Connect with us

Utah

5 years after failure, Utah lawmakers haven’t taken another stab at tax reform. When will they? • Utah News Dispatch

Published

on

5 years after failure, Utah lawmakers haven’t taken another stab at tax reform. When will they? • Utah News Dispatch


Heading into the Utah Legislature’s 2025 legislative session set to convene next week, Gov. Spencer Cox and Republican legislative leaders are eager to cut taxes for a fifth year in a row, adding to their running total of more than $1.2 billion in tax cuts since 2021.

But even as they continue to chip away at the state’s income tax base — saying they eventually want to see Utah get rid of its income tax entirely — a weighty policy issue continues to loom unaddressed.

Tax reform.

Cox acknowledged it Tuesday during an annual conference hosted by the Utah Taxpayers Association, a tax watchdog group, at the Little America Hotel in Salt Lake City. He repeated a warning he issued last year, when lawmakers were gearing up for their fourth tax cut — that if they’re going to continue to cut the state’s income tax rate with the ultimate goal of eliminating the tax altogether, they need to at some point have a larger discussion to overhaul Utah’s tax system. 

Advertisement

“Look, I said this last year and I will just say it again. We’ve got to get really serious about what our tax code looks like moving forward,” Cox said. “I feel like we’re kind of piecemealing it along, and I don’t think that’s a great way to do things.”

Utah Legislature poised to cut taxes for 5th year in a row — but how?

Cox, who this month began his second term as Utah’s governor, reiterated his call for Utah lawmakers to tackle tax reform in response to a question from an audience member about any future tax policy priorities his administration may have for his next four years. Cox has promised 2028 will be his last year as governor, saying he will not seek a third term.

Cox has, however, supported and signed all of the Legislature’s recent income tax cuts — and he said he would support another one if that’s what lawmakers opt to do. 

While Cox this year is pushing to totally repeal the state’s Social Security income tax (which he reiterated is a form of an income tax cut), he said he would also support an income tax rate cut. Or both, if lawmakers find the money.

Advertisement

“If we can fit it in the budget, and we’ll look at what those final numbers are, I would be willing to support that,” Cox said. 

But expecting a tighter budget year thanks to lower than expected revenue estimates for 2025, legislative leaders at the helm of Utah’s Republican-controlled Legislature have both signaled they have their own preferences. House Speaker Mike Schultz and Senate President Stuart Adams said they’re inclined to support another income tax rate cut and maybe a scaled-back version of Cox’s Social Security proposal, by expanding the number of Utah taxpayers eligible for the Social Security benefit tax credit rather than eliminating the tax entirely.

Cox acknowledged that lawmakers can choose to disregard his budget recommendation — but he defended his proposal to eliminate the state’s tax on Social Security benefits, saying, “I handed you a gift this year.” 

“This is, I would say, easily the most popular proposal that I’ve made in the past four years judging by the interaction that we’ve had,” Cox said, jokingly adding, “I also lament what will happen to you if you don’t do it, so good luck with that.” 

Utah Gov. Spencer Cox speaks at the Utah Taxpayers Association’s annual conference at The Little America Hotel in Salt Lake City on Dec. 14, 2024. (Courtesy of the Governor’s Office)

Cox reminds tax reform is still needed 

Even though legislative leaders have said they don’t expect a broad tax reform discussion during the 2025 session, Cox said that’s something lawmakers will need to confront at some point.  

Advertisement

“Are we going to eventually eliminate income tax? I said I would support that,” the governor said. “But we have to look at what that looks like.” 

Though it may initially sound like an appealing prospect for Utah taxpayers, Cox pointed to states like Texas that don’t have an income tax, but rely on higher property taxes.

“I hear people all the time say, ‘I want to be like Texas.’ I’m like, ‘Great, let’s eliminate the income tax just like Texas,’” Cox said, though he urged Utahns to realize that would mean maybe tripling their current property tax bills. He said he asks, ‘Is that what you prefer?’ And they’re like, ‘Oh, well, maybe not.’”

