UTAH STATE CAPITOL—A bill that would prohibit law enforcement from using an unmarked vehicle to stop a driver for certain traffic violations received a favorable recommendation from the Senate Judiciary, Law Enforcement, and Criminal Justice Committee on Feb. 20 and was sent to the Senate floor by a 6-1 vote. 

“A young lady was pulled over in a not well lit area,” SB262 sponsor, Sen. Daniel McCay, R-Riverton, told the committee. “She was driving along and apparently committed some type of traffic infraction and she got pulled over. When the person was walking up to the car she noticed that it wasn’t a marked vehicle so she got a little bit concerned.”

When the person got out of the car, the individual was wearing a pair of jeans and a polo shirt, with no markings that it was law enforcement, he said. “She began to get very nervous and explained her frustration when confronted by the officer. She was told that she was being pulled over for failing to signal and wanted a bunch of information.”

Her concern deepened and she felt like she was unsafe in the situation she was in, McCay said. “It turned out to be a legitimate stop as a law enforcement officer. When she called me the next morning she still felt traumatized, I guess is the best word for it.”

McCay said he asked his daughters how they felt about the situation. “They felt extremely uneasy in the same situation.”

The purpose of the bill is to remove the use of unmarked vehicles for the purpose of traffic enforcement for infractions, he said. “These are the types of things you usually get tickets for. It doesn’t arise to the level of a misdemeanor. There are crimes that do elevate to a misdemeanor, for example, going over 100 miles an hour or driving while intoxicated, all of those things happen.”

McCay said it is well known that marked vehicles are greater crime prevention and greater traffic enforcement tools because they actually prevent behavior as opposed to one vehicle pulling over one vehicle that is about enforcement and ticket/revenue collection. “Marked vehicles have the ability to make the roads safer.”

“Thank you Senator for being responsive to an actual fear, I think of especially women,” said Sen. Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City. “There’s also been an increase in impersonating law enforcement, unfortunately, women tend to be disproportionately impacted. These are individuals that are using vehicles that are unmarked but they put the demo lights or whatever they do.”

Unfortunately, some horrible things have happened to those victims, she said. “I think this is a way of protecting both law enforcement as well as individuals that may be interacting.”

“I agree with the senator,” said Col. Greg Holly, Utah Highway Patrol. “Marked patrol cars are by far the biggest deterrent. That’s why the majority of our vehicles are fully marked.”

Holly said they were in opposition of the bill. “It limits in a variety of ways that we can do some enforcement projects, distracted driving being one of them. We typically bring a van out, unmarked, and patrol the highways identifying distracted drivers such as texting. Then we initiated a traffic stop.”

Holly said he drives an unmarked car to and from the office. “I’d like to think if someone goes by me blowing my doors off at 90 miles an hour, I’m still a trooper and I would expect the public expects me to make this traffic stop on the person. This limits that ability for myself and other administrators. We do appreciate the conversations we’ve had but as it’s written we would oppose the bill.”

“I have four daughters,” said Escamilla. “I’m afraid when I cannot see who this person is and I’ve been pulled over. I’m OK having an interaction with an officer when I can see what the car is and interact.”

This is not a safe world, she said. “So this idea of ‘oh trust us.’ Trust who when we can’t see who you are?”

“I’m opposed to this bill, said Lt. Nate Hutchinson, Salt Lake Area Gang Project. “I don’t think this makes Utah safer. The number one preventable cause of death in the state of Utah is traffic accidents and the number one cause of traffic accidents is excessive speed. So anytime you’re taking away a tool that we can use to slow people down, that's kind of the obvious effect that you’re having.”

Ultimately, the committee voted in favor of sending SB262 to the floor with six members voting ‘yes’ and Sen. Brady Brammer, R-Pleasant Grove, voting in the negative.