- [Announcer] PBS Utah presents the Governor's Monthly News Conference, an exchange between Utah reporters and Governor Spencer Cox.

(bright music) - Good morning, everyone.

It's great to see all of you again.

I hope you're enjoying, or maybe surviving the legislative session is a better way to put it.

I'm excited to be with you again.

Before we start taking questions, I just wanted to share a couple things that I think are very important, especially for people in the rural parts of our state.

As governor, I care deeply about all the people in our state regardless of where you live.

We love the people here on the Wasatch Front but also our friends in rural Utah.

Tomorrow I will be speaking with the legislature's Rural Caucus, and I wanted to give you a brief preview of some of our efforts over the past couple years, which are bringing great results to rural Utah.

So we continue to invest in the Water Optimization Program so farmers can make their water go further with better equipment and better technologies.

We're keeping rural county grant funds available to support communities which are working to keep local talent and helping previous residents bring their businesses back to their hometowns, something we're very proud of.

We're continuing to invest in food processing, which expands food security throughout our state.

We're making it easier for companies to grow in rural Utah.

A great example of this is Milford Mining, which has just announced this week that they are expanding, creating 160 new jobs in Beaver County, and investing $20 million into their operations.

We're working to provide more opportunities and pathways to home ownership for all Utahns, including those in rural Utah.

We, we refuse to accept that our children and grandchildren will never be able to afford a home.

We've opened local crisis centers in rural areas so that individuals and families who are struggling can access mental health services when and where they need it most.

We've been doing this on the Wasatch Front, but getting those in rural areas has really been a game-changer.

And we're also advocating funding for homelessness resources to help support communities across our state, not just in Salt Lake City, as we're trying to get to help homeless individuals get treatment and transitional housing.

In addition, we're working hard to make sure that state agencies are responsive in rural areas.

Just a couple examples, over the past couple weeks, the Department of Environmental Quality has been working alongside the new mayor of Apple Valley to solve a serious water issue that they're facing down in the Southern part of the state.

The Governor's Office of Economic Opportunity is highlighting and supporting our rural businesses through the REDTIF's Rural Economic Incentives Program.

The Department of Public Safety used our new search-and-rescue helicopter in Southern Utah to help track and arrest a carjacker in St. George.

And because we believe that government closest to the people serves them best, we've made it a priority to shift state jobs to rural areas.

And we're proud to announce that we now have close to 6,000 jobs for those who live in rural Utah.

That includes 61% of the Utah Department of Ag and Food, 52% of the Department of Natural Resources, 43% of UDOT employees, 36% of corrections employees, 33% of the Department of Workforce Services, and 30% of our public safety employees live and work in rural Utah.

All of this is to say that we care deeply about the rural parts of our state, and we want our entire state to be a place where everyone can thrive.

So we'll continue these efforts because we know that when rural areas succeed, the whole state benefits.

So with that, I'm happy to start taking questions, and I'm sure you have a few.

- Governor.

- Yes.

- You signed H.B.

261, which would ban DEI practices and offices that discriminate on the basis of personal identity characteristics.

Do you have any worries about potential unintended consequences that this bill might have for the state's more vulnerable populations, and what is your vision for what should replace DEI on college campuses particularly?

- Well, thanks Brigham, for the question.

We always worry about unintended consequences of anything that we do.

And I think that the bill sponsors have been very clear on this in interviews that they've done with some of you, in my conversations with them as well, that this is not a done thing or a settled thing.

This is something that we will work very closely with our campuses, higher ed, with our departments, with my agencies and departments, and make sure that as we're implementing this new law that it will work the way it was intended to work.

And so we'll be watching very closely and responding if there are any unintended consequences.

I suspect that there will likely be changes to this bill over the course of the next year.

And again, I'm not just saying that, that was said by the bill sponsors.

When it comes to college campuses, and we've been having these conversations as well, again, it's focusing on race-neutral policies that will help all of our students.

And so, ways that I think that this will work, and again, I wanna thank the legislature for not just doing what's happening in some other states, where it was just defund DEI and we're out, this is really a positive vision of how we help our minority communities and all students that are struggling.

I think you'll see a focus on completion, making sure that all students who are coming in have the tools necessary, the communities necessary, the inclusion necessary, the support necessary to actually graduate.

That's a big deal.

We're worried about our completion rates across the board, but especially with our minority communities.

So that's going to be a focus.

I think you'll see a focus on first-generation college students, that there's no question that first-generation college students tend to struggle more, the data shows that, than those whose parents went to college, you know, who may have more support at home, who understand what it's like to go to college and are maybe better prepared when they get there.

Any type of focus, again, in a race-neutral way is going to really help a disproportionate number of our minority students, because they're more likely to be first-generation college students.

And so that's a positive thing.