“So I think it’s a mistake to just keep piecemealing things,” he said. “I think we have to decide … What is the optimal vision of that? And then let’s do it. … Let’s not just do five basis points here and 10 basis points there and keep doing this. Let’s do it. Let’s get real about it.”

Cox, however, didn’t offer specifics on how he’d like Utah to undertake tax reform. 

Advertisement

“I have some ideas,” he said, “but I’m not a tax expert.” He welcomed the Utah Taxpayers Association and others to get involved in the discussion. 

Utah State Tax Commissioner John Valentine also spoke in front of Tuesday’s conference, fielding questions from the crowd — which included a fair share of legislators. 

When one audience member asked if Utah’s “three-legged stool” for tax policy is “still solid” — referring to the three most prominent taxes supporting state government and public schools (income tax, sales tax and property tax) — Valentine indicated it’s stable for now, but could reach a tipping point sometime in the future, especially if lawmakers continue to reduce income tax revenue. 

Utah State Tax Commissioner John Valentine speaks at the Utah Taxpayers Association’s annual conference at The Little America Hotel in Salt Lake City on Dec. 14, 2024. (Courtesy of the Utah Senate)

“The governor is correct,” he said, “that at some point in time you’ll end up like Texas or like Florida where you have to rely on some other tax. And most of the time, they’ve gone to either a significant sales tax increase or a significant property tax increase — or both.” 

Valentine said Texas’ property taxes are now four times higher than Utah’s. He added that property taxes can sometimes be problematic and challenging for homeowners when their bills fluctuate unexpectedly. 

“Property taxes are particularly difficult for me,” Valentine said, adding that “property taxes are tough for people because it comes all at once. It comes as a big amount. And there’s not sometimes a reasonable relationship between the value of the property you’re in and the ability you have to pay a large property tax bill. Because the property may have increased in value, but your overall wealth and well-being and income has not.” 

Advertisement

So Valentine cautioned against taking that approach if lawmakers opt to eventually completely repeal the state’s income tax. 

“I don’t like the idea of trying to push it more on property taxes,” he said. “I agree with the governor on that one. That’s a little scary.” 

Why has tax reform been tabled?

Pressed by Utah News Dispatch on the governor’s call for a larger tax reform discussion and why that debate has been tabled for another year, Schultz pointed to the Legislature’s last tax reform attempt that crashed and burned.

“Because we remember what it was like a few years ago when we had that discussion,” Schultz said, prompting some knowing chuckles from the crowd. 

In 2019, the Utah Legislature passed legislation to raise sales taxes on food, gas and some other services while reducing the income tax rate from 4.95% to 4.66% — but lawmakers repealed it soon after amid backlash fueling a referendum effort that was on track to qualify for the ballot. 

Advertisement

The list of services that would have been taxed was whittled away repeatedly as the tax reform package wound its way through the Legislature, to the point that even some supporters said they wished it was more comprehensive by the time it came to a vote in the House and Senate. In the end, it would have taxed services including Uber rides, streaming media, dating referrals, pet boarding, towing, newspaper subscriptions, and a handful of other services, the Deseret News reported. 

Utah’s last tax reform attempt crashed and burned. What now?

While they have lowered income taxes over the past four — going on five — years and have now surpassed the income tax rate cut proposed in 2019, Utah lawmakers haven’t since taken another stab at such sweeping tax reform. 

That’s even though pundits including former Gov. Mike Leavitt have urged them to muster up the political courage to do so in order to confront an evolving economy and a budgetary structural imbalance between sales tax revenue and income tax revenue that will eventually become impossible to ignore. 

Schultz said he still stands by that 2019 effort. “What we came up with would reduce the tax burdens for the citizens of the state,” he said, but “the problem is it was so complicated the citizens of the state didn’t get it. And it was hard.”

Advertisement

The House speaker added “we’re not to that point yet” of needing to revisit that debate, “but you know, down the road, future legislatures will have to have that discussion.”

Schultz said for now “we don’t see anything on the horizon” to force the tax reform discussion this year, adding “we’ve got a few years before that becomes a big issue.” 

