Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Photo Radar Moving Violations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves amended moving‑violation bill after debate over photo‑radar revenue and evidentiary requirements
Summary
The Utah Senate passed Substitute Senate Bill 8 on the moving‑violation/photo‑radar package after floor amendments that limited reporting of photo‑radar citations and added a requirement that citations include accompanying photographs; a separate amendment would divert 50% of state‑highway radar revenue to the State Treasurer and 50% to the local court entity was debated but retained in the amended bill. 19 aye, 9 nay, 1 absent.
The Utah State Senate on Jan. 31, 1996 approved a revised moving‑violation bill (Substitute Senate Bill 8) that narrows the reporting effect of photo‑radar citations and requires that any citation accompanied by a photograph also include that photograph with the citation.
Senator Reese, the floor sponsor, told colleagues the package includes two core changes: that a "moving traffic violation obtained through the use of photo radar is not a reportable violation" for purposes of driving points and insurance scoring, and that "when the citation is accompanied by photograph . . . they include the photograph" with the citation. Those amendments, he said, were designed to address earlier concerns about fairness and due process.
The most contested amendment came from Senator Hilliard, who said his change "provides that for any moving . . . traffic violation committed on a State Highway that was obtained through the use of radar or photo radar the court shall allocate 50% of the money to the State Treasurer and 50% to the city or county government responsible for the justice court." Hilliard argued the split would remove the incentive for communities to site photo‑radar in places that maximize revenue rather than improve safety, stating, "If it's really a safety factor then the revenue ought to go to the city." Senator Blackham and others countered that the amendment did not fully resolve the local control question; Blackham urged a ban on state‑highway use by municipalities while Burns cautioned that a 50/50 split "may not even pay the cost of the photo‑radar" and suggested additional study in committee.
Supporters said the amendments restore the original safety‑focused intent of the program by protecting drivers' point records and by attaching photo evidence to citations. Opponents framed much of the debate around local authority, arguing cities and towns should decide enforcement in their jurisdictions.
After extended floor discussion and multiple amendments, the presiding officer directed a roll‑call tally. The Senate recorded 19 aye votes, 9 nay votes and 1 absent; the bill "passed to the House for their consideration," according to the president's announcement.
The bill as amended will be signed by the Senate President in open session and returned to the House for enrollment. No implementation timetable or effective date was specified on the floor; the text of the final enrolled bill will determine those details.
