2026 Candidate Questionnaire

I decided to run for senate after years of watching our legislature use deceptive and unethical tactics to seize power for themselves, mostly in their fight against Proposition 4. My opponent has been at the forefront of many of these maneuvers. I seek to bring transparency, civility, integrity, and fairness back into our state government. Our current system incentivizes extremism and polarization. I want to fix those incentives so that they pull us toward consensus and fairness.

My obligation is to listen and consider their perspectives. I can't make everyone happy all of the time, but I can make the law as fair as possible for everyone. Once elected, I am everyone's senator, not just those that voted for me. The American ideal is for voters and candidates to move forward as constituents and elected leaders after an election is through, and put election differences behind us. I believe in this ideal. I support the peaceful transition of power. I admire the tradition of calling one's opponent to congratulate them, and encouraging supporters to now support their newly elected leader.

One simple example is school vouchers. I was once an ardent supporter of school choice and vouchers to create an education marketplace that allowed market driven innovation to spur progress in the education system. I have since talked with educators and public school advocates, and have come to understand and appreciate their concerns. I have since softened my stance to support vouchers more narrowly as a need-based opportunity. I have now moved my efforts more toward finding ways to strengthen the quality of public education, while leaving vouchers intact for those whose circumstances may require it, but cannot afford private school.

I would first work directly with my party or my allies to address the issues that were contrary to my constituents' interests. If they are indeed my allies, I assume our relationship would permit us to come to an accord. If that were unsuccessful, though, and it came to a vote, I would vote against any measure that was contrary to my beliefs or the interests of my constituents.

Elected officials have numerous communication channels open to them. I respond to emails and constituent questions as soon and as well as possible, and make every effort to address their needs. If I am unable to keep up with mass communication about some issue, I would make myself available at a public gathering where I could address questions and concerns all at once.

Government works best when decisions are made at the lowest level of government that can effectively manage the issue. Local leaders are more directly accountable and have a better handle on local considerations. States law provides legal consistency between cities and counties, ensures that basic individual rights are upheld, controls statewide infrastructure, and ensure that local governments are being fiscally responsible. They basically provide the baseline rules that cities should follow in order to function and keep cities from going off the rails. But there is a presumption of local control.

In recent years, the state has gotten very controlling over land use, because they see it as their responsibility to compel cities to offer more affordable housing options. I understand this impulse, since many of these politicians made campaign promises to fix the housing affordability crisis. I myself am eager to find solutions. But land use is ultimately a city issue, and the state needs to be cautious about overreach.

The state could probably do more to set baseline rules about city finances, such as providing standards for transparency, reporting, and accountability.

I will fight for public education, fight for an affordable life for all families, and fight against the growing wealth and power gap. I want to see $1 billion in additional public education funding, housing cost 30% or less of a family’s income, universal childcare and pre-K, and campaign finance limits that keep the wealthy from funding our government.

I will always be open to their concerns and grievances, and I hope that I can provide answers to assuage their concerns. I have an obligation to always clearly justify my voting choices and how they benefit my constituency.

Earlier in my life, I was skeptical of many claims of racism throughout the country, but I have since seen the numbers in income and wealth disparity, as well as police brutality, and ai can see more clearly the evidence of racism. I’m much more open to hearing the experience of people of color than I used to be.

Constituents and state first. I am not beholden or accountable to the Democratic Party—I am accountable to the district that voted for me.

I will continually read from reliable news sources that provide multiple perspectives, and I will respond to emails quickly. I have always valued that in my current job, and I will value that as a legislator.

I personally prefer more local control. This gives people greater, closer access to their elected officials. However, that must be paired with a push for wealth equality and campaign finance reform. Local elections can be more easily overrun by wealthy interests and fear-mongering.

I would like to see the state exercise less control (more funding, but less control) over public education. We have a state school board and many local school boards elected to make rules governing public education. We don’t need the state to step in and keep us drowning in new rules.

Justice & Accountability - Justice needs to be delivered and public officials must be held accountable. The lack thereof is causing too much mistrust in our government and or in our justice system and we need to restore that.

