Legislative auditors and state patrol point to cost, coordination gaps as chief barriers to ignition interlock compliance

The Senate Transportation Committee on Feb. 5 heard evidence that cost and fragmented agency oversight are major obstacles to wider use of ignition interlock devices (IIDs), devices installed on vehicles to prevent starting if a breath sample registers a blood-alcohol concentration above 0.02.

"So an ignition interlock device is installed in a driver's car. And it prevents the car from being started if the driver blows into the device and it registers a BAC higher than 0.02," Mark McKechnie, external relations director at the Traffic Safety Commission, told the committee as he introduced a Yakima County pilot aimed at boosting installation and compliance.

The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) staff reported that, based on a sample of roughly 66,000 drivers from January 2018 through June 2025, an estimated 41% of drivers required to have an IID will complete the requirement and have a device installed at a given point in time. "We calculated an overall, installation rate of 41 percent," JLARC staff said, adding that installation rates increase with income and that about half of drivers required to have a device earn under $28,000 annually.

JLARC and local pilots identified cost as a central barrier. JLARC staff said the cost to install and maintain a device for one year is about $2,700, with other costs such as high-risk insurance and fines potentially raising first-year totals to roughly $5,000. The state's financial assistance program, managed by the Department of Licensing, reimburses up to about $1,400 per year but JLARC found the program has limited reach and no clearly defined performance targets.

"We found that the Department of Licensing has not established performance metrics or targets for the program," JLARC staff told the committee, recommending the department set clear objectives and performance goals and that Licensing and the State Patrol develop a formal agreement to coordinate IID responsibilities.

The Washington State Patrol described a pilot outreach effort in Snohomish County that used data-sharing, door-to-door contact and flyers to reach drivers flagged as noncompliant. Lieutenant Jeffrey Leonard said the patrol screened roughly 2,132 drivers, made 616 contacts and "we gained 31" additional installations following outreach.

Leonard said the outreach also revealed hurdles beyond cost: 13% of people screened were no longer required to have an IID, 13% were data lags or duplicates, about one-third no longer owned a vehicle and 19% said they could not afford payments. He told the committee about officer-safety limits: roughly 16% of people the patrol intended to contact were on warrant status and therefore not visited.

Senators pressed JLARC and the State Patrol on implementation and accountability. JLARC staff said the auditor's office follows up on recommendations for roughly four years and that the agencies will have to report back formally to JLARC in the audit process. Committee members asked whether other enforcement actions (vehicle impoundment, stricter traffic enforcement) were studied; JLARC staff said they did not examine additional enforcement practices and instead recommended the agencies study pilots and best practices and return a coordinated plan to the legislature.

The witnesses emphasized that the Yakima County pilot's increase to a 41% installation rate reflects a concerted local effort that may be costly to replicate statewide without policy changes, such as enabling payment plans and simplifying administrative pathways to compliance. JLARC recommended the two agencies develop shared goals and a coordinated outreach strategy that could incorporate lessons from the pilots.

What happens next: JLARC said it will present a final report in April, which will include formal responses from the Department of Licensing and the State Patrol. The committee indicated interest in continued oversight and follow-up on agency progress and coordination.