House passes bill removing entry/exit signaling requirement for roundabouts after divided debate

SALT LAKE CITY — The Utah House on Feb. 3 approved House Bill 128, which removes the statutory requirement to signal when entering or exiting roundabouts, with a 59–7 vote after a lengthy floor discussion over safety and driver practice.

Representative Jason DeFe, sponsor of the traffic amendment, argued that signaling to enter or exit a roundabout can confuse other road users and at times create safety risks. "Roundabouts are designed to simplify traffic flow and reduce serious crashes," DeFe said on the floor, adding that signaling to enter or exit "often confusing and can even create risk." He told members that, in tight single-lane roundabouts, signaling can be counterproductive and that the change better matches how drivers actually use roundabouts.

Several lawmakers asked whether the bill would affect multi-lane roundabouts. DeFe said the bill still requires signaling when moving between lanes in a multi-lane roundabout: "If you are in a roundabout that has multiple lanes, then you are still required to signal when moving between lanes within a roundabout." (Representative Cutler pressed for that clarification.)

Opponents, including Representative Chu, warned that removing the signaling requirement could create hazardous situations, especially for large vehicles or drivers unfamiliar with local roads. "Without the turn signal, situations hazardous situation may arrive," Chu said, describing scenarios involving semitrailers and travelers routed through many roundabouts.

Supporters noted inconsistent enforcement and that many drivers do not know the existing requirement. Representative Kyle described repeatedly violating the law in everyday driving and urged change.

The House passed HB 128 59–7; it will be transmitted to the Senate for further consideration.

What happens next: The bill proceeds to the Utah Senate for committee referral and potential floor action.