“It will have to happen,” he said. “Those discussions will have to come at some point in time. But it’s not a top priority right now … there’s other things to focus on.” 

Legislative proposals for 2025 — so far

Currently Utahns who receive Social Security are already eligible for a tax credit if their household income is no more than $75,000. While Cox wants to do away with that tax completely, some 2025 legislative proposals have surfaced to partially answer his call by simply increasing that income threshold to some other amount lawmakers settle on. 

With recently filed HB130, Rep. Walt Brooks, R-St. George, has proposed giving a partial Social Security tax cut by increasing the income threshold to $90,000 for households, $54,000 for single filers (up from $45,000) and $45,000 for married filing separately (up from $37,500).

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Rep. Kay Christofferson, R-Lehi, has filed a bill, HB106, to lower the income tax rate from 4.55% to 4.45%. According to State Tax Commission estimates, that would cost the state about $160 million — the entirety of the amount the Executive Appropriations Committee already set aside in December to be used for some type of tax cut. Cox’s proposed Social Security repeal would cost roughly $143 million.

Another proposal that Valentine said will be “interesting” to watch is SB85, from Sen. Lincoln Fillmore, R-South Jordan. He’s proposing that the state use a formula to automatically reduce its income tax rate when the state’s actual revenue exceeds forecasted revenue starting in 2026.

Another income tax rate cut already has some political steam, with Schultz, R-Hooper, and Adams, R-Layton, both saying Tuesday they want to cut Utah’s income tax rate for a fifth year — “again, again, again, again, and hopefully this year again,” as Adams put it. 

Utah Senate President Stuart Adams, R-Layton, speaks at the Utah Taxpayers Association’s annual conference at The Little America Hotel in Salt Lake City on Dec. 14, 2024. (Courtesy of the Utah Senate)

Schultz spent most of his speech during Tuesday’s conference talking about one of his top priorities: higher education “reform.” He has challenged leaders of Utah’s public universities to find “inefficiencies” and cut “low-performing” programs while expanding other programs like nursing, engineering and computer science to better “align” the system with workforce demands. 

On taxes, however, Schultz again said he’d be supportive of reducing Social Security taxes — but only partially — while also providing another income tax rate cut. 

“We have a limited amount of money. If we had all the money … I’d love to go all the way and take the Social Security tax completely off the table,” the House speaker said. 

Advertisement

But given this year’s limited revenue, Schultz said he’d like to raise the Social Security tax income thresholds “where high-income earners continue to pay Social Security taxes. However, the rest of that money I would like to take and give every citizen of the state who pays income taxes a tax cut.”  

Adams also said he’d be in favor of a partial Social Security tax cut by maybe moving the income threshold to perhaps $100,000. “But we also have young families paying income tax that need a tax break too,” he said, so “my hope is that we cut income tax for a fifth year in a row.” 

Across-the-board income tax rate cuts, however, disproportionately benefit the wealthy over low-income earners. Cox has also proposed another expansion to the state’s child tax credit for families of up to four children. That would cost the state about $2.1 million. 

“One of the No. 1 things we hear is the cost of inflation is hitting home with families, young families,” Schultz said. “Doing everything we can to continue to reduce their tax burden, I think, is every bit as important as reducing it for high-income earners.” 

Schultz said he had “no doubt that sooner or later” lawmakers will eliminate Utah’s Social Security tax completely, but he questioned whether this year, “when we don’t have a lot of revenue, is this the right year to do it?” Still, he said he’d like to “see everybody get a tax cut.” 

Advertisement

Elections, higher ed, immigration: 3 big issues to expect from the 2025 Utah Legislature

House Minority Leader Angela Romero, D-Salt Lake City, said she’s supportive of the governor’s Social Security tax cut proposal, but she’s opposed to another income tax rate cut, noting it would result in hardly noticeable savings for low-income earners. 

“I’d like to see that money put in other spaces,” she said, pointing to issues in need of more funding including homeless and housing services. 

