Utah Code

Utah Code § 20A-7-202 (2026)

Statewide initiative process -- Initiative application procedures -- Time to gather signatures -- Grounds for rejection

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Individuals wishing to circulate an initiative petition shall file an initiative application with the lieutenant governor.

The initiative application shall include:

the name and residence address of at least five sponsors of the initiative petition;

a statement indicating that each of the sponsors is registered to vote in Utah;

a statement designating a sponsor liaison, including the sponsor liaison's name, residence address, telephone number, and email address;

a statement indicating whether the initiative will be presented to:

the Legislature under Subsection 20A-7-201(1); or

a vote of the people under Subsection 20A-7-201(2);

the signature of each of the sponsors, attested to by a notary public; and

the following, in the following order:

the title of the proposed law that clearly expresses the subject of the law;

except as provided in Subsection (3)(c), a description of the manner in which the proposed law will be funded, including:

all proposed sources of funding for the costs associated with the proposed law, including the proposed percentage of total funding from each source;

if the proposed law will be funded, in whole or in part, by a new tax, a description of the new tax and the tax rate;

if the proposed law will be funded, in whole or in part, by a tax increase, the following statement for each tax increase, "This initiative seeks to increase the current (insert name of tax) rate by (insert the tax percentage difference) percent, resulting in a(n) (insert the tax percentage increase) percent increase in the current tax rate.";

if the proposed law will be funded, in whole or in part, from new revenues, a description of the amount and source of the new revenues; and

if the proposed law will be funded, in whole or in part, from existing revenues, a description of the existing line items or programs that will receive less funding in order to fund the proposed law and the amount by which the funding will be reduced;

a statement indicating whether persons gathering signatures for the initiative petition may be paid for gathering signatures; and

the text of the proposed law.

An individual's status as a resident, under Subsection (2), is determined in accordance with Section 20A-2-105.

The initiative application and the initiative application's contents are public when filed with the lieutenant governor.

If the fiscal impact of the law proposed by an initiative is less than the amount specified by joint legislative rule for designating a bill as a fiscal note bill:

the initiative application is not required to include the description described in Subsection (2)(f)(ii); and

the lieutenant governor may not reject the initiative application or initiative application addendum under Subsection (5)(c).

If the initiative petition fails to qualify for the ballot of the election described in Subsection 20A-7-201(2)(b), the sponsors shall:

submit a new initiative application;

obtain new signature sheets; and

collect signatures again.

The lieutenant governor shall reject an initiative application or an initiative application addendum filed under Subsection 20A-7-204.1(5) and not issue signature sheets if:

the proposed law:

is unconstitutional;

is nonsensical;

could not become law if passed;

contains more than one subject as evaluated in accordance with Subsection (6); or

is identical or substantially similar to a law proposed by an initiative for which signatures were submitted to the county clerks and lieutenant governor for certification within two years preceding the date on which the initiative application for the new initiative is filed;

the subject of the proposed law is not clearly expressed in the law's title; or

except as provided in Subsection (3)(c), the lieutenant governor determines, after consultation with the Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst, that the funding description, described in Subsection (2)(f)(ii):

does not comply with the requirements of Subsection (2)(f)(ii); or

is unlikely to provide adequate funding for the proposed law.

To evaluate whether the proposed law contains more than one subject under Subsection (5)(a)(iv), the lieutenant governor shall apply the same standard provided in Utah Constitution, Article VI, Section 22, which prohibits a bill from passing that contains more than one subject.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case: Utah Safe to Learn-Safe to Worship Coalition, Inc. v. State, 2004 UT 32 (Utah 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Utah Safe to Learn-Safe to Worship Coalition, Inc. v. State, 2004 UT 32 (Utah 2004). · cites it 9× “Utah Code Ann. § 20A-7-202(4) (1998). Safe Havens contends that this new requirement has no legitimate legislative purpose, but was passed simply to make it more difficult to place initiatives on the ballot.”

Count My Vote v. Cox, 2019 UT 60 (Utah 2019). · cites it 2× “UTAH CODE §§ 20A-7-202, 20A-7-205.5, 20A-11-802(1).”

Cook v. Bell, 2014 UT 46 (Utah 2014). · cites it 2× “UTAH CODE §§ 20A-7-202(4)(a), 20A-7-506(1) (2010). The 2011 amendments standardized these diverse timetables, requiring both statewide and local initiative sponsors to gather the required number of signatures by the sooner of (a) 316 days after filing an application or (b) the…”

Salt Lake on Track v. Salt Lake City, 939 P.2d 680 (Utah 1997). · cites it 2× “Cf Utah Code Ann. § 20A-7-202(5) (codifying statute passed after decisions in White and Keigley , and granting lieutenant governor power to reject initiative petition if proposed law is unconstitutional, is nonsensical, or could not become law if passed).”

