Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate circles aggressive‑driving bill after heated debate over unmarked patrol cars
Summary
After extended floor debate about whether unmarked highway patrol vehicles should be permitted for aggressive‑driving enforcement, the Utah Senate voted to circle House Bill 9 for further amendment rather than pass it, leaving the contentious unmarked‑vehicle provision unresolved.
The Utah State Senate debated House Bill 9 on Feb. 4, 2000, a measure that would expand aggressive‑driving penalties and allow limited use of unmarked highway patrol vehicles in defined enforcement situations. The chamber ultimately agreed to circle the bill for later amendment, deferring a final decision.
Supporters including Senate sponsor Senator Steele argued the provision is narrowly targeted to dangerous, overt violations — for example, drivers exceeding the posted limit by 21 miles per hour — and that unmarked vehicles are a necessary enforcement tool to catch chronic offenders who slow when they see marked patrol cars. “This thing doesn’t have any impact until people are exceeding in speed 21 miles an hour,” Steele said, adding that the measure addresses particular highway‑safety concerns.
Opponents, led by Senator Blackcomb and Senator Stevenson, said permitting unmarked government vehicles for routine traffic enforcement raises public‑safety and civil‑liberty concerns. “I just don’t see why unmarked vehicles are necessary in this area,” Blackcomb said, arguing that the presence of unmarked cars can alarm drivers — especially young or lone motorists — and sometimes provoke unsafe reactions. Stevenson called the approach ‘‘cloak‑and‑dagger’’ and suggested improving the responsiveness of existing law‑enforcement channels and citizen reporting instead of authorizing hidden patrol cars.
Senator Knudson and other supporters pointed to repeated testimony and interim committee work showing chronic offenders frequently use the interstate as a ‘speedway’ and that enforcement tools targeted at blatant, dangerous behavior should be tried. Knudson said the legislature can revisit the policy if it proves ineffective. Several senators proposed amendments and offered to draft narrower language. Facing outstanding concerns and a pending amendment effort, the Senate voted to circle HB 9 (move it off the active calendar for additional work) rather than adopt the bill in its current form.
The action leaves the unmarked‑vehicle provision unresolved; sponsors said they will prepare amendments addressing the safety and scope questions raised during floor debate. The bill was not passed, and a future Senate floor date was not specified during the session.