At least one Republican lawmaker, though, isn’t keen on repealing Social Security taxes. Though he acknowledged that Cox’s proposal has “a lot of wind behind” it, Sen. Dan McCay, R-Riverton, who is also chairman of the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee, indicated he had misgivings. 

“I’ve always believed in a broader base and a lower rate,” McCay said, adding that it’s “better for the economy and better for the taxpayers and is more transparent.” 

Advertisement

“I’ve never been one to believe that we accomplish more by carving (out) or setting aside groups and creating special tax credits,” he said. “That’s why I’m concerned, a little bit, about the push to completely withdraw the tax on Social Security.”

McCay added that he realized it’s “potentially a very politically popular idea. I get it.” But he said “the wealth accumulation for people over the age of 65 over the last 10 years has doubled, (while) wealth accumulation for those under the age of 65 has been cut by a third.”

McCay said Utah households with incomes less than $75,000 already don’t pay taxes on Social Security benefits, while noting the median salary for Utah teachers is $67,000. 

“I have a hard time justifying a tax cut that is going to be paid for by teachers, or by other public employees,” he said. “So, while popular — because we would remove our name from the AARP website that says Utah is one of 13 states (that) collects (Social Security) taxes — sometimes it’s important to not only do popular things, but to do the right thing.

McCay said he will “double down” on lowering Utah’s income tax rate and advocating for “a broader tax base,” though he didn’t offer specifics.

Advertisement

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

Advertisement



Source link

Utah

A new law in Utah allows students to opt out of coursework that conflicts with their beliefs

Published

on

A new law in Utah allows students to opt out of coursework that conflicts with their beliefs


OGDEN, Utah — The syllabus in 18-year-old Madelynn Wells’ introductory film studies class assigned “Jaws” first, and then the Spanish dark comedy “Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown.” She said she watched those, and did the written assignments with no problem. 

Around the third week of the term, the assignment was a film called “Pariah.” She hadn’t heard of it, so she looked it up and found that it was a coming-of-age film about a young woman who turned away from her conservative family to live as a lesbian.

Wells, a freshman at Weber State University who said she’s a devout Catholic and a political conservative, felt uneasy. She didn’t want to watch the film, and the idea of writing a paper on it made her even more uncomfortable. 

Advertisement

“I feel like whenever you put something in writing it just feels more serious,” Wells said. 

She decided to drop the class. 

In Utah, with a large and devout religious population, Wells is not alone in trying to uphold her religious beliefs while getting a college education. 

A new state law offers these students a unique protection: If something in a class conflicts with their strongly held religious or personal beliefs, students can ask their professor for an alternative assignment or exam. And as long as their request doesn’t change the fundamental nature of the course, the professor is now required by law to allow the student to opt out. 

Advertisement

The law has some guardrails that protect against accommodation requests that are universally considered absurd. For example, a student won’t be able to claim a moral objection to math in a college algebra course. And the law requires faculty to make these accommodations only in courses that are part of a college’s general education requirement or are required for the student’s major.

Despite those protections, the law is polarizing. Proponents say that students shouldn’t be required to do assignments or take exams on topics that compromise their morals unless it’s absolutely necessary to advance in their field of study. Opponents argue that engaging with beliefs they don’t hold helps students understand their own views better. 

This Utah law is the first of its kind targeting higher education, but it’s an extension of concerns being expressed at the K-12 level. There have been efforts to emphasize conservative and religious values in public schools, and limit what can be taught about subjects including racial history, gender and sexuality. The Utah law is also reminiscent of a case the Supreme Court took up last year, in which the justices sided with parents of public school students who wanted to take their children out of class during lessons that violate their religious beliefs — such as using books about LGBTQ+ identities. President Donald Trump has said that colleges are “corrupting our youth and society with woke, socialist, and anti-American ideology.” 

And over the past few years, there have been dozens of state-level bills — including one in Utah — banning initiatives or programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI. Lawmakers in other states have gone after what’s taught in the classroom and how certain issues, like race and gender identity, are discussed. The legislative approach here is different. Instead of dictating what can or cannot be taught, the new Utah law shifts the power to students who now have the agency to decide when curriculum crosses a line for them. 

