Utah

Utah appeals court upholds public records release on wolves

Published

1 month ago

May 25, 2024

Utah appeals court upholds public records release on wolves

SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Court of Appeals has sided with a journalist pursuing records about state contracts with an organization lobbying to remove the Gray Wolf from federal endangered species protections.

In a ruling made public late Friday, the Court sided with Eric Peterson and the Utah Investigative Journalism Project over expense reports from Big Game Forever related to its contract work with Utah’s Department of Natural Resources. The agency granted Peterson’s request for those reports, but redacted some portions of the records. Peterson challenged the redactions and the Utah State Records Committee reversed DNR’s decision.

That prompted Big Game Forever to go to court to challenge the records committee’s decision. A lower court ruled in Peterson and the Utah Investigative Journalism Project’s favor. Big Game Forever appealed.

The Utah Court of Appeals unanimously sided with Peterson and the Utah Investigative Journalism Project again.

Big Game Forever has received millions of dollars from the state of Utah over the years in efforts to lobby for wolf delisting.

“Big Game has subcontracted with numerous vendors, and it claims to have dealt with two consistent problems: (1) ‘frequent death threats and harassment regarding the work it (and its vendors) performs’ and (2) competitors’ efforts to poach its subcontractors in an attempt to compete for future contracts. Thus, Big Game has taken, in its judgment, ‘all reasonable measures’ to maintain and protect the confidentiality of its subcontractors’ identities,” Judge Gregory Orme wrote in the ruling, adding that an audit of the group’s first contract suggested there was a lack of sufficient safeguards around the money.

While a subsequent contract had expenditure disclosures, there was a provision that any information contained in them “would be protected,” Judge Orme wrote. That was the rationale for denying Peterson’s records request. When the case ultimately made it to court, a judge rejected the idea that the names of vendors was a “trade secret” and that releasing names or other information would be harmful.

The Utah Court of Appeals agreed and ruled the information could be released under Utah’s Government Records Access Management Act (GRAMA), the law that governs public records.

“In applying this balancing test, the court weighed Big Game’s interest in protecting against unfair competition and its interest in protecting the subcontractors’ safety against the public’s interest in knowing how public funds are spent. The court stated that Big Game made only conclusory statements that its subcontractors had ‘historically been targeted by extremist animal rights groups’ without providing ‘any specifics as to the conduct by animal rights groups,’” Judge Orme wrote.

“Conversely, the court determined that ‘the public’s interest in obtaining access to the information regarding who is receiving public funds, and what they are doing to perform the public contract, is high’ and that ‘[t]he public has a great interest in the accountability and transparency of the expenditure of millions of dollars under the public contracts with Big Game.’ After balancing these considerations, the court concluded that ‘even if the subcontractor list is properly classified as protected, the interest favoring access is greater than or equal to the interest favoring restriction of access.’”

The judges ruled that Big Game Forever did not raise a sufficient enough challenge to the lower court’s decision to balance interests.

“Big Game’s argument on balancing in the commercial-information context is limited to the assertions that it ‘derives economic value from keeping the names of its subcontractors confidential’ and that ‘[c]onsidering the consequences to Big Game if these names were disclosed, Big Game’s interest in preventing disclosure outweighs the public’s interest in learning them,’” Judge Orme wrote. “In the context of challenging the district court’s … balancing of interests, these conclusory statements do not meaningfully engage with the district court’s reasoning and are thus insufficient to carry Big Game’s burden of persuasion on appeal.”

Emails to the Utah Investigative Journalism Project and an attorney representing Big Game Forever requesting comment on the Court’s ruling were not immediately returned on Saturday.

Read the Utah Court of Appeals ruling here:

While Big Game Forever was advocating for wolf delisting, there are signs that lawmakers on Utah’s Capitol Hill have questions about what they are ultimately getting for it. During a budget hearing in February before the Utah State Legislature’s Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environmental Quality Appropriations Subcommittee, Assistant House Majority Whip Casey Snider, R-Paradise, said the state has contributed a lot of money to the effort.

