Utah Code

Utah Code § 20A-7-607 (2026)

Evaluation by the local clerk -- Determination of election for vote on referendum

✓ 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 referendum process, when the local clerk receives a referendum packet from a county clerk, the local clerk shall record the number of the referendum packet received.

The county clerk shall:

in relation to the manual referendum 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 at least 45 calendar days; and

update on the local clerk's website the number of signatures certified as of the date of the update; or

in relation to the electronic referendum process:

post the names, voter identification numbers, and dates of signatures described in Subsection 20A-7-616(3) on the lieutenant governor's website, in a conspicuous location designated by the lieutenant governor, 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 local clerk:

shall, except as provided in Subsection (3)(b), declare the referendum petition to be sufficient or insufficient:

in relation to the manual referendum process, no later than 111 calendar days after the day of the deadline, described in Subsection 20A-7-105(5)(a)(iv), to submit a referendum packet to the county clerk; or

in relation to the electronic referendum process, no later than 111 calendar days after the day of the deadline, described in Subsection 20A-7-616(2), to collect a signature; or

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

in relation to the manual referendum process, the total of all valid signatures on timely and lawfully submitted referendum packets that have been certified by the county clerk, plus the number of signatures on timely and lawfully submitted referendum packets that have not yet been evaluated for certification, is less than the number of names required under Section 20A-7-601;

in relation to the electronic referendum 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-7-601; 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-7-601, and the requirements of this part are met, the local clerk shall mark upon the front of the referendum 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-7-601 or a requirement of this part is not met, the local clerk shall mark upon the front of the referendum petition the word "insufficient."

The local clerk shall immediately notify any one of the sponsors of the local clerk's finding.

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

If the local clerk refuses to declare a referendum petition sufficient, any voter may, no later than 10 days after the day on which the local clerk declares the referendum petition insufficient, apply to the appropriate court for an order finding the referendum petition legally sufficient.

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

If the court determines that a referendum petition filed is not legally sufficient, the court may enjoin the local clerk and all other officers from:

certifying or printing the ballot title and numbers of that referendum on the official ballot for the next election; or

as it relates to a local tax law that is conducted entirely by mail, certifying, printing, or mailing the ballot title and numbers of that referendum under Section 20A-7-609.5.

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

Except as provided in Subsection (7)(b) or (c), if a referendum relates to legislative action taken after April 15, the election officer may not place the referendum on an election ballot until a primary election, a general election, or a special election the following year.

The election officer may place a referendum described in Subsection (7)(a) on the ballot for a special, primary, or general election held during the year that the legislative action was taken if the following agree, in writing, on a timeline to place the referendum on that ballot:

the local clerk;

the county clerk; and

the attorney for the county or municipality that took the legislative action.

For a referendum on a land use law, if, before August 30, the local clerk or a court determines that the total number of certified names equals or exceeds the number of signatures required in Section 20A-7-601, the election officer shall place the referendum on the election ballot for:

the next general election; or

another election, if the following agree, in writing, on a timeline to place the referendum on that ballot:

the affected owners, as defined in Section 10-20-102 or 17-79-102, as applicable;

the local clerk;

the county clerk; and

the attorney for the county or municipality that took the legislative action.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 13 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1998–2025 · leading case: Anderson v. Provo City, 2016 UT 50 (Utah 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Anderson v. Provo City, 2016 UT 50 (Utah 2016). · cites it 14× “” Petitioners ask this court to “acknowledge as a matter of law that the rejection of the [Referendum] Petition meets the requirements of urgency [under rule 19(b)(4)], and that no other plain and speedy remedy exists but to file a Petition for Writ with the state’s high court.”

Krejci v. City of Saratoga Springs, 322 P.3d 662 (Utah 2013). · cites it 8× “It first contends that this case falls outside the domain of the statute invoked by petitioners, Utah Code section 20A-7-607. And alternatively, it claims that petitioners lost any authority they may have had to petition for an extraordinary writ by failing to intervene in the…”

Low v. City of Monticello, 2002 UT 90 (Utah 2002). · cites it 10× “See Utah Code Ann. §§ 20A-7-607 to -608; see also Keigley v.”

Croft v. Morgan Cnty., 2021 UT 46 (Utah 2021). · cites it 3× “8 prescribes procedures specific to a referendum application for a local land use law, Utah Code section 20A-7-607 regulates the acceptance or rejection of the actual, circulated referendum, with signatures.”

