(Continued from page 15)

• She was the only supporter of the bill who testified, and only one person testified in opposition. Committee members lamented the lack of testimony from law enforcement or the Attorney General's office.
• Larry Nelson, a lawyer and lobbyist with the South Dakota Municipal League, said the language in the bill could prohibit use of radars and cameras in police vehicles.
• "We think this is a bill that is going to create problems for law enforcement," Nelson said.
• Chief Deputy Attorney General Charles McGuigan, who said his office has no official stance, said the bill likely referred to devices that included both a camera and radar.
• "I have no idea what technology is going to bring us in 10 years. In 10 years we could very much look silly," said Republican Sen. Craig Tieszen of Rapid City, who opposed the bill.
• Tieszen said as Rapid City police chief he advised against the adopting of the cameras there, but said municipalities should be able to make that decision. He said the bill challenged local control.
• The committee considered three different amendments to clarify the language in the bill, none of them passed.
• Sen. Jean Hunhoff, R-Yankton, said she was worried that the bill was complicated by trying to address both red light violations and speeding violations.
• "It's like we're mixing apples and oranges," Hunhoff said. "To me, it's too confusing."
• She suggested Gibson return the bill another year with clarifications.
• After the hearing, Gibson said she wasn't sure if she would redraft the bill or not. She has drafted similar bills in the past few years that failed as well.
•