Amy Reid, who directs the Freedom to Learn initiative at the free speech advocacy organization PEN America, said it’s the responsibility of faculty to help all students get the most out of what’s being taught. Some accommodations — like those for students with disabilities or religious students who need to reschedule exams for religious holidays — help faculty meet that goal, she said. This one, she said, does not. 

Advertisement

Rather than “encourage students to shut their eyes or plug their ears or throw a book out the window,” she said, “You encourage students to engage with ideas, and you provide them with the support that they need — which can be different for individual students — so that they are able to complete the work.”

“Being exposed to ideas that you disagree with doesn’t mean you’re going to change your mind, but it should make you clearer about what it is that you believe and why,” Reid added.

Interested in more news about colleges and universities? Subscribe to our free biweekly higher education newsletter.

Wells, a zoology major, was taking the film course to fulfill a general education arts credit. After dropping it, she had more than two dozen other classes to choose from to earn that credit. She picked photography. 

Advertisement

But if she had needed the course to graduate, she said she would have had to swallow her discomfort or work up the courage to talk to her professor about an alternative assignment. In the case of the film studies course, perhaps she could have watched a different coming-of-age film, or another film by a Black screenwriter — depending on the goal of that assignment. (Her professor declined to comment.) 

Seth Mulkey, a junior at Utah State University in Logan, said he felt uncomfortable in his general education biology class when the course topic turned to evolution. Mulkey, an evangelical Christian, said he believes that God created the Earth in seven days.

“It can be a bit disheartening to have to learn about something and have something proposed as fact when it’s not something that you’re in agreement with,” Mulkey said. He tries to keep his beliefs to himself and instead, he said, “I’ll do my best to engage from an intellectual standpoint with this idea. So, if this is the assumption we’re making about how this works, we’ll talk about it, we’ll see what conclusions are there.” 

Even if the law had been in effect when he took that biology class, Mulkey said he wouldn’t have asked for an accommodation to get out of uncomfortable group discussions. But writing assignments might have been a different story. 

“If the assignment were to write an essay supporting this view, write an essay about why evolution is correct and why it is the right view of the creation of the world — I think at that point, I would want to step back,” Mulkey said. 

Advertisement

Politicians say left-wing professors push their views. New poll shows students don’t see it that way

Utah appears to be the most religious state in the country. About 76 percent of Utah residents are religious, compared to only about 49 percent nationwide, according to a 2024 report from the Gardner Policy Institute at the University of Utah. Data from the Pew Research Center shows that about 50 percent of all residents are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and another 13 percent identify as members of other Christian denominations. 

Michael J. Petersen, a Republican state representative from Logan, said the idea for the bill came after his daughter was assigned to write a letter to a legislator in support of LGBTQ+ rights as part of a master’s degree program at an out-of-state college. The assignment was in conflict with her beliefs, so she called her dad for help. 

He helped her write “something that was very, very bland.” She moved on — and he began drafting the legislation. 

Had Petersen’s daughter been an undergraduate student at a public college in Utah, the law would have helped her in two ways. It would have prohibited her instructor from requiring that she take a specific public stance (such as sending a letter) on anything that is a “political, social, religious, moral, or community matter.” And it would have allowed her to ask her professor for an alternative assignment.

Advertisement

Petersen said he believes that his daughter’s assignment was to write the letter and also send it. (The Hechinger Report was not able to independently confirm this.)

Most faculty and education advocates, whatever their politics, agree that requiring her to send the letter would be inappropriate.

Mike Gavin, the president and CEO of the Alliance for Higher Education, said it is reasonable for a professor to ask a student to take on other perspectives during an in-class debate or in a written assignment. But it shouldn’t be taken outside the classroom. 

“In no way, shape or form should they be required to publicly sign their names to something. That would be very problematic,” Gavin said. “That, I think, would be a personnel issue that an institution should handle. That is not an academic freedom issue. That is actually using students for things that are political.” 

And, he said, in 30 years in higher education he’s never heard of it happening. 