So again, I think it's important to see how this is supposed to work.

This isn't saying that we don't care about these communities, it's the exact opposite.

We care deeply, but we wanna do it in a way that benefits everyone.

- But you say that you're looking to see changes to this bill over the next year, does that suggest that you've already seen problems as a result of the bill you signed?

- No, it doesn't.

It doesn't suggest that at all, Ben, and I don't think the people who, again, the bill sponsors would've said that.

It's because it is a change, and we wanna make sure it works the way it was intended to.

Look, there will be 500+ bills that pass this year.

There are every year.

Most of those bills are changes to bills that passed the year before.

This is an art more than a science when it comes to lawmaking.

And so routinely what happens is we pass bills and then realize that there's an unintended consequence, something we missed, something we didn't think through.

And when you start putting it into practice, you realize that there's something that needs to be changed, and so we go back and change them.

So, I would say the same thing about every single other bill that we're passing this session, that there's a real possibility that we'll come back and make changes next year.

- The State Board of Education last night took action against board member Natalie Cline.

You yourself have issued statements calling for her resignation.

What do you make of the board's action and what do you think the House should do now?

- Yeah, so, I support the board's action.

I think it's very illustrative that it wasn't just a board action, but it was a unanimous board action.

That's a board, if you follow any of the board meetings, it's a divided board.

They don't agree on lots of things, which is part of the process, but this is the one thing that they all seem to agree on.

And so I think that was very illustrative.

We've had some conversations with the House and the Senate.

I don't know exactly what they're going to do.

I think we'll find out soon.

So I don't wanna presuppose anything that comes out of what they're going to do possibly later today.

So yeah, it's a fair question.

Look, what I think should be done is I think she should resign, and that's the right thing to do, the best thing to do.

You know, whether she should be impeached or not, what happened yesterday has effectively removed her from any actions of the board.

And so, whether or not she's impeached, it probably is immaterial at this point because that is in effect what has happened.

She's not, you know, she's not participating in the meeting, she's not able to participate on any of the committees, she no longer has authority to even put agenda items on.

Again, that's a decision that was made, so that's effectively what has happened, and so I support that and I think that that's a really positive thing.

- Governor, last week- - Please.

- I ask minority leader Senator Luz Escamilla about the decision of sending our National Guard to the Southern border.

She told me that our state shouldn't focus on federal issues, and she told me that we were sending things, she told me in Spanish, (speaks in Spanish) in a dumb way.

What is your response to this?

- Well, I'm really happy to hear that that the minority party in the state doesn't think we should focus on national issues, because they focus on federal issues all the time.

Look, I didn't hear that from them when we sent troops to the border.

We've sent about 230 troops to the border since 2018.

I didn't hear complaints from them when we did it then, and so I'm not sure why they're complaining about it now.

Look, Texas has asked us for help.

That's what we do.

We share resources as states.

I had an opportunity to go to the border, I've talked about that.

It was incredible to see upfront exactly what's happening.

And we know it's incredibly dangerous.

And the federal government, I wanna be very clear on this, the federal government has absolutely dropped the ball on this.

The federal government is not performing their constitutional duties.

The federal government, the Biden administration and the Congress both are just completely absent from this crisis.

And more and more Americans, including Democrats now, a supermajority of Democrats believe that the border is a problem right now.

That's a vast change over the last couple years.

It is overwhelming all of our systems.

It is completely unsustainable.

I don't care how compassionate you are, and we are, I believe, the most compassionate state in the United States, we cannot sustain 3.2 million interactions with undocumented immigrants last year, over 2 million of those at the Southern border.

There is no order in that.

We know from the data that about 80% of them likely don't qualify for asylum, but it's going to take a year to a year and a half for them to go through the asylum process.

We can't do that, so if the Biden administration is not going to fill their constitutional duty and if Congress is not gonna fulfill their duty, then unfortunately the states are going to have to step up.

- I have a question- - Please.

- Natalie Cline, couple of questions.

So if I'm hearing you right, impeachment is not necessary now because of what the school board did last night?

- Impeachment would be fine, I have no problem with impeachment, but that's effectively what has already happened.

- [Brian] Do you support impeachment?

- I would, but again, it's already effectively happened.

- Okay, what about the lieutenant governor providing money for Natalie Cline's opponent?

Is that appropriate given the lieutenant governor's position as head of Utah elections?

- Well, sure, yeah.

I did it all the time when I was lieutenant governor, and I've done it as governor too.

So yeah, we're independently elected.

We get to raise money, we get to donate to candidates.

Every election, and I really wish that in our reporting we could actually get this right, every election is a county election.

County clerks run elections.

Lieutenant governor does not run elections.

The county clerk runs elections.

The lieutenant governor's office oversees elections.

If there is an issue, they can come to that, the lieutenant governor can recuse herself if there's any type of issue there.

