Utah teachers union asks court to void proposed amendment – Deseret News

The Utah Education Association now wants another proposed constitutional amendment on the state's November ballot declared void.

Amendment A, which would remove the restrictions in the Utah Constitution that limit the use of state income tax revenues to schools and some human services needs as well as trigger a law removing the state's share of sales tax on food purchases, is the subject of a new court filing by the teachers union.

The UEA is seeking to amend its May lawsuit against the state school voucher system created in 2023, known as the Utah Fits All Scholarship Program, to stop the amendment so voters don't "unknowingly remove one of the Constitution's primary barriers to private school vouchers."

The filing states that the amendment language is "misleading" and that the Utah Legislature failed to publicize it as required. Similar arguments were made successfully last week against Amendment D , which would have given state lawmakers the express power to immediately change or repeal initiatives approved by voters. That ruling is being appealed.

The latest legal action comes as a new political issues committee, Utahns for Student Success, launches its campaign against Amendment A. At a news conference held at the Murray headquarters of the Utah PTA, representatives of educator, parent and child advocacy organizations criticized the proposed change.

The political issues committee reported $20,150 in contributions as of mid-August, including $20,000 from the UEA. The teachers union also contributed $70,000 worth of polling to the effort, according to the disclosure.

"If we open up the state income tax fund to all state needs, we are guaranteeing the defunding of our public education system which is the foundation of our democracy," UEA President Renée Pinkney said at the news conference. "Are we really willing to sacrifice our children's education, their future success and their happiness for the sake of legislative convenience?"

Pinkney said lawmakers would use the money once reserved only for K-12 schools, but expanded over the years to include higher education and some human services needs, for "pet projects, including private religious school vouchers, at the expense of our neighborhood schools."

Asked about the new legal filing at the news conference, the UEA leader said "it is a completely separate issue" from the campaign launched by Utahns for Student Success, which she also heads. Pressed about whether the political issues committee backed the effort to void the amendment, she said, "of course we support that particular filing."

After the news conference, Pinkney told reporters she was advised by counsel there had to be a "clear distinction" between the efforts. She answered questions about the filing, saying she expects Amendment A to be voided by the court. Whatever happens, she said the campaign against the amendment, expected to include TV commercials, will continue.

Gov. Spencer Cox backed the constitutional amendment as "a good idea" during the taping of his monthly news conference on PBS Utah Thursday, but had little to say about the court filing other than it caught him "off guard."

Lifting the restrictions on the use of income tax "gives us the flexibility we need to fund government as a whole," Cox said, adding "that earmark has never worked the way it was intended to" because lawmakers just end up shifting expenditures between the state's income fund and general fund, made up largely of sales tax revenues.

"So instead of, I think, kind of keeping up that charade, what we should do is actually put some protections in place which we've done via legislation, to make sure we're getting more funding to schools," Cox said, referring to additional language in the amendment that adds funding guarantees already legislatively approved to the Constitution.

Plus, over the past four years, there's been a big increase in school funding, the governor said.

"That's not because of the earmark. It's because of our commitment to our kids," he said. "Having good government and balanced government means being able to make those decisions in deciding where that funding needs to go."