“I actually am very supportive of delisting wolves and having wolves under state management. But I’m not necessarily, and haven’t been, supportive of this blank check that’s contributed itself through time with not much accountability,” he said, adding he had concerns about “just continuing to throw money down this hole.”

Don Peay, representing an organization called Hunter Nation, pushed back in the hearing and insisted that Big Game Forever’s efforts were successful in getting a wolf delisting in parts of Utah.

“We got the little teeny sliver that goes from I-15 Idaho border down to Ogden, up to Evanston,” Peay replied. “So that little portion of Utah is now, wolves on that side of the boundary are not endangered species.”

Hunter Nation sought $500,000 for its wolf delisting efforts this year. The legislature approved $250,000.

Utah’s Department of Agriculture & Food has been bracing for the possibility of wolves entering Utah after Colorado voters approved their reintroduction. Under current federal laws, they must be trapped and relocated.

Source link

Utah

What to expect for the Nov. 5 general election in Utah

Published

4 hours ago

June 26, 2024

Press Room

SALT LAKE CITY (ABC4) — Polls closed for Utah’s primary elections on June 25 and preliminary results began coming in, setting the stage for the upcoming general election on Tuesday, Nov. 5.

While official voter canvassing results were not scheduled to be available until July 22, the Associated Press projected winners for several races by June 25.

Here’s what to expect for the voting process for the general election in November.

Who is running in Utah?

The June 25 primaries narrowed down the list of candidates running for office in Utah.

Gov. Spencer Cox was the projected winner for the gubernatorial race, according to the AP.

Rep. John Curtis was expected to clinch the Republican nomination to replace Sen. Mitt Romney, and would face off against Democratic challenger Caroline Gleich and Independent challengers Carlton E. Bown and Robert Newcomb in the 2024 General Election in November.

For a full list of Utah’s candidates, click here.

When are the registration and voting deadlines?

Depending on how Utahns register to vote, the deadlines for registration may vary.

Deadlines for registration (and how to register)

Voters in Utah can register online, in person, or by mail.

Online voter registration is available at vote.utah.gov, and it must be completed by Oct. 25, 2024. The deadline for registering by mail is also Oct. 25.

If registering to vote in person, the deadline is Nov. 5, 2024 (meaning you can register on Election Day if you have the proper forms of identification).

Deadlines for voting

Early in-person voting at the Government Center begins Oct. 22, 2024, and ends Nov. 1, 2024. Early in-person voting at satellite locations begins Oct. 29, 2024, and ends Nov. 1, 2024.

If returning a ballot by mail, the ballot must be postmarked by Nov. 4, 2024. Ballots should be sent to voters by Oct. 15, and the last day to request a mail ballot is Oct. 29.

On Election Day — Tuesday, Nov. 5 — Utahns can vote at polling locations from 7 a.m. until 8 p.m.

To find the closest polling location to you, visit votesearch.utah.gov and enter your address.

How do you check registration status in Utah?

If you want to vote but are unsure if you have already registered, you can check your status online at votesearch.utah.gov. To check your registration status, you need to provide your name, date of birth, and address.

That website can also display tracking information for mail ballots or provisional ballots, but not if you voted at a voting machine or in person.

Once you register to vote in Utah, you don’t need to re-register unless your registration status changes.

“If you have moved outside of the state and returned, or your name has changed, or your registration has lapsed by not voting in the last two presidential elections you will need to re-register,” according to the Salt Lake County Clerk’s Office.

Registering on Election Day

Did you know that if you are not yet registered to vote you can do so on Election Day?

“A poll worker will assist you in registering to vote and casting a provisional ballot on an electronic voting machine,” the Salt Lake County Clerk’s Office said.

To register on Election Day, you must bring a valid photo ID and proof of Utah residency to an Election Day vote center during polling hours. To see the full list of approved forms of identification, click here.

Who can vote in Utah?

There are three criteria for voters in the Beehive State.