But that's not what this is about, we support good candidates, we've always supported good candidates.

Every lieutenant governor in the history of the state has advocated for good candidates, has campaigned for good candidates, and so I don't have a problem with that at all.

- What do you make of the allegation that her actions and the actions of the school board amount to election interference?

- Well, they're just patently wrong.

- Governor, so what did you think about, what are your thoughts about migrants coming to our state?

Are you concerned about the crisis of immigration here in our state?

We know that there are some migrants that arrive from New York City shelter this week.

They actually told us that the shelter pay for their plane ticket.

Are you aware of this, and is this a concern?

- Yeah, it is a concern.

When you hear governors say that every state is a border state now, this is exactly what we're talking about.

Again, we're the most compassionate country in the world, the most compassionate state in the world, we care deeply about helping people out.

But this system, that's a perfect example of how broken this system is.

Every single city, every single major city in America right now is facing this crisis.

We don't have resources.

Now, we have used those resources historically and just in the past year to help, again, in a very organized way, asylees who are coming from places like Ukraine and Afghanistan.

That's not what is happening here.

What is happening here is cartel members are getting paid money to deliver migrants to the border with a script that they then read to the border patrol agents, a script that forces those border patrol agents to put them into this parolee or asylee program, right?

Whether they qualify or not, right?

And again, we know that 80% of them are not going to qualify for that and should be turned around right there at the border.

I've been in Mexico, I met with the highest level of leaders in Mexico, and they are as concerned about this as we are.

They are concerned that the laws and the president of the United States are not enforcing the laws of the United States, which is making it harder for them as well.

So this is unsustainable and cannot continue.

And yes, I'm deeply concerned that the same thing is happening, they're coming here as well, they're taking up resources that we need for our homeless population, for refugees that are here legitimately, and that it's completely unsustainable.

This isn't the same migration that we used to see 20 years ago, where it was mostly young male Mexican workers who were coming across the border to work on farms and provide migrant labor.

That is not what we are talking about.

We are talking about almost every country on earth, we're talking about 169 people who were detained at the border who were on the terror watch list last year.

That's an incredible number.

And by the way, we know from cartel members who have been captured that most people on the terror watch list pay extra so that they can go different routes and not get detained.

So of the 169 we caught, how many didn't we catch?

Again, you just can't run a country that way.

And so yes, I'm deeply concerned.

It's broken, it's completely broken, it's unsustainable, and it's embarrassing that we have a president and a Congress that aren't willing to do their part to fix it.

Please.

- Natalie Cline's actions came just a few weeks after you signed a bill restricting bathroom access for transgender residents, which some LGBTQ+ advocates have said gives people license to question other people's gender.

So what would you say to the people who think you and your fellow Republican leaders have contributed to an anti-transgender climate in Utah that enables the kind of behavior that Cline expressed?

- Well, I would push back, and what I would say is that we are all personally responsible for our actions.

Natalie Cline is an adult.

This is not the first time that she has done things like this.

And so everybody is responsible for their own actions.

Those types of arguments would dismiss, or argue that we shouldn't hold people like that accountable.

It's important for everyone to understand.

And again, the bill sponsors have been very clear about this, that this is not about vigilantism.

This is not about us judging other people, and we should not be doing that.

And so I'm adamant that we should treat people with dignity and respect, that did not happen in this case.

Even if it were, even if this young person was transgender, it would still have been inappropriate.

That is not who we are or what we should be doing.

Again, this idea that because a bill passed this enables that type of response is just wrong.

And I think you see that with the backlash.

The backlash has been profound, it's been unanimous.

It's people on the right and the left, people who supported that legislation, including the bill sponsor, who has been very outspoken about Natalie Cline's action and that she should resign.

- Governor, what are your thoughts on the new lawsuit that was recently filed against the new Utah State flag?

- I think it's a tremendous waste of resources and very disappointing.

And I feel very confident that that lawsuit, like everything else they've tried so far, will fail as well.

- Governor, back to the Natalie Cline situation for a moment.

You say that she should resign, you say that she's been effectively impeached by the board's actions.

Legislators aren't sure what they want to do, they hope that she resigns or they're hoping that voters take care of the problem at the upcoming election.

There's a non-zero chance that she gets reelected.

What happens in that case?

- Well, I don't know.

That's a hypothetical that I can't answer.

And so, you know, we'll wait and see.

- That's an endorsement of what she did.

- Well, potentially, but I would push back, and you're probably right, Bryan, in this case, but let me just say this, this is one of the problems with, quite frankly, with having an elected school board.

There's a reason that almost every other state in the nation does not have an elected school board.

By the raise of hands, how many of you, sorry, I shouldn't do this, but let me do it anyway.

