Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety Trick Driving topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears AB 4 17 to require DMV action after trick-driving citations, tighten vehicle-safety enforcement
Summary
AB 4 17 would require law enforcement to report vehicles cited for trick driving or speed contests to the DMV; the DMV could temporarily cancel registrations and require inspections to bring vehicles into compliance within 30 days. Sponsors said the measure builds on earlier laws to reduce dangerous street takeovers.
CARSON CITY — Lawmakers heard testimony on Assembly Bill 4 17, a proposal intended to reduce trick driving and organized speed contests by tightening the link between law enforcement citations and the Department of Motor Vehicles' registration and inspection processes.
Assemblymember Linda Hunt, the bill sponsor, said AB 4 17 builds on previous measures, including work by Clark County and prior session legislation, and is aimed at removing unsafe vehicles from Nevada roads.
Andrew Bennett, director of the Clark County Office of Traffic Safety, described the bill in the context of roadway fatalities and said previous laws helped give law enforcement ticket-and-tow tools but that unsafe vehicle equipment continues to contribute to deadly crashes. Officer Mike Teal of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department said the measure would help "get the illegal and unsafe vehicles off our roads" and asked for the bill's implementation "sooner rather than later" because the behavior is year-round in Clark County.
Under the bill as presented, officers investigating a speed contest or trick-driving display would inspect vehicles for violations of Nevada's vehicle-safety laws (functional lights, brakes, mirrors, mufflers and other required equipment). If a vehicle is found unsafe or noncompliant, the officer would issue a citation to the registered owner and submit a copy to the DMV within five days. The DMV, using its existing authority, would temporarily cancel the registration and notify the owner to obtain a safety inspection within 30 days; failure to cure violations within that period would lead to cancellation of registration. Presenters told the committee they are discussing potential reasonable extensions with public defenders for repairs that may take longer than 30 days.
JD Decker, chief of the Nevada DMV's compliance enforcement division, advised the committee that Nevada statutes already authorize law enforcement to seize vehicles operated with improper registration and enable the DMV to issue notices of inspection and temporary cancellations while owners cure defects. He explained the practical process: a notice of inspection provides a 30-day window for the registered owner to present the vehicle for a VIN/safety inspection and clear curable violations before reinstatement.
Committee members asked how the bill would treat unregistered vehicles and older or classic cars lacking modern safety equipment. Decker and Andrew Bennett said Nevada law includes grandfathering for certain older vehicles; compliance and seizure authority exists for improperly registered vehicles. Officer Teal did not provide a specific count of fatalities attributable solely to trick driving but said the agencies could provide follow-up data.
Supporters including the Nevada Sheriffs and Chiefs Association and the Nevada Franchise Auto Dealers Association testified in favor of AB 4 17, saying the bill would protect public safety and could protect future buyers from unknowingly purchasing heavily modified, unsafe vehicles. No callers or in-person witnesses opposed the bill at the hearing.
The committee closed the hearing on AB 4 17 with the sponsor indicating plans to continue stakeholder discussions and to propose amendments for reasonable extensions and implementation details.
