Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fines And Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate adopts amendment and advances bill to redirect registration-violation fines, prompting questions about local revenue effects
Summary
SB 72 would route half of fines for certain out-of-state vehicle-registration violations to the issuing agency; the Senate adopted a three-year sunset amendment and advanced the bill to third reading (26–1–2). Local prosecutor revenue effects and Initiative B implications were discussed.
SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah Senate on Jan. 27 amended and advanced Senate Bill 72, which would direct 50% of fines for specified out-of-state vehicle-registration violations to the agency issuing the citation and retain the other half under normal court distribution.
Senator Hickman, sponsor of SB 72, said the measure is intended to create enforcement incentives after observing residents registering vehicles out of state to avoid higher fees. "All SB 72 simply does is it says it directs the courts that 50% of the fine assessed ... will go directly to the agency issuing the citation," Hickman said, adding he included a three-year sunset amendment to allow review of effectiveness.
Senator Thomas, who identified a conflict of interest as a deputy county attorney, raised concern that shifting distribution could reduce funds that would otherwise go to county or city prosecutor offices; he suggested the state portion could be the source instead. Hickman replied his aim was to send proceeds to the agency that issues the citation (sheriff, highway patrol or local police) to focus enforcement attention.
Senator Stevenson asked whether the proposal runs afoul of Initiative B, which sought to curb incentive-based confiscation. Senators clarified the difference between fines and confiscated property; several members said Initiative B targeted confiscation abuses and SB 72 deals with fines rather than seized property.
The Senate adopted the sponsor's amendment by voice vote and later put the bill to roll-call for third-reading placement. The floor tally was 26 ayes, 1 nay and 2 absences; SB 72 passed to the third-reading calendar.
The bill will return for third-reading consideration; local revenue allocations and the practical effects on enforcement were key concerns on the floor.