By the raise of the hands, and I may call on you, so be careful if you raise your hand, how many of you know the name of your elected school board member?

We got one hand that came up in a room, two hands, of really bright people.

Some of you are Googling it right now just in case I call on you, (Brian laughs) so, okay.

By the way, if I were to do this in a room full of legislators, I bet the percentage would be very close, because I've done this before.

I've asked legislators, "Tell me the name of your elected school board member," and they can't do it.

That's a concern I have.

In most every other state, governors appoint the school board, because everyone knows who the governor is and everyone can hold the governor accountable.

If the governor does a terrible job of appointing school board members, they can throw them out.

In our state, I appoint the board members for the Board of Higher Education, right?

I'm held accountable for what that board does, and I should be held accountable for that.

Now, I know that's not gonna change, there's been a lot of talk about that it would take a constitutional change.

But that's the reason why.

You know, my school board elected member lives in Cedar City, which is a three-hour drive from Fairview.

And I guarantee you that no one in Fairview knows that person and has probably never met her.

So, my only point in pointing that out, Bryan, is that these are the types of elections where people vote and usually have no idea who they're voting for or, you know, what that person's stance is.

Now, this is now a much higher profile, right?

Election.

And so there are, you know, there are lots of people, I donated to her opponent as well.

And we'll be working hard to make sure that someone else gets elected there.

T - Those elections were recently made partisan, not that Natalie Cline's actions are, you know, represent the entire party, but do you feel like making these elections partisan has contributed to an environment where this kind of thing could happen?

- I mean, there's, (sighs) thanks for the question, but there's an argument to be made that that's potentially the case, but I don't know that that's true.

Certainly, you know, winning the Republican nomination in a very Republican district, people, again, because no one knows who these people are, they're much more likely to vote for the person with an R by their name.

But at least that gives them some information about the beliefs of the individual, which we didn't even have that before.

So yeah, it could add to it, but I don't know if that's the case.

- Governor, you've signed a couple of resolutions, I believe, or you will, dealing with Major League Baseball and National Hockey League.

And right now, you've said in the past that there is no appetite, you have no appetite to use taxpayer dollars to fund stadiums.

However, there may come a point where taxpayer dollars are necessary to in some capacity.

So what are you willing to do, I guess, to get these stadiums built or lure these teams to Utah even though you say you don't want taxpayer money directly used to build these stadiums?

- Right, so what I've said in the past, well, let me back up.

This is incredibly exciting.

Utahns should be really, really excited about what's happening in those two areas.

There is a very, very good chance that the National Hockey League will be coming to Utah soon, and there is a very good chance that Major League Baseball will be coming to Utah soon.

And this is kind of an outside indication that everything we've been working on for the past decade is working and that Utah's arrow is pointing up, that we are in great shape, that our economy is good, that we are attracting the very best that America has to offer to our state.

And so I just wanna be clear that this is an amazing conversation that we're ha having right now.

Even five or six years ago, I don't know that any of us thought that this could really be happening this soon.

That being said, what I've said in the past is that I'm very uncomfortable the state writing out a check to billionaires, that's not something I feel comfortable with, and I don't think it's something that most people in the state do feel comfortable with.

What I have said, though, is that what we've done in the past, I think, should absolutely be on the table.

And what we've done in the past is tax increment financing, which means that if you're going to build a stadium somewhere, there will be benefits to that community that will attract people, not just people from Utah but people from outside Utah.

It will attract other businesses, it will attract hotels, it will attract restaurants.

And that economic incentive, there is an opportunity for us to use the benefit of that to help incentivize a stadium to be built, right?

So using tax increment is something we've done before and something I've said publicly before that I absolutely support.

I know there's some conversation right now about a TRT, so we have a transient room tax that is applied on hotels.

We have some of the lowest taxes in the United States on hotels.

Most states have higher taxes there.

So the argument is that there's a little bit of room.

Most of those taxes are actually paid by people outside the state of Utah, right?

- [Ben] So you would support a tax increase?

- So that's one area where we're having discussions and negotiation where I'm open to it.

I'm not open to using general fund money, writing a check to subsidize these at all.

That is one area where I think there's some room for negotiation, where, you know, most people from outside the state would be paying this tax.

And again, there has to be a tie, though, where the benefit from these, so we'll have more people staying in hotels because they're coming to watch Major League Baseball, where there's some tie, some nexus, to what we're actually trying to do, and that there's strict guardrails that protect the taxpayers, making sure that we're not getting cut out.

I think those are areas where we're open to negotiation.

- Okay, that is all the time that we have for our television broadcast.

I wanna thank you so much for joining us for the Governor's Monthly News Conference.

- [Announcer] This has been the "Governor's Monthly News Conference."

For video and more information, visit pbsutah.org/governor.

(orchestral music) (orchestral music)