Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the DUI And Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee trims and advances wide-ranging roadway safety bill after split on penalties and enforcement
Summary
SB 1667, covering crosswalk blocking, DUI testing refusal consequences, and expansion of speed and red-light cameras, was amended to adopt DOT site-selection criteria and to remove repeat-penalty language for separate handling; prosecutors backed increased administrative penalties while public defenders warned of constitutional sentencing issues.
Senate Bill 1667 — a multi-part roadway safety bill — brought a sustained exchange on implied-consent rules, administrative penalties and automated enforcement during the Feb. 4 Senate Transportation Committee hearing.
The measure includes provisions to prohibit vehicles from blocking marked crosswalks, to expand administrative penalties for excessive speeding and refusal to submit to chemical tests, to allow appeals through the Administrative Driver's License Revocation Office (ADLRO), and to authorize additional photo red-light detectors and school-zone speed cameras at locations identified by the Safe Routes to School advisory body.
The Department of the Prosecuting Attorney told the committee the felony and administrative penalties are justified by the public-safety harm of extreme speeding and the risks officers assume when pursuing such drivers. "To catch someone going a 100 miles an hour, you have to go faster than a 100 miles an hour," the prosecutor said, describing enforcement burdens and court time.
The Office of the Public Defender opposed parts of the bill that it said would be overly punitive and possibly inconsistent with constitutional sentencing frameworks; the public defender urged that sentencing and habitual-offender language be reconciled with existing statutes.
Committee members questioned how implied consent operates given Hawaii Supreme Court limits (State v. Mon), whether automatic on-the-spot license revocation is appropriate, and how appeals at ADLRO would work in practice. The prosecutor explained that revocations are typically adjudicated administratively with opportunities for later challenge.
The committee adopted DOT recommendations to align camera site-selection criteria with existing standards, allowed an expansion of cameras tied to Safe Routes to School recommendations, removed a repeat-penalty section for separate consideration, and passed the bill with those amendments. The committee also left appropriation amounts blank for Ways and Means to consider.
Next steps: The bill was passed with committee amendments that narrow or reassign contested provisions; the removed repeat-penalty language will be handled in a separate bill and the committee indicated further follow-up for ADLRO-and-procedure clarifications.
