Utah Code

Utah Code § 20A-7-207 (2026)

Evaluation by the lieutenant governor

✓ current as of May 2026

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

In relation to the manual initiative process, when the lieutenant governor receives an initiative packet from a county clerk, the lieutenant governor shall record the number of the initiative packet received.

The county clerk shall:

in relation to the manual initiative process:

post the names, voter identification numbers, and dates of signatures described in Subsection 20A-7-105(6)(a)(iii) on the lieutenant governor's website, in a conspicuous location designated by the lieutenant governor:

for an initiative packet received by the county clerk before December 1, for at least 90 calendar days; or

for an initiative packet received by the county clerk on or after December 1, for at least 45 calendar days; and

update on the lieutenant governor's website the number of signatures certified as of the date of the update; or

in relation to the electronic initiative process:

post the names, voter identification numbers, and dates of signatures described in Subsection 20A-7-217(4) on the lieutenant governor's website, in a conspicuous location designated by the lieutenant governor:

for a signature received by the county clerk before December 1, for at least 90 calendar days; or

for a signature received by the county clerk on or after December 1, for at least 45 calendar days; and

update on the lieutenant governor's website the number of signatures certified as of the date of the update.

The lieutenant governor:

shall, except as provided in Subsection (3)(b), declare the initiative petition to be sufficient or insufficient on April 30 before the regular general election described in Subsection 20A-7-201(2)(b); or

may declare the initiative petition to be insufficient before the day described in Subsection (3)(a) if:

in relation to the manual initiative process, the total of all valid signatures on timely and lawfully submitted initiative packets that have been certified by the county clerks, plus the number of signatures on timely and lawfully submitted initiative packets that have not yet been evaluated for certification, is less than the number of names required under Section 20A-7-201;

in relation to the electronic initiative process, the total of all timely and lawfully submitted valid signatures that have been certified by the county clerks, plus the number of timely and lawfully submitted valid signatures received under Subsection 20A-21-201(6)(b) that have not yet been evaluated for certification, is less than the number of names required under Section 20A-7-201; or

a requirement of this part has not been met.

If the total number of names certified under Subsection (3) equals or exceeds the number of names required under Section 20A-7-201, and the requirements of this part are met, the lieutenant governor shall mark upon the front of the initiative petition the word "sufficient."

If the total number of names certified under Subsection (3) does not equal or exceed the number of names required under Section 20A-7-201 or a requirement of this part is not met, the lieutenant governor shall mark upon the front of the initiative petition the word "insufficient."

The lieutenant governor shall immediately notify any one of the sponsors of the lieutenant governor's finding.

After an initiative petition is declared insufficient, a person may not submit additional signatures to qualify the initiative for the ballot.

If the lieutenant governor refuses to declare an initiative petition sufficient that a voter believes is legally sufficient, the voter may, no later than May 15, apply to the appropriate court for an order finding the initiative petition legally sufficient.

If the court determines that the initiative petition is legally sufficient, the lieutenant governor shall mark the petition "sufficient" and consider the declaration of sufficiency effective as of the date on which the initiative petition should have been declared sufficient by the lieutenant governor's office.

If the court determines that the initiative petition is not legally sufficient, the court may enjoin the lieutenant governor and all other officers from certifying or printing the ballot title and numbers of that measure on the official ballot.

An initiative petition determined to be sufficient in accordance with this section is qualified for the ballot.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1994–2025 · leading case: Gallivan v. Walker, 2002 UT 89 (Utah 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Gallivan v. Walker, 2002 UT 89 (Utah 2002). · cites it 14× “Kuziak, and Linda Sue Dickey (collectively, "Gallivan") seek an extraordinary writ from this court requesting the following relief: (1) a declaration that Utah's multi-county signature requirement for placing an initiative on the ballot is unconstitutional, (2) a declaration…”

Gallivan v. Walker, 2002 UT 73 (Utah 2002). · cites it 18× “Utah Code Ann. § 20A-7-207 (2001). ¶ 3 Subsection (2) of the foregoing statute prescribes the acts that are to be undertaken by the lieutenant governor in determining the sufficiency of initiative petitions.”

Utah Safe to Learn-Safe to Worship Coalition, Inc. v. State, 2004 UT 32 (Utah 2004). “§ 20A-7-207. Accordingly, the State argues, the lieutenant governor must look to the law in effect at the time that she makes these separate determinations.”

Count My Vote v. Cox, 2019 UT 60 (Utah 2019). · cites it 2× “§ 20A-7-207(3). ¶103 Before analyzing how the Extra-Month Provision burdens the initiative right, it is important to understand how several of the Initiative Statute’s requirements work together.”

In re Cook, 882 P.2d 656 (Utah 1994). · cites it 2× “After a statutory review of the petitions pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 20A-7-207, the Lieutenant Governor certified Initiative A for inclusion on the ballot for the general election.”

ERDA Cmty. v. Baugh, 2025 UT 56 (Utah 2025). · cites it 2× “” But the sponsors do not seek a writ directing the City Recorder to perform her statutory duty, which is to determine whether the annexation petition met the statutory requirements and to certify or reject the petition accordingly.”

Page v. McKeachnie, 97 P.3d 1290 (Utah 2004). · cites it 2× “Petitioners are sponsors of the Utah Clean Water, Quality Growth and Open Space Initiative, who seek an order from this court declaring the sufficiency of signatures on their initiative petition for two senate districts, and ordering the Lieutenant Governor to place the…”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-207(2) — 2 cases

Gallivan v. Walker, 2002 UT 89 (Utah 2002). “Kuziak, and Linda Sue Dickey (collectively, "Gallivan") seek an extraordinary writ from this court requesting the following relief: (1) a declaration that Utah's multi-county signature requirement for placing an initiative on the ballot is unconstitutional, (2) a declaration…”

Gallivan v. Walker, 2002 UT 73 (Utah 2002). “Utah Code Ann. § 20A-7-207 (2001). ¶ 3 Subsection (2) of the foregoing statute prescribes the acts that are to be undertaken by the lieutenant governor in determining the sufficiency of initiative petitions.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-207(3) — 1 case

Count My Vote v. Cox, 2019 UT 60 (Utah 2019). “§ 20A-7-207(3). ¶103 Before analyzing how the Extra-Month Provision burdens the initiative right, it is important to understand how several of the Initiative Statute’s requirements work together.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-207(4) — 3 cases

ERDA Cmty. v. Baugh, 2025 UT 56 (Utah 2025). “” But the sponsors do not seek a writ directing the City Recorder to perform her statutory duty, which is to determine whether the annexation petition met the statutory requirements and to certify or reject the petition accordingly.”

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.