Utah voters to decide on the state’s first veto referendum in 18 years

By

Ballotpedia staff

Welcome to the Friday, June 27, Brew. 

By: Briana Ryan

Here’s what’s in store for you as you start your day:

  1. Utah voters to decide on the state’s first veto referendum in 18 years
  2. The Crucial Role of Ballotpedia’s Policy Research, by Leslie Graves, Ballotpedia Founder and CEO
  3. Nine new measures have been certified for 2026, none for 2025

Utah voters to decide on the state’s first veto referendum in 18 years, on public sector bargaining

On Nov. 3, 2026, Utah voters will decide whether to uphold or repeal House Bill 267 (HB 267), the first time they will decide on a veto referendum in 18 years. A “yes” vote on the referendum will uphold HB 267, and a “no” vote would repeal it.

The bill would prohibit public sector unions from entering into collective bargaining agreements (CBAs)—contracts between an employer and a labor union regarding employment terms and conditions. Although the law was meant to go into effect on July 1, Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson (R) announced that there would be a stay until voters decide on the referendum.

According to The New York Times’ Orlando Mayorquín, “Federal law protects the collective bargaining rights of workers in the private sector, but determining labor law for public employees is up to the states.”

North Carolina and South Carolina have banned CBAs for all public sector employees. However, seven other states have prohibited CBAs for certain types of public sector employees. For more information on the laws governing CBAs in each state, click here.

To put a referendum on the ballot, a petition must include signatures from 8% of active voters in at least 15 of 29 Utah Senate districts. In this case, that’s 140,748 signatures. 

According to Henderson, 23 state Senate districts crossed the 8% threshold. The campaign opposing HB 267, Protect Utah Workers, submitted 324,410 signatures. Henderson’s office verified 251,590 signatures and rejected 73,136.

Gov. Spencer Cox (R) signed HB 267 on Feb. 14. On Jan. 29, the Utah House of Representatives passed the bill 42-32. On Feb. 6, the state Senate passed it 16-13. Twenty-five Republicans joined all Democrats in voting against the bill.

Protect Utah Workers said the ban on collective bargaining would cause public workers to “lose their most effective tool for advocating workplace improvements.”

Utah Parents United, which supports HB 267, said it “requires transparency in political activity, and stops our tax dollars from funding union business during school hours.”

The measure is the sixth veto referendum Utah voters will decide in the state’s history. All the previous referendum efforts ended with voters repealing the targeted law, making Utah the only state to do so.

In addition to the referendum, Utah voters will decide two constitutional amendments on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot.

Click here for more information on the referendum.

The Crucial Role of Ballotpedia’s Policy Research

Ballotpedia is known for providing neutral, fact-based information on politics and elections. But Ballotpedia also has a thriving policy research and analysis team that applies the same neutral approach to some of the biggest policy discussions in the country today.

How did we get into public policy? Like so much else at Ballotpedia, it began with our work providing readers with unbiased coverage of state and local ballot measures.

What made our coverage of ballot measures unparalleled was that in addition to summaries and official language describing the measures, we also published the arguments supporters and opponents were making to the public.

We should do this. These arguments were — and still are — part of the ongoing and often spirited debates over these issues. We had a responsibility to map out for our readers the arguments on both sides of these measures so they could decide for themselves which made the better case for their position.

But what seemed obvious to us was a revelation to many of our readers. They loved it because we had made it easy for them to get all the pro and con information on ballot measures in one place. No more searching through government websites or hoping they would get a voter guide in the mail. And all of it in language they could understand. (To see just how important this point is, check out our page on ballot measure readability scores.) 

It quickly dawned on us that we could use this same approach to the big policy debates facing federal, state, and local officials.

One thing we knew going in was that we wouldn’t be covering policy like a think tank or a media outlet. Think tanks, lobbyists, professional associations, and the press all advocate for issues in one way or another. They will do their best to be persuasive and compelling, ultimately working to get the public or lawmakers (usually both) to back their point of view.

Like we did with ballot measures, our aim in covering policy has always been to map out the arguments for readers.  

Unlike a trend in some media circles to neglect, or intentionally ignore, one side of a policy debate, judging it as unserious or worse, illegitimate, our readers want to understand all sides of a policy debate. They have told us they enjoy and appreciate the opportunity to think through what’s being said, weigh advocates’ statements against the facts, the history, and the larger context, and make their own decisions.

Take one example: school choice policy. 

Currently, every state has some sort of school choice program. The particulars vary, but the current debate isn’t whether there should be any school choice at all but what manner of choice there should be, who would be eligible to use it, and whether it includes public and private schools, public schools only, homeschoolers, and so on.

One of the major school choice debates underway right now is whether states should include private schools in their choice programs — and how those proposals affect and are viewed among rural residents and their lawmakers.

Ballotpedia’s task is not to shape or sway policy in any way. It’s to give readers a clear, unbiased look at how the debate is playing out in states across the country.

Not everyone agrees with our approach. In an upcoming column, I’ll take a look at some of the negative feedback we’ve received on our policy coverage and how it informs our actions.

Nine new measures have been certified for 2026, none for 2025

As of June 24, the number of certified statewide ballot measures for both 2025 and 2026 is trending above average compared to previous election cycles.

Twenty-seven measures have been certified for the 2025 ballot in Colorado, Louisiana, New York, Ohio, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin. Voters have already decided on six measures, while the other 21 are scheduled for elections on Nov. 4.

Over the past two weeks, no new measures were certified for the 2025 ballot.

Fifty-four measures have been certified for the 2026 ballot in 28 states. Over the past two weeks, nine new measures have been certified in four states:

Signatures were verified for two indirect initiatives in Maine, which would appear on the Nov. 4, 2025 ballot. Since these are indirect citizen initiatives, the Maine Legislature can pass them outright. Otherwise, voters will decide these initiatives.

The next signature deadlines for initiatives intended for the Nov. 4, 2025, ballot are July 2 in Ohio and July 3 in Washington.

Click here for a deep dive into the measures certified for the 2026 ballot. You can also check out certifications for the 2025 ballot here.