Term Limits - Public office should be limited to a maximum of two terms. After which, they must run for a different office or leave public office. This should allow them to experience the effect of the laws legislated and or grow instead of being stagnant. Age of retirement must be enforced not a choice in public office.

Religious Over-reach - Utah is no longer a religious metropolis, the laws and the enforcement of laws should be for the benefit of both religious and non religious citizens not in favor of religion.

Taxation - Ages 17 and below, and 80 and above should be free of any tax obligations on their active employment income. Before the age of 18, a minor should not be obligated to pay tax, and past the age of retirement, 80 years of age should be enjoying retirement not obligated to work for a living, this is a failure in the system. Property tax laws should also exempt 80 years and above from having to pay property tax especially if they are still actively working, granted that they are the only occupant of their property other then 1 medical personnel.

Housing Market - Any public official who holds interest or stock in the housing market or any market in relation to housing (HOA, Construction etc), is a conflict of interest and must be removed from office.

Summer Fires - We've dealt with this concern year after year yet nothing is in place to prepare for these fires. This year alone 2026 proved how ill prepared the state has been and it is unacceptable.

Candidates has an obligation to EVERY citizen of the area they serve. Labels should not define our level of service and performance. If how a candidate acts is dependent on which party they belong to, religion they affiliate with or the amount of people they agree or disagree with, then they should not be in office. The only side a candidate should be picking, is the side of the people. If they have opposition, it is their duty to figure out why there is an opposition and how to better serve those constituents.

That the executive branch of government loves to abuse their power, the judicial branch of government is broken and the legislative branch of government no longer represents the people. That comes from personal experience having been in law enforcement and watching the justice system protect and serve criminals while attacking the victim; Having run for legislative branch of office and learning that they serve businesses and their own best interests lacking the ability to sacrifice and or compromise for the welfare of the citizens, and being involved with the executive branch of government to know the abuse of power that makes them consider themselves above the law.

Screw the party. We are elected by the people to represent the best interest of the people. If we as candidates are to represent the party, then we have failed the people and it is why our government system fails. We have lost track of the value of the government (its people) and have become blindly obedient, worshiping and idolizing party agenda.

Become part of the community I am (you as a candidate is) serving. The biggest difference between myself and other candidates, is that my information comes from first hand experience not hearsay and misinformation. If there is a concern about Data Centers, I find employment at a data center. If there is a concern about corruption in healthcare, I find employment in the healthcare sector. Don't just go off of what others say, find the answer for yourself so that the decision you make is based on facts and not Chinese whispers.

I had to learn every aspects of the U.S government to become a citizen of this great nation. A lot of information to which I am certain that not even Americans holding office, is aware of. I have served in the U.S military, learning about the conflict of our nation and what it takes to engage in those conflicts. I have served as a Law Enforcement officer and not only understand how laws ought to be enforced, but have seen the many ways it can and is being manipulated by government officials to restrict justice and accountability.

State Government should have zero interference in city level affairs other then if and when the city needs assistance, and if it needs anything at all that it can't handle on its own, then it will ask it off the cities not demand it. More or less, state government acts as a consolidation of resource and power; a governing city that has no city; the middle man, an estate manager. If its role was to run local level affairs, then there wouldn't be a need for local level government.

It should not operate outside the laws the cities allows it to operate. If there are laws that needs to be put in place, the state puts it in place. If there are laws that needs to be enforced, the state provides the resources to get those laws enforced.

We have had it backwards for way too long and that is why the government is failing. The state government works for the city governments best interest for the general welfare of the citizens of the state; just as the city governments should be working for the people for the communities for the best interest of its tax payers. Not the other way around where the people fund the city so that the city funds the state to do whatever they want.

My top issue that leads me to run for office is the extreme party lines that have been drawn that most politicians seem happy to color within. Our interests are not being represented accurately and certainly our values are not being considered.