First, you must be a resident of the United States in order to be eligible to vote in Utah. Second, you must reside in Utah for at least 30 days prior to the next election.

Third, you must be at least 18 years old on or before the general election. If you are 17 years old at the time of the primary election, you may still vote if you are 18 years old on or before the date of the general election.

Source link

Utah

Utah Jazz NBA Draft Preview: 2024

Published

11 hours ago

June 25, 2024

Press Room

The Utah Jazz have an exciting night tomorrow because they have the 10th, 29th, and 32nd pick in the 2024 NBA Draft. the Jazz have been in several rumors regarding the draft. Some rumors suggest the Jazz will trade up for higher than pick number 10. Some rumors suggest the Jazz will package picks 29 and 32 for a higher second pick in the first round. The honest observation at this point is that the Jazz might do just about anything for the draft. Tune in tomorrow night from home or from the Delta Center to find out what the Jazz do in round one! To watch the draft, tune in to ABC or ESPN.

Round One Draft: 6 PM MST, June 26th

Round Two Draft: 2 PM MST, June 27th

Below are projections on who the Jazz could select with their 3 picks. The projections are based on the Jazz’s rumored interest and generally where players are projected to be picked.

10th Pick Projections:

Photo by David Becker/NBAE via Getty Images

Ron Holland

Nikola Topic

Rob Dillingham

Cody Williams

Zach Edey

Dalton Knecht

29th Pick Projections:

Kyshawn George

Ryan Dunn

Baylor Scheierman

AJ Johnson

Justin Edwards

Cam Christie

Tyler smith

Johnny Furphy

Pick 32 Projections:

Picks 29 and 32 are close so these projections mainly overlap.

Harrison Ingram

Kyle Flipowski

Trentyn Flowers

Jonathan Mogbo

Jaylon Tyson

Tyler Kolek

Bronny James

Bobi Klintman

Final Prediction

This projection could be way off because this draft has a lot of parity and the Jazz could very well trade some of their picks. With that said, I predict that the Jazz select Nikola Topic with the 10th pick. For the 29th pick, The Jazz go for Ryan Dunn. For the 32nd pick, I predict that the Jazz select Jaylon Tyson. I think the Jazz will almost make a trade or two tomorrow but don’t quite pull the trigger.

What do you think the Jazz will do tomorrow night? Comment below!

Source link

Utah

4 Utah Jazz rumors to watch before the NBA Draft

Published

19 hours ago

June 25, 2024

Press Room

4 Utah Jazz rumors to watch before the NBA Draft

The Tribune’s Andy Larsen breaks down the latest reports.

(Francisco Kjolseth | The Salt Lake Tribune) Brooklyn Nets forward Mikal Bridges (1) tries to evade the block attempt by Utah Jazz center Walker Kessler (24) during NBA basketball in Salt Lake City Monday, Dec. 18, 2023.

| June 25, 2024, 1:50 p.m.

The NBA Draft starts Wednesday, and the rumor mill is heating up around the Utah Jazz. Here’s the latest news, along with my reaction to the possibilities.

Trading for Mikal Bridges?

Rumor: Yahoo’s Jake Fischer reported that the Jazz are one of the teams interested in trading for Brooklyn wing Mikal Bridges, along with Houston and New York. Bridges is one of “Utah’s most aggressive aspirations,” Fischer wrote.

Reaction: The Nets have repeatedly declined to trade Bridges despite it probably making sense for the franchise to do so. Instead, they’ve been asking for more than three first-round picks in return for the 27-year-old.

Bridges would make the Jazz significantly better; he’s developed himself into a 20-point-per-game scorer while also being a solid defender. He’s the two-way player with size that these most recent playoffs have shown are extremely valuable. (Though we should note here that he was a far better player before the All-Star break than after it last year.)

The problem is that it’s not immediately clear that the Jazz would be a playoff team even with Bridges — he was an eight-win player last season, and the Jazz finished 15 wins short of the No. 10 seed. For an acquisition of Bridges to make sense, Utah would probably need to acquire other good players around him and Lauri Markkanen to get up in that 45-win range required to make the playoffs in the West. Still, it could be an exciting first step.

