as required by the state constitution. As a result, while Amendment A appeared on the ballots, any votes on the measure were not counted.
Amending the Constitution: Who Approves?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Amendment A would have amended Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution
Utah's Amendment A, also known as the Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment, was a proposed amendment to Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution. This amendment aimed to alter the way revenue from income taxes and intangible property taxes was spent.
Under the existing Section 5 of Article XIII, all revenue from these taxes must be used exclusively for public education, higher education, children, and persons with disabilities. The proposed Amendment A would have removed this mandate, allowing for more flexibility in how these tax revenues could be allocated. Specifically, it would have provided that taxes on intangible property and income be used to maintain a public education funding framework, with a portion of revenue growth dedicated to the Uniform School Fund for addressing changes in student enrollment and long-term inflation. Additionally, it would have established a budgetary stabilization account.
Amendment A sought to balance the state's budget by allowing tax revenue from intangible property and income to be used for other state purposes once the requirements for public education funding were met. Proponents of the amendment, such as State Senator Dan McCay (R), argued that it would provide continued constitutional protections while enabling the state to address other financial priorities. House Majority Leader Mike Schultz (R) emphasized the state's constitutional duty to balance its budget and believed that Amendment A would empower citizens to make decisions about budget allocations.
However, Utah House Democrats opposed Amendment A, arguing that education funding should not be compromised or used as a bargaining chip. On October 9, 2024, the 3rd Judicial District Court ruled that the measure was invalid due to a failure to comply with the state constitution's requirement to publish it in a state newspaper 60 days before the election. Despite appearing on the ballots, votes for Amendment A were not counted.
The Electoral College Reform: 12th Amendment Explained
You may want to see also
The amendment was ruled invalid and votes on it would not be counted
The Utah Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment, also known as Amendment A, was ruled invalid by the 3rd Judicial District Court on October 9, 2024. The ruling stated that the measure was invalid because it was not published in a state newspaper 60 days prior to the election, as required by the state constitution. Despite the measure being printed on ballots, votes on it would not be counted.
Amendment A aimed to amend Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution, which mandates that all revenue from income taxes and intangible property taxes be used for public education, higher education, children, and persons with disabilities. The proposed amendment would have removed this mandate, allowing tax revenue from these sources to be used for other state purposes once the requirements for public education funding were met.
Supporters of the amendment argued that it would provide continued constitutional protections while allowing for more flexibility in revenue allocation. State Senator and amendment sponsor Dan McCay (R) stated that it would "protect and provide continued constitutional protections but then allow for... revenue in the income tax fund to be used for other state purposes once we fulfilled our responsibilities for growth, and for student enrollment and long-term inflation." House Majority Leader Mike Schultz (R) emphasized the need for Utah to balance its state budget and asserted that the amendment would empower citizens to make decisions about revenue allocation.
However, opponents of the amendment, including Utah House Democrats, argued that education funding should not be used as a bargaining chip and is essential to the state's future. They emphasized their inability to support measures that would remove the constitutional earmark on public education funding.
It is worth noting that Amendment A was not the only controversial amendment on the 2024 ballot in Utah. Amendment D, which sought to cement the Utah Legislature's power over ballot initiatives, was also ruled invalid by the courts, and votes cast for it were not counted.
Amendments Expanding the Right to Vote
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Amendment A, or the Constitutional Requirements for Education Funding Amendment, is a legislatively referred constitutional amendment in Utah.
Amendment A would have removed the mandate on how revenues from income taxes and intangible property taxes are spent. This would have allowed tax revenue to be used for other purposes once the requirements for public education funding are met.
Amendment A was certified for the ballot in Utah on November 5, 2024. However, the 3rd Judicial District Court ruled that the measure was invalid due to non-compliance with the state constitution, and votes on the measure would not be counted.
Amendment A would have amended Section 5 of Article XIII of the Utah Constitution, which outlines the use and amount of taxes and expenditures. It would have provided flexibility in allocating tax revenue, potentially benefiting other state priorities while maintaining support for public education.
Yes, Amendment B proposes to increase the limit on annual distributions from the State School Fund to public schools, resulting in more funding for students, teachers, and schools. This amendment has been non-controversial and encourages support from Utah voters.