Advertisement

Gavin said he thinks it’s unnecessary to give students such broad permission to opt out of coursework that conflicts with their beliefs. There are cases in which it’s appropriate, but those already come up and are handled on a case-by-case basis between professors and students, he said. 

“It’s entirely probable — I say this facetiously and also seriously — that a freshman in college doesn’t know everything yet,” Gavin said. “They need to engage with ideas they have not come across. Even if they end up being uncomfortable for a minute, that doesn’t mean that they’re traumatized.” 

Conservative-leaning civic centers now teach courses at public colleges 

Outside of Utah, many people might gawk at the idea of students opting out of coursework that makes them feel uncomfortable, and worry about the broader implications of such a policy. But among Utahns, there seem to be wider-ranging and more nuanced perspectives.

It’s partly because they’ve been down this road before. In 1998, a Mormon theater student at the University of Utah objected to reading a script with profanity. The student sued the university, accusing faculty of essentially pushing her out after she was given the choice to recite the lines as written or leave the program. 

Advertisement

A settlement agreement required the university to write a policy to deal with coursework objections related to sincerely held beliefs. But the policy still requires that students be able to understand and articulate ideas and theories that are important to the course, regardless of whether they agree with or believe them. The new law does away with that requirement. 

High school speech and debate allows students to find common ground 

Sarah Projansky, the vice provost for faculty and academic affairs at the University of Utah and a professor of film and gender studies who has examined the representation of sexual violence in film and media, said she’s had students walk out of class film screenings during intense moments. If a student says they can’t watch a certain film, she says she works with them to find an alternative. 

“It’s not my business why a student can’t be there. Religion, sincerely held belief of conscience, memory, family memory. It doesn’t matter, they can’t be there,” Projansky said. “Anything that’s not pedagogically necessary is very easy to accommodate.”

Nicole Allen, a communications professor at Utah State, said she thought the law was “a solution in search of a problem,” given existing policies at public institutions and the fact that most professors are able to handle these issues on a case-by-case basis. 

Advertisement

Still, she thinks there’s no need for students to experience “gratuitous discomfort” in the name of academia, she said, as long as accommodations wouldn’t take away from the big-picture goals of the course. 

Although the law doesn’t concern what professors are allowed to teach, some worry that it could still influence academic freedom.

Reid, of PEN America, worries that faculty may overcorrect. They might leave controversial reading materials off their syllabuses or dodge subjects that tend to make students feel uncomfortable, in order to avoid consequences. Those range from the extra work of writing new assignments and test questions to the bureaucratic headache that comes with denying a request to, in the worst and least likely scenario, becoming caught up in a public controversy if a student takes issue with something they’re being taught. 

She said it makes sense that professors would not want to end up like Melissa McCoul, who was fired from Texas A&M University after a student recorded her teaching about gender identity, or Mel Curth, the graduate teaching assistant who lost her job at the University of Oklahoma after she failed a student who had turned in a poorly written psychology paper using only the Bible as a source. 

Behind the turmoil of federal attacks on colleges, some states are coming after tenure 

Advertisement

Though students can now choose to opt out of coursework on difficult topics, many Utah public colleges go to great lengths to encourage them to do the opposite outside the classroom. Many institutions host regular forums where students can come together for facilitated conversations on controversial topics and engage with classmates who hold differing opinions. Often, the colleges offer free lunch to incentivize students to dig into tough topics. 

At Weber State, the dialogue programming is run by the Walker Institute of Politics and Public Service. On a recent Wednesday, a group of students, staff, and current and retired professors came together at a long, conference room table to discuss the war in Iran over sub sandwiches and chips. 

Strict rules protect the integrity of conversations: Everyone has to read the same article, there’s to be no use of tech devices and no note-taking, and nothing that is said should be shared outside that space. 

Leah A. Murray, the institute’s director and a professor of political science and philosophy, said the rules exist so that everyone feels comfortable speaking freely. (The group made an exception to the no note-taking rule for the reporter in the room.) 

Advertisement

Sometimes Murray selects the topic, but sometimes the topic comes from a student.

