Governor Kevin Stitt today signed nine bills into law while simultaneously vetoing four others, marking a significant day for legislative action in Oklahoma. The signed bills cover a range of issues from election administration and public safety to education and business regulations.
The newly enacted legislation includes:
• SB 335: Prohibits certain incentivization practices by retail electric suppliers.
• SB 462: Authorizes retired municipal police officers to retain their firearms and badges.
• SB 599: Modifies the scope of punishment for lewd or indecent acts committed against a child.
• SB 638: Amends definitions within the Unfair Sales Act and establishes penalties for retailers violating the act when selling motor fuel.
• SB 652: Modifies permissible dates for certain elections and authorizes special elections on specific dates.
• HB 1075: Extends certain provisions to administrators, requires specific recommendations to the State Board of Education, and provides for expungement related to teachers.
• HB 1096: Modifies goals for certain school programs, adjusts eligibility for higher education programs, and incorporates references to the Classic Learning Test.
• HB 1865: Directs ballots to be printed in advance, sets voting hours, clarifies applicability to county election boards, mandates voters appear at assigned polling places, and prohibits voting centers.
• SB 1027: Establishes requirements for the gist of initiative and referendum propositions, outlines signature collection requirements, and mandates certain disclosures.
In contrast, Governor Stitt exercised his veto power on four distinct bills. He offered specific reasoning for vetoing SB 799, which pertained to electronic communication between students and school personnel:
• SB 799: 'This is ripe for abuse. It gives bad actors wide breadth to take advantage of vulnerable youths and adolescents,' Governor Stitt stated in his veto message. He expressed concern that the bill 'lets schools replace parents with 'alternate adults' when the parent doesn’t object to a mailed letter fast enough. That’s not due process, that’s displacement.' Stitt further noted that the bill 'defines these alternates broadly, including case managers or employees from shelters or agencies, giving them authority meant for parents. It doesn’t go far enough in ensuring that effort is made to find student’s parents or guardians. It’s an erosion of parental rights. Helping vulnerable and homeless students is important, but sidelining families is not the answer.'
Regarding his veto of SB 1083, concerning digital assets and kiosks, Governor Stitt stated:
• SB 1083: 'This legislation more closely aligns with the regulatory state in California and New York than a free market state like Oklahoma. Not only that, it creates yet another license. Cryptocurrency ATMs should be regulated in the same manner as regular ATMs – a simple registration form and fee.'
For his veto of HB 1138, which sought to modify the duties of the Human Capital Management Division and the Civil Service Division of the Office of Management and Enterprise Services, Governor Stitt explained: • HB 1138: 'We want to hold bad actors accountable. This bill makes it harder to do that. I want every public servant to be an at will employee to ensure that our state is a meritocracy. This bill goes back on the progress we’ve made on rooting out protectionist policies and harkens back to the days when unions ran state government.'
Finally, Governor Stitt issued a line-item veto for HB 2235, which aimed to increase compensation for individuals wrongfully convicted and incarcerated. While supporting the bill's core intent, his veto message specified issues with particular appropriations:
• HB 2235: 'I support the intent of House Bill 2235— increasing the compensation available for individuals who have been incarcerated due to wrongful conviction,' Governor Stitt affirmed. However, he clarified that the bill was subject to his line-item veto authority because it 'makes appropriations of money embracing distinct items, sets apart a specific portion of money to be applied to an expenditure, purchase, or expense for a specified purpose, and materially alters the conditions of funds previously specified for expenditure.' Specifically, he cited concerns with Section 2, which would provide health coverage to claimants as if they were Department of Corrections employees, and Section 4, which would waive tuition and fees at Oklahoma colleges for claimants and their children at the state's expense. Stitt concluded, 'I believe the other provisions in House Bill 2235 are adequate, at this time, to compensate wrongfully convicted individuals; adding legislatively appropriated free health insurance and college is unnecessary.'
