Committee holds HB 464 after mixed testimony on parent‑taught driver education

A legislative committee held House Bill 464 on a motion to hold after more than two hours of testimony for and against a proposal to let parents register as the primary instructor for teens seeking a learner permit.

Representative Peck, the bill sponsor, told the committee she removed earlier language that would have lowered the driving age and narrowed the measure to allow a parent‑led driver education pathway. "We are not lowering the driver's age today," she said, and described a process at the Driver License Division (DLD) in which the application would add a third choice: school, third‑party provider or parent taught. Parents would not administer written or driving tests; those would remain under DLD oversight.

The bill’s student co‑author, Kiara Pointer of Tooele High School, described the change as an additional option for families who cannot access school programs, afford private courses or prefer home instruction. "In conclusion, I believe this would be a positive additional option for families alongside both in school and private driver's education courses," she told the committee.

State education officials and driving school representatives gave contrasting accounts of existing readiness and oversight. Audra Yuri, driver education specialist at the Utah State Board of Education (USBE), said certified instructors currently record completions in the Driver Education Management System (DIMS), which communicates with the DLD. She also told the committee, "We do not currently have parent taught curriculum available," and said USBE would need to develop materials specifically for parent‑taught instruction.

Several certified instructors and safety advocates urged caution. Ken Wade, owner of a small driver education business, said "very few parents are equipped to teach these advanced driving skills" and relayed concerns that parents often do not actually complete or document required supervised hours. Lisa McConnell of Dave's Driving School and other instructors cited peer‑reviewed studies and UDOT safety concerns, saying formal, professionally delivered instruction and dual‑control vehicles reduce crash risk.

AAA’s lobbyist Mike Deaver emphasized research he characterized as showing large safety differences: "Teens who complete formal driving training have a 70 percent lower odds of a severe crash in the first year," he said, and cited a study he described as finding higher crash and ticket rates when novice drivers prepare only with parents.

Supporters, including homeschool families and a Utah parent‑advocacy group (UHOPE), said the bill addresses access and cost: several parents said private courses cost about $400 per student, a barrier for large or homeschooling families. Tammy Flake, a homeschooling parent, testified that private instruction can cost about $400 per student and that adding a parent pathway would reduce that burden.

Committee members pressed several technical questions: whether applicants would still take the same DLD tests (sponsor: yes); whether USBE or DLD already had parent‑taught curriculum (Audra Yuri: no, not yet); and whether districts could offer free access to courses for homeschoolers (discussion, not resolved). Representative Thurston and others suggested making existing online classroom modules more easily available to parents and keeping a supervised professional check for roadway complexity.

In committee action, Representative DeFe moved to hold HB 464 to allow time for further work; Representative Kristofferson later moved to adopt the sponsor's second substitute, which the committee adopted by voice vote. Representative Kristofferson then moved that the committee pass the bill out favorably, but the previously offered motion to hold was called for a roll call vote and passed 8–3 (yes: DeFe; Dominguez; Matthews; Oakland; Romero; Sawyer; Thurston; Vice Chair Roberts; no: Chevrier; Peterson; Chair Kristofferson). The committee chair said members would work offline to try to return the bill quickly to committee.

The committee did not vote on the underlying bill; the hold means the bill will not advance from this committee until sponsors and members address outstanding concerns such as curriculum development, documentation of supervised hours, and safety safeguards.

Next steps: the sponsor said she is open to revisions and further conversations about test content, access for homeschoolers, and how districts might or might not provide coursework without fee. The committee adjourned after the vote.