Adam Nichols, a 43-year-old junior who is studying to become a high school teacher, said he proposed the idea to Murray because he wanted to be able to talk about the Iran conflict with people in his life, but he felt he didn’t quite have the language to feel comfortable doing so.

When he’s been forced to reckon with his strongly held beliefs, both in class and in various Walker Institute Talks, he said, “It forces me to reassess other areas where I may have been wrong. And I would much rather be wrong and be corrected than to continue under those false pretenses.” 

Despite her appreciation for difficult conversations with people she doesn’t necessarily agree with, Murray sees value in making the types of accommodations in the law. Her views are informed by her own experience as a vegan, animal-loving undergraduate who opted to fulfill her science requirement with geology instead of biology to avoid having to dissect a pig.

“I was unwilling to do that,” Murray said. “It was a violation of my conscience at that time.”

Advertisement

She said that experience has also informed the way she handles difficult issues with her students. At the beginning of each term, she says, “If you’re going to go to hell for learning this, please drop this class.”

She delivers it just like that, she said, and her students always laugh. But she’s serious. 

“I don’t want to be responsible for your salvation being denied because you learn something in this class.”

Contact staff writer Olivia Sanchez at 212-678-8402 or osanchez@hechingerreport.org

This story about religious beliefs and college students was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

Advertisement

This <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org/new-law-utah-student-coursework-religious-beliefs/”>article</a> first appeared on <a target=”_blank” href=”https://hechingerreport.org”>The Hechinger Report</a> and is republished here under a <a target=”_blank” href=”https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/”>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License</a>.<img src=”https://i0.wp.com/hechingerreport.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/cropped-favicon.jpg?fit=150%2C150&amp;ssl=1″ style=”width:1em;height:1em;margin-left:10px;”>

<img id=”republication-tracker-tool-source” src=”https://hechingerreport.org/?republication-pixel=true&post=116311&amp;ga4=G-03KPHXDF3H” style=”width:1px;height:1px;”><script> PARSELY = { autotrack: false, onload: function() { PARSELY.beacon.trackPageView({ url: “https://hechingerreport.org/new-law-utah-student-coursework-religious-beliefs/”, urlref: window.location.href }); } } </script> <script id=”parsely-cfg” src=”//cdn.parsely.com/keys/hechingerreport.org/p.js”></script>



Source link

Continue Reading

Utah

Utah Royals FC Returns Home to Host Racing Louisville FC Chasing Eight Match Unbeaten Streak | Utah Royals

Published

on

Utah Royals FC Returns Home to Host Racing Louisville FC Chasing Eight Match Unbeaten Streak |  Utah Royals


HERRIMAN, Utah (Thursday, May 14, 2026) — Utah Royals FC (5-2-2, 17 pts) returns to the Beehive State this weekend to host Racing Louisville FC (2-1-5, 7 pts) for the first meeting between the two clubs during the 2026 campaign on Sunday, May 17, at America First Field. Kickoff is scheduled for 6:00 p.m. MT.

Utah enters Sunday’s contest following a hard-fought 0-0 road draw against Bay FC at PayPal Park, earning another clean sheet while continuing the club’s streak of never allowing Bay FC to score at home against Utah Royals FC. The point on the road marked Utah’s 11th away point of the 2026 campaign, equaling the club’s combined road-point total from both the 2024 and 2025 seasons.

Advertisement

The Royals were tested throughout the opening half, with one of Bay FC’s best opportunities coming in the 40th minute when Racheal Kundananji broke forward on a dangerous run through the middle of the pitch before entering the penalty area. Midfielder Narumi came up with a crucial defensive stop, diving in front of the attempt and deflecting the shot away with her leg to preserve the scoreless draw. The sequence highlighted Utah’s defensive commitment, with multiple Royals players sprinting back to disrupt the Bay FC attack and protect the clean sheet heading into halftime.

Utah continued to remain organized defensively throughout the second half, limiting Bay FC’s opportunities and securing its fifth clean sheet of the 2026 season. The result extended the Royals’ unbeaten streak to seven consecutive matches while also leaving Bay FC winless against Utah through five all-time meetings between the clubs.