Citizens for Responsible Transp. v. Draper City, 2008 UT 43 (Utah 2008). · cites it 2× “Therefore, citizens of the State of Utah may refer acts by the Legislature, and citizens of a city or county may refer legislative acts by their city council or county commission. If a petition for referendum is properly presented to public officials, those officials are…”

Tobias v. South Jordan City Recorder, 972 P.2d 373 (Utah 1998). · cites it 2× “§ 20A-7-607. Petitioners contend that it is only the application, not the referendum petition, which must be filed within thirty-five days after the passage of the ordinance.”

Mouty v. Sandy City Recorder, 2005 UT 41 (Utah 2005). “§ 20A-7-607(4)(a) (2003) (“If the local clerk refuses to accept and file any referendum petition, any voter may apply to the Supreme Court for an extraordinary writ to compel him to do so.”

Mawhinney v. City of Draper, 2014 UT 54 (Utah 2014). · cites it 2× “" Petitioners filed in this court a petition for writ of extraordinary relief, pursuant to Utah Code section 20A-7-607(4)(a), and a motion for emergency relief, pursuant to rule 28C of the Utah Rules of Appellate Procedure.”

Anderson v. Orem City, 2016 UT 50 (Utah 2016). · cites it 11× “” Petitioners ask this court to “acknowledge as a matter of law that the rejection of the [Referendum] Petition meets the requirements of urgency [under rule 19(b)(4)], and that no other plain and speedy remedy exists but to file a Petition for Writ with the state’s high court.”

Smith v. Return Dev., 2021 UT 10 (Utah 2021). · cites it 2× “§ 20A-7-607(2)(b) (incorporating the requirements of section 20A-7-601); id.”

Haney v. Tooele Cnty., 2025 UT 30 (Utah 2025). · cites it 2× “See UTAH CODE § 20A-7-607(2)(c) (2020) (instructing local clerk on when to mark a referendum packet “insufficient”).”

Burr v. City of Orem, 2013 UT 57 (Utah 2013). · cites it 2× “Petitioners acquired the required number of signatures for the Referendum Petition, and on October 18, 2012, the City Recorder declared the Referendum Petition to be sufficient to go to a vote pursuant to Utah Code section 20A-7-607(2)(b). On November 2, 2012, the City Attorney…”

Show all 13 citing cases →

— Utah Code § 20A-7-607(2)(b) — 2 cases

Burr v. City of Orem, 2013 UT 57 (Utah 2013). “Petitioners acquired the required number of signatures for the Referendum Petition, and on October 18, 2012, the City Recorder declared the Referendum Petition to be sufficient to go to a vote pursuant to Utah Code section 20A-7-607(2)(b). On November 2, 2012, the City Attorney…”

Smith v. Return Dev., 2021 UT 10 (Utah 2021). “§ 20A-7-607(2)(b) (incorporating the requirements of section 20A-7-601); id.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-607(2)(c) — 1 case

Haney v. Tooele Cnty., 2025 UT 30 (Utah 2025). “See UTAH CODE § 20A-7-607(2)(c) (2020) (instructing local clerk on when to mark a referendum packet “insufficient”).”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-607(4) — 3 cases

Anderson v. Provo City, 2016 UT 50 (Utah 2016). “” Petitioners ask this court to “acknowledge as a matter of law that the rejection of the [Referendum] Petition meets the requirements of urgency [under rule 19(b)(4)], and that no other plain and speedy remedy exists but to file a Petition for Writ with the state’s high court.”

Smith v. Return Dev., 2021 UT 10 (Utah 2021). “§ 20A-7-607(2)(b) (incorporating the requirements of section 20A-7-601); id.”

Anderson v. Orem City, 2016 UT 50 (Utah 2016). “” Petitioners ask this court to “acknowledge as a matter of law that the rejection of the [Referendum] Petition meets the requirements of urgency [under rule 19(b)(4)], and that no other plain and speedy remedy exists but to file a Petition for Writ with the state’s high court.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-607(4)(a) — 8 cases

Low v. City of Monticello, 2002 UT 90 (Utah 2002). “See Utah Code Ann. §§ 20A-7-607 to -608; see also Keigley v.”

Krejci v. City of Saratoga Springs, 322 P.3d 662 (Utah 2013). “It first contends that this case falls outside the domain of the statute invoked by petitioners, Utah Code section 20A-7-607. And alternatively, it claims that petitioners lost any authority they may have had to petition for an extraordinary writ by failing to intervene in the…”

Croft v. Morgan Cnty., 2021 UT 46 (Utah 2021). “8 prescribes procedures specific to a referendum application for a local land use law, Utah Code section 20A-7-607 regulates the acceptance or rejection of the actual, circulated referendum, with signatures.”

— Utah Code § 20A-7-607(4)(b) — 2 cases

— Utah Code § 20A-7-607(5)(a) — 1 case

League of Women Voters v. Utah State Legislature, 2024 UT 40 (Utah 2024).

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.