My obligations towards those who opposed me are to win them over, to demonstrate that politicians have the ability and obligation to work for the good of all, regardless of party. Ultimately we all have the same goals: the equal pursuit of happiness, peace and quality of life

I have really come to see the need for more public social funding. Now knowing what I do about mental illness and the cycle, perpetuated by our systems, of homelessness, jail, state hospital I see how we need to help the least among us with better support and creative solutions that will encourage the unhoused mentally-ill to opt in to their own treatment

I would verify with my constituents what they indeed believe to be the best for them and then I would try my best to carry out their wishes after researching pros and cons of said action

I would hold quarterly in-person meetings for feedback, advice and transparency and then report on what's going on via newsletter

I believe that the Utah State Board of Education should exercise more authority in regards to the current defunding and abuse of public education funds. I would want to see the state government do a better job of preserving our state's quality of life in regards to water usage, public lands, etc. I support municipalities find a common page in order to provide more affordable housing due to standardization and less red tape

I am running because I believe working families deserve a stronger voice in state government. I have worked in construction my entire adult life and currently work in municipal government. I have seen how decisions made at the state level affect people's ability to afford housing, healthcare, education, utilities, and the basic necessities of life. I believe government should work for ordinary people, not primarily for those with the most money or political influence. I want to make Utah more affordable, protect our water and environment, strengthen public education, support working people, and expand access to affordable healthcare. I am running because I believe my experience as a working person, community volunteer, and nonprofit leader gives me a perspective that is often missing from the Legislature.

I would have exactly the same obligation to constituents who opposed me as I would to those who supported me: to listen to them, represent them fairly, and take their concerns seriously. Winning an election does not give an elected official ownership of a district. It gives them a responsibility to serve the entire community. People who disagree with me are not opponents after Election Day; they are constituents. I would not expect everyone to agree with my progressive values. I would expect, however, that we can disagree honestly and respectfully. I would make myself available to people across the political spectrum and consider their experiences when making decisions. Representing people fairly does not always mean agreeing with them. It means giving them a genuine opportunity to be heard and being accountable for the decisions I make.

My experience working in non-profit, construction, and municipal government has changed how I think about the relationship between policy and implementation. Earlier in my life, I was more likely to look at a policy primarily in terms of whether its goal was worthwhile. Working directly with projects, regulations, contractors, local government, and residents taught me that good intentions are not enough. A policy also has to work in the real world. I have become much more attentive to the practical consequences of government decisions and to the people responsible for implementing them. I am more willing to listen to workers and local officials who may see problems that are not apparent from a legislative office. That experience has made me less interested in ideological purity and more interested in whether a policy actually improves people's lives while accomplishing its intended purpose.

I would disagree with them. I am running as a Democrat because I believe in the Democratic values I have described to voters, but my first responsibility as a legislator would be to the people of my district. If I believed a proposal was harmful to my constituents, I would examine the evidence, listen to the arguments on both sides, talk with people affected by the proposal, and explain my concerns to my colleagues. If I remained convinced that the proposal was contrary to the interests of my constituents, I would vote accordingly. Being part of a political party should provide an opportunity to work with people who share broad values. It should not require surrendering independent judgment. I would rather have an honest disagreement with my own party than knowingly support something I believed would harm the people I represent.

I believe representation should be a year-round responsibility, not something that begins when the next campaign starts. My campaign has emphasized face-to-face conversations because I believe there is no substitute for listening directly to people. As a legislator, I would continue that approach through community meetings, town halls, neighborhood events, constituent communication, and regular opportunities for people to speak with me. I would also actively seek input from workers, educators, local government officials, small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and community groups. I would make an effort to hear from people who normally do not have access to elected officials or lobbyists. I also believe responsiveness means reporting back to constituents—explaining what I am doing, what I have learned, and why I made a particular decision.

I believe government should make decisions as close to the people as practical, while recognizing that some problems require statewide action. Cities and counties are often better positioned to make decisions about local services, development, transportation, zoning, and other issues because they understand their communities and their particular circumstances. The state should be cautious about overriding legitimate local decisions simply because state officials prefer a different approach. At the same time, some issues cannot be effectively handled one community at a time. Water resources, environmental protection, major infrastructure, public education, civil rights, and issues that cross city and county boundaries can require statewide standards and coordination. The state should establish appropriate statewide protections and provide resources where necessary, while allowing local governments room to solve local problems.

I'm running because fear has spread through our community, and our leaders haven't stepped up for the people of Orem and Provo. Residents showed up to protests and public meetings to plead with officials, yet our former mayor and the sheriff signed cooperation agreements with ICE anyway. The Legislature has done little to acknowledge or ease that fear. Friends and family now carry their passports everywhere, and since January I haven't gone to my local Home Depot, or other places where ICE has been seen, alone. If there was ever a time to step up, it's now.

I'd start by acknowledging that fear, protecting residents' rights, and supporting legal help for our neighbors. I also want to make life more affordable, take big money out of politics, and put power back in voters' hands. These are things I've heard personally throughout this campaign. It all comes down to whether leaders listen to the people they serve.

The same obligations I have to the people who supported me. I'm not running to represent my own ideas, or only the people who voted for me. I'm running to represent all of House District 61. Democracy works best when more people take part, and working together helps us find solutions tailored to our district.

I owe everyone my time. I'll hear your concerns, share what others have told me and what has shaped my thinking, and work to bridge the gap. I won't say "tough luck, it is what it is." Polls show Utahns losing faith in their leaders, and I want to be more than talk. I have two ears and one mouth, and I plan to use them in that order. I'll hold town halls, welcome every email and call, and listen, because anyone's insight might help HD61.

I've worked in IT and cybersecurity, and I've been an early adopter of AI. I still think it has great uses, and the data centers we already have should operate responsibly. But I used to believe hyperscale data centers meant jobs and a boost to the economy. Then I learned that once they're built, the jobs are minimal and the impact on communities is high. Add the environmental toll, privacy concerns, and the autonomous, large-scale cyberattacks I see in my own field that weren't possible before, and I believe we need to slow down. I support pausing new hyperscale data centers until we understand the implications and can see whether the benefits outweigh the costs. Technology should serve communities, not be forced on them.

I will always put the needs and wishes of HD61's constituents first. I don't agree with my party 100% of the time, and I don't believe anyone should agree with any party that much. My party has a lot of great ideas, but they have to be great for HD61 first and foremost.

If my party or allies wanted something contrary to my constituents' interests, I'd tell party leadership directly, so no one is blindsided, that this goes against what my constituents want, and that I represent them. If I vote against my party, I'll explain why, and why it's what is right for HD61.

I'll answer every email and message. I'm already out at community events talking with people, and if constituents invite me and I'm available, I'll come. People will be able to sign up for email updates, and I'll send monthly and quarterly updates and invite discussion, in whatever format constituents prefer. I'll also post my calendar and every lobbyist meeting online.

On bills, no legislator can be an expert in every field. I'll seek out university researchers, state agencies, local officials, and others in the field who have no money on the line. I'll work to understand their perspective and trust the science and data, so my decisions serve our communities and not large corporate interests.

The people affected by a decision should have the strongest voice in it. The state should defer to cities and counties on matters that mainly affect their own residents, like large projects that change a community's land, water and power. A policy meant for Salt Lake City shouldn't become a state law that applies everywhere.

The state should step in when something affects people statewide: protecting residents' rights, setting water standards, requiring large users to disclose their impact, or tackling a housing shortage that is pushing families out of Utah. People want more homes, and they don't want projects like the Stratos data center forced on them. That's why I support making starter homes easier to build and oppose large corporations forcing their way into communities.

Our current legislature does not stand up for us a everyday people. They all take corporate money and they seem to be more interested in passing laws to benefit themselves and their wealthy friends. I hope to focus on campaign finance reform, banning corporate money in politics, and addressing our two pressing crises: the housing crisis and the Great Salt Lake.

I have an equal obligation to those who vote for me and those who don't. I don't care. I have much more in common with my MAGA neighbor than most of the legislature. I believe a good legislator is a good listener and I am committed to being a good legislator, I don't care if you vote for me or not.

Like many young people I know, I was very conservative before Trump came to power. His actions were very offputting and repulsive to me so I was forced to re-examine my beliefs. Ultimately, after a lot of research and introspection, I came to the conclusion that it was the left side of center that represented my values. Values like hard-work, democracy, self-determination, equality, freedom, fairness, and integrity are found in the policies I advocate for now like banning corporate money in politics, free school meals, passing a bill of rights for renters and workers, and ending sales tax on essentials. Most of these policies would not have gained my support when I was conservative.

Easy, I vote my conscience. I have no loyalty to my party. I've been an independent my whole life and am very opposed to the two party system in this country and the caucus system in Utah. It is really important to me that we elect leaders who vote for the interests of the people and not any particular ideology. I believe in first, listening. Second, doing as much research as possible to determine what is right. Third, doing what is right.

My phone number and email is public (8019602217, info@davidforutah.com) for people to reach out at any time. I also plan on having monthly town halls and keeping people informed through social media. Constituent services is very important to me. People need to know that they've got a friend in the legisalture who is fighting for them.

I believe local governments could have more control, particularly in protecting workers and renters. For example, cities cannot set a city-specific minimum wage or cap rental application fees / late fees.

I am running to share the idea of civic virtue. It is a real term and political scientists know that it is a major part of adjusting any government that has become extreme. It means that the people choose to sacrifice for the common good, in some way, without expectation of reward. When “we the people” speak up through sacrificing our time to educate ourselves or writing a letter or serving in the community, we have power. When we work together we see each other and can unite over our commonalities rather than being torn apart by our differences. When the people are universally motivated they push for ethics and we literally can fix every issue we have. We fix our country by fixing ourselves.

We all have a responsibility to listen. Sincere responses to citizen questions and concerns should always be given. Through civic virtue and humility, we can choose to try to understand their view rather than just proving that we are right. This is a process. An elected leader must be patient with the process and transparently explain the decisions they make and why they are making them, especially if it isn’t clear to the constituency. Elected leaders are the servants of the public and have a responsibility to them.

Understanding that another person’s perspective comes from their background is important. Their background and consequent belief system is just as valid as mine, even if I don’t get it. When we learn someone’s “why,” which usually stems from their background, we are taking the first steps on the road toward unity. We must see people as people, not as their party. I recently talked to a family member who had different viewpoints about the importance of and the role of government than I did. As we talked, what came through was his frustration with bureaucracy and how long government approvals took in his industry. Where I had once completely disagreed, I now understood his perspective and I changed my mind. In the end, I felt like the laws written had been short-sighted and had become too arduous, and that was something I had never considered before. Luckily, a good government can fix things like this if the people will communicate and work together.

The Forward Party’s platform is focused on working from the bottom up and based on collaboration. Therefore, it is clear that I must listen to my constituents and work across the aisle. The Forward Party also focuses on adherence to the rule of law, the Constitution, and a supporting and strengthening democracy to elevate the voters’ voices. All of these ideals would be inline with the interests of my constituents. If I was approached to align myself in a way that would clearly hurt those in my home district, I would refuse to be involved.

I think the best thing to do would be to maintain an ongoing website where as many of the bills as possible would be posted, along with my vote on them. In addition, a brief explanation of why I voted that way and linked accurate and factual evidence, as is possible, as evidence of my rationale would be most helpful. In addition, holding regular public meetings in each area would be appropriate.

Federalism has always been a balance. The founding fathers debated it, we fought over it in the Civil War, and we are still figuring it all out. I believe legislators should ask the following questions with every bill:

1. Why is this being proposed?
2. What level of Federalism (local, state, or national) should handle this?
3. Do we have Constitutional guidance?
4. Is a law really needed?
5. Who will this hurt?
6. Who will this help?
7. Is hurting this group to help the other ethical?
8. What can be fairly enacted to impact the most people positively?

When we honestly answer these questions, using what is best for everyone as our guide, not what is best for a particular party, we can respectfully and logically find a third, new solution. The founding fathers did it and we can too.

Food insecurity and alleviation of poverty. I’m passionate about community and ensuring everyone has access to high quality nutrient dense foods. I live in Sanpete County, the second poorest county in Utah and utilizing government measures in more meaningful and efficient ways to ensure peoples basic needs can be met is a top priority for me.

My obligation is to every constituent regardless of party affiliation or voting habits. I am at their service to listen and make decisions in a collaborative manner.

I was previously indifferent to growth in rural areas, having lived rural for close to five years and having seen unfettered growth capture some of my favorite childhood places back in Colorado, I now have a passionate desire to preserve rural farmland and public lands because once that land is gone or bought up or sold to big developers there is no getting it back.

I would vote in the best interest of my constituents, that is what good governance requires. It’s not a popularity contest.

I am an open book, I am skilled at listening and giving every person the dignity of their question or concern. I will meet with anyone, anywhere in my district.

I think more often than not, local governments should be making decisions that inform the state versus the other way around. Local government has more information and context and can seek outside expertise from larger state entities when necessary and needed.

One of the top motivations for me to run for State Board of Education is to ensure continued Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Screening Programs in schools. When the board considered eliminating these programs this past January, it made it clear that a mental health professional needs to be in on decisions being made.

I believe I have an obligation to all constituents, regardless of how they vote. I want to represent the people of my district and that means everyone.

Is it ok to say all of my positions? I thought I was a conservative republican most of my life, then I went to grad school and learned more information about complex issues. It was difficult to reconsider so many things I'd never questioned. I believe information is powerful; it changed my mind about a lot of things including my political affiliation.

I would first get curious and initiate a conversation to understand why there is such opposition. Ultimately, I would stand up for what is in the interests of my constituents because serving them is the whole reason I'm running.

I will ensure I stay approachable - via email, text, in-person meetings, and ongoing attendance to local school board and community meetings. I want to hear about and understand what's most important to my constituents.

One particular area I believe should be deferred to more local governments is that of book bans. I don't believe the State Board of Education should make a one-size-fits-all decision on the books allowed in schools; these decisions should be made on a school-by-school basis with input from librarians, teachers, and parents.

Planning for and managing growth in Utah County to create a more affordable future for our children and grandchildren. I hope to help create durable strategic plans for transportation, infrastructure and land use that maintain the quality of life over the next 30 to 40 years. The commission has an important role in working with the State and Federal governments to make sure that Utah County gets funding for the projects that will support what will be some of the most dramatic growth in the entire country.

I will always have the obligation to listen to every voice and every position, and to honestly consider their ideas. I am not under the illusion that all my ideas are the most brilliant solutions. I think I have an obligation to remain open to persuasion.

My position on AI data centers has changed as I have seen how they are being developed around Utah. As a technology executive, I expect the progress of technology to benefit society, however, the manner in which AI data centers are being approved and developed in Utah is undemocratic and shows contempt for the citizens around them. I'm now opposed to developing new AI data centers without public support demonstrated in a referendum.

I have an ethical obligation to defend the interests of my constituents. I like to think that I would be able to withstand pressure from friends and allies. The more complex ethical question, is what I do when I encounter something that I think is in the best interest of my constituents, but is unpopular with those constituents. For example, a new road needed for traffic flow that divides a neighborhood. I like to think I will make the best decision possible, with an eye on the future of the county.

Meeting with constituents in my office, taking constituent phone calls, on-going meetings with mayors and other stakeholders. Communication, transparency and clarity are key to my candidacy and my plans for governance.

Assuming that municipal elections are non-partisan, as I think they should be, political parties should keep their thumbs off the scale and avoid interfering in those elections. Non-partisan should mean non-partisan.

I think the three-person commission structure is adequate for this point in the county's growth. As evidence, I submit the fact that the county continues to be considered among the best run in the state and country. However, as the county grows, the government model will probably have to evolve. At some point, too much power will be concentrated in too few hands with the three-person structure. The Mayor and council model may be the best solution when there are over 1 million people in the county. Under that model, administrative responsibilities shift from full-time commissioners to professional administrative staff. The Utah County commission has already taken steps in that direction by hiring a county administrator and expanding the commission staff. A some point, the data will guide the decision about when it is time for the change and a referendum will decide the matter.