With the result, Utah extended its unbeaten streak to seven consecutive matches, continuing the Royals’ impressive run of form heading into Sunday’s home match against Racing Louisville FC.

Advertisement

Head Coach Jimmy Coenraets and his squad now look to build on an impressive seven-match unbeaten streak, alongside multiple consecutive clean sheets against Chicago Stars FC, Seattle Reign FC, Angel City FC, Houston Dash, and most recently Bay FC. The result against Bay extended Utah’s strong run of form as the Royals continue to establish themselves as one of the league’s toughest defensive sides. Utah now returns home looking to carry that momentum into America First Field in front of its home crowd while aiming to extend both its unbeaten streak and defensive success.

Now in his second full season at the helm, Head Coach Coenraets continues molding a balanced squad built on defensive discipline, midfield control, and attacking creativity. Sunday’s contest presents another opportunity for Utah to extend its unbeaten streak to eight consecutive matches while collecting crucial points at home in front of the club’s supporters at America First Field.

Advertisement

Racing Louisville FC enters the matchup with a 2-1-5 record, most recently earning a 3-1 home victory over Portland Thorns FC after suffering back-to-back defeats. Led by Head Coach Bev Yanez, Racing Louisville FC will look to build on its return to winning form and secure all three points on the road at America First Field.

Sunday’s contest marks the tenth match of the 2026 NWSL regular season for the Royals and the ninth for Racing Louisville FC, with both sides aiming to secure valuable early-season points and strengthen their position in the league standings.

WATCH LIVE on Victory+ with Josh Eastern and McCall Zerboni :: Utah Royals FC vs Racing Louisville | America First Field | 6:00 p.m. MT

Advertisement

WATCH LIVE on Victory+ with Kelley O’Hara and Ali Riley :: Utah Royals FC vs Racing Louisville | America First Field | 6:00 p.m. MT

LISTEN via KSL Sports Radio (102.7 FM / 1160 AM) starting at 5:30 p.m. MT

Advertisement

Following Sunday’s match, Utah Royals FC will remain in the Beehive State to host inaugural side Denver Summit FC on Saturday, May 23, at America First Field. Kickoff is scheduled for 4:30 p.m. MT, with tickets available for purchase here.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Utah

‘It means building hope’: USU brings independence to refugee group through chicken coop project

Published

on

‘It means building hope’: USU brings independence to refugee group through chicken coop project


SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — Refugee communities in Utah are being supplied with farm-fresh eggs and poultry thanks to a collaborative effort between Utah State University and Utah Refugee Goats.

According to Utah Refugee Goats (URG), their goat and poultry farm supplies refugee communities with reliable, affordable and culturally familiar sources of meat. Thanks to Utah State University (USU) agriculture students, it’s getting some ‘egg’stra attention.

Over the last 10 weeks, Brad Borges, a Ph.D candidate for career and technical education, has been taking a hands-on approach with his students to construct a new chicken coop with the support of a mobile construction lab and a $20,000 grant.

According to URG President Abdikadir Hussein, the coop is equipped with fully enclosed roofs and will increase their flock by 40%, meaning faster growth for the Salt Lake City-based farm. As a refugee, though, Hussein said it means even more.

Advertisement

“It means resiliency. It means independence. It means building hope. Hopelessness is something that is killing the most refugees inside,” he expressed. “I came as a refugee, and hope is the last everything that ever came to mind.”

“We feel like even the birds are happy, like they want to get into there,” he added.

From the student perspective, being able to build a project that will be used to generate money for refugee groups was incredibly engaging and inspirational, according to Borges. The sentiment is shared by Joseph Okoh, extension assistant professor of small acreage livestock.

“It’s a win-win situation for everyone,” Okoh said. One, we are getting the coop for the refugee group, these students are going to learn from the construction of the coop, and not only that, everybody is going to be happy to be part of this community to be able to develop a better coop for better production.”

To learn more about issues facing refugees in Utah and how to support them, visit Utah Refugee Goats’ website.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending