Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Driver License Hearings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate circles driver‑license rule updates after debate over telephonic hearings and due process
Summary
Senate Bill 168 would authorize telephonic driver‑license hearings, extend certain time frames and modernize communication methods. Senators raised due‑process and access concerns about allowing the division to require telephonic hearings; the Senate voted to 'circle' the bill for further work.
Senate Bill 168, a largely technical bill updating driver‑license procedures and administrative rules, was circled on Feb. 12 after senators debated whether the measure could allow the division to require telephonic hearings in ways that might impair a respondent’s ability to confront evidence.
Sponsor Senator Walker said the bill mostly reconciles administrative language and would permit telephonic hearings as a convenience — for example when an arresting officer is outside the jurisdiction or a driver is hospitalized. "It will allow the division to choose the location of the hearing provided telephonic hearings participation is offered," Walker explained.
Senator Hilliard pressed for stronger protections, saying he worried the bill could allow the division to force telephonic hearings so a defendant or attorney could not examine evidence or confront the officer in person. "I just feel very uncomfortable with something so important as this, that suddenly the division can just simply tell you, we're gonna do this telephonic and you have no chance where you look over the material," Hilliard said.
A division representative (Mr. Blackstock) told senators that physical attendance remains an option and telephonic hearings provide convenience and reduced expense for officers. After discussion, Senator Walker moved to "circle" the bill — a procedural hold to allow further consideration and compromise — and the motion passed.
What’s next: SB168 is circled for further work; sponsors and staff may negotiate clarifying language addressing the due‑process concerns raised on the floor.