Trading for Zach LaVine?

Rumor: The Bulls “remain active” on trade negotiations sending out Zach LaVine involving the Jazz and the Philadelphia 76ers, according to NBC Sports Chicago’s K.C. Johnson. However, reporter Marc Stein disagreed with the report, saying he had been “advised to dismiss Utah’s interest.”

Reaction: Johnson’s a quality veteran reporter, but I agree with Stein. While I haven’t heard recent updates, Jazz personnel earlier this year indicated that LaVine wasn’t a logical option in the pre-trade deadline market given the Jazz’s place in the standings, LaVine’s poor record of availability, and especially his high contract that pays him a combined $138 million over the next three years.

Chicago Bulls’ Zach LaVine (8) scores past Toronto Raptors’ Gary Trent Jr. (33) during the first half of an NBA basketball In-Season Tournament game Friday, Nov. 24, 2023, in Toronto. (Frank Gunn/The Canadian Press via AP)

I don’t suspect circumstances have changed enough since to make a LaVine trade make sense now, at least not a trade in which the Jazz are giving up assets. If anything, it might require Chicago to send out assets to push the Jazz to take on LaVine’s deal.

Signing Tobias Harris?

Rumor: The Athletic’s Shams Charania reported that the Jazz and the Detroit Pistons “are expected to be the strongest suitors for Tobias Harris,” who is a free agent this summer after his 5-year, $180 million albatross of a deal ended with the 76ers.

Reaction: The Jazz will likely have about $40 million in cap space this summer. Some of that room the franchise anticipates using on Markkanen’s renegotiation and extension as the Finnish star enters the final year of his current contract.

Boston Celtics’ Al Horford (42) defends against Philadelphia 76ers’ Tobias Harris (12) during the first half of an NBA basketball game Friday, Dec. 1, 2023, in Boston. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer)

Harris is theoretically someone who could help the Jazz. At this point in his career, he’s statistically pretty average across the board — his shooting, rebounding, passing, steals, and block rates are just around the 50th percentile, maybe a bit higher. Even average, though, would make Harris the Jazz’s best wing by a lot.

He turns 32 this summer, so Harris doesn’t make sense for the Jazz’s long-term future, and signing him would also mean fewer minutes for last year’s No. 9 pick, Taylor Hendricks. But if they could get him on a short-term deal for a discount, he could also be a tradable piece in a move later while helping the Jazz improve now.

Looking to move up?

Rumor: Multiple reporters indicated that the Jazz are looking to move up in the draft using the No. 29 pick and the No. 32 pick. First, ESPN’s Jonathan Givony reported Monday morning that the Jazz are looking to trade the two picks for a “pick in the late teens.” Arizona sports radio host John Gambadoro reported that he believed that the Suns had had discussions with the Jazz, sending the No. 22 pick to Utah for No. 29 and No. 32. Fischer, meanwhile, floated the idea of the Jazz acquiring No. 17 from the Lakers in exchange for the two picks.

Reaction: Jazz general manager Justin Zanik acknowledged that the club has reservations about having six first- or second-year players on the roster next season, the logical outcome if the team makes all three selections on Wednesday. So the Jazz consolidating these picks in this fashion follows that line of thinking, especially if they are targeting a player they believe is significantly better than what’s available around the turn of the draft.

My only concern is that, in general, teams trading up in drafts get a little less value than those trading down when you study the issue analytically. The NBA Draft Pick Trade Simulator at nbasense.com is a good tool for looking at this — trading No. 29 and No. 32 for No. 17 is a pretty fair deal, but trading those picks for No. 22 would be analytically a bad idea. That’s especially true in a “flat” draft, where players’ values are considered pretty close throughout the first round.

If the Jazz are going to defy the analytics, they should be really sure that the player they’re acquiring with the higher pick is worth giving up two chances to place bets further down in the draft.

Editor’s note • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.

Source link