AN ACT relating to operating a motor vehicle.
SB 28, titled the “Phone-Down Kentucky Act,” revises Kentucky’s laws on distracted driving and related traffic enforcement. The bill repeals and reenacts KRS 189.292 to prohibit drivers operating a motor vehicle on a public highway from holding or supporting a mobile electronic device, reading or sending texts or other digital content, or watching moving images on such a device. It defines “mobile electronic device” broadly to include cell phones, portable computers, GPS receivers, electronic games, and similar stand-alone devices, while excluding certain radios, emergency communication devices, and prescribed medical devices.
The bill also updates Kentucky’s graduated restrictions for drivers under 18 in KRS 189.294, continuing to bar device use while the vehicle is in motion and clarifying exceptions for emergency calls and certain navigation functions. In addition, it amends penalty provisions so violations of the main distracted-driving sections are generally punishable by a $100 fine with no points assessed, and it directs how those fines are distributed to trauma-related and veterans’ funds. The bill further adds a new work-zone penalty structure, including higher fines for violations in highway work zones when proper signage and worker presence requirements are met, and creates a highway work zone safety fund for enhanced enforcement.
SB 28 would significantly strengthen Kentucky’s distracted-driving framework by replacing the prior personal communication device provisions with a broader mobile electronic device ban and by standardizing enforcement and penalties. It amends KRS 189.292, 189.294, 189.990, and 189.2327, changes fine amounts and fund allocations, limits officer authority to stop, search, seize, or arrest solely for a device violation, and requires Transportation Cabinet signage at highway entry points. It also creates a temporary courtesy-warning period through October 31, 2026, before uniform citations are issued.
The available voting history suggests the bill had meaningful but not unanimous support in the Senate, passing third reading 30-7. The bill’s structure and title indicate a public-safety focus, and its provisions on distracted driving, work zones, and trauma funding are consistent with a safety-oriented approach. No committee transcript is available, so the broader discussion record is limited, but the recorded vote shows clear majority support with some opposition.
Likely points of contention include the breadth of the device ban, the enforcement limits on police stops and searches, and the size and structure of the penalties. Some may view the $100 fine and no-points approach as too lenient, while others may object to the expanded restrictions on driver behavior or to the work-zone penalty enhancements. The bill also distinguishes between ordinary distracted-driving violations and work-zone violations, which may raise questions about consistency, signage requirements, and when increased fines apply. The 7 nays in the Senate suggest at least some disagreement over one or more of these enforcement and penalty choices.