Fiscal note challenged on guns-on-campus bill

Sen. Dean Cameron, R-Rupert, asked the guns-on-campus bill sponsor, Sen. Curt McKenzie, if the fiscal note on his bill is accurate, which says there would be only a “de minimus” cost. “Under Joint Rule 18, we are required to have an accurate fiscal note attached to any piece of legislation,” Cameron said.

McKenzie responded, “It probably is overstated. It says that they would have to change signage at buildings, venues, but since they currently don’t allow that, I don’t know that they would need to change that. If the question relates to training, about changing the training, universities are currently saying we’ll take away your liberty right, but you can trust us to provide security for you. But now they’re saying when we allow a very limited number of citizens to carry firearms, that for some reason now we need training to deal with firearms. I don’t think that is a position that makes sense.”

Cameron asked, “Is it your judgment that our universities and college campuses would not have to do further training and would therefore not ask us for an additional appropriation?” McKenzie said, “They probably will ask us for an additional appropriation,” but he said they shouldn’t have to. “If there was training that was required in order to deal with firearms, it should have already been taking place.”

Cameron then said, “With reluctance, I challenge the fiscal note on the Statement of Purpose under Joint Rule 18. I realize that doesn’t do anything, except state it for the record.”