Phillips v. Henderson, 2024 UT 19 (Utah 2024). · cites it 3× “” UTAH CODE § 20A-7-202(1), (5)(a). ¶15 The Sponsors’ complaint sought a declaration that “[t]he Lieutenant Governor wrongfully rejected [their initiative application] on the basis that the proposed legislation was unconstitutional.”

Utahns for Ethical Gov't v. Barton, 778 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (D. Utah 2011). · cites it 8× “16 Their interpretation of section 20A-7-202(4), however, is disputed by Defendants.”

Maxfield v. Cox, 2025 UT 44 (Utah 2025). · cites it 6× “” 2 ¶2 The Lieutenant Governor determined that the applications failed to comply with former subsection 20A-7-202(2)(e)(iii) of the Utah Code (Mar.”

Utahns for Ethical Gov't v. Clerks of All Counties in the State, 291 P.3d 235 (Utah 2012). · cites it 2× “€ 35 UEG's claim that it had a full year to gather signatures under section 20A-7-202(4)(a) (2010) is equally unavailing.”

Maxfield v. Herbert (D. Utah 2021). “§ 20A-7-202(2)(b)(i), amended by H.B. 211, 1244-45 (2021).”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(1) — 2 cases

Count My Vote v. Cox, 2019 UT 60 (Utah 2019). “UTAH CODE §§ 20A-7-202, 20A-7-205.5, 20A-11-802(1).”

Phillips v. Henderson, 2024 UT 19 (Utah 2024). “” UTAH CODE § 20A-7-202(1), (5)(a). ¶15 The Sponsors’ complaint sought a declaration that “[t]he Lieutenant Governor wrongfully rejected [their initiative application] on the basis that the proposed legislation was unconstitutional.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(2)(b)(i) — 2 cases

Maxfield v. Herbert (D. Utah 2021). “§ 20A-7-202(2)(b)(i), amended by H.B. 211, 1244-45 (2021).”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(2)(e)(iii) — 1 case

Maxfield v. Cox, 2025 UT 44 (Utah 2025). “” 2 ¶2 The Lieutenant Governor determined that the applications failed to comply with former subsection 20A-7-202(2)(e)(iii) of the Utah Code (Mar.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(2)(e)(iv) — 1 case

Maxfield v. Cox, 2025 UT 44 (Utah 2025). “” 2 ¶2 The Lieutenant Governor determined that the applications failed to comply with former subsection 20A-7-202(2)(e)(iii) of the Utah Code (Mar.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(4) — 2 cases

Utah Safe to Learn-Safe to Worship Coalition, Inc. v. State, 2004 UT 32 (Utah 2004). “Utah Code Ann. § 20A-7-202(4) (1998). Safe Havens contends that this new requirement has no legitimate legislative purpose, but was passed simply to make it more difficult to place initiatives on the ballot.”

Utahns for Ethical Gov't v. Barton, 778 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (D. Utah 2011). “16 Their interpretation of section 20A-7-202(4), however, is disputed by Defendants.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(4)(a) — 3 cases

Cook v. Bell, 2014 UT 46 (Utah 2014). “UTAH CODE §§ 20A-7-202(4)(a), 20A-7-506(1) (2010). The 2011 amendments standardized these diverse timetables, requiring both statewide and local initiative sponsors to gather the required number of signatures by the sooner of (a) 316 days after filing an application or (b) the…”

Utahns for Ethical Gov't v. Clerks of All Counties in the State, 291 P.3d 235 (Utah 2012). “€ 35 UEG's claim that it had a full year to gather signatures under section 20A-7-202(4)(a) (2010) is equally unavailing.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(5) — 4 cases

Salt Lake on Track v. Salt Lake City, 939 P.2d 680 (Utah 1997). “Cf Utah Code Ann. § 20A-7-202(5) (codifying statute passed after decisions in White and Keigley , and granting lieutenant governor power to reject initiative petition if proposed law is unconstitutional, is nonsensical, or could not become law if passed).”

Maxfield v. Cox, 2025 UT 44 (Utah 2025). “” 2 ¶2 The Lieutenant Governor determined that the applications failed to comply with former subsection 20A-7-202(2)(e)(iii) of the Utah Code (Mar.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(5)(d) — 1 case

— Utah Code § 20A-7-202(a) — 1 case

Utahns for Ethical Gov't v. Barton, 778 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (D. Utah 2011). “16 Their interpretation of section 20A-7-202(4), however, is disputed by Defendants.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.