Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
12/03/23 at 17:29:37

Please take a minute and fill out our Utah visitors survey.  Click here

Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1
Send Topic Print
SB168 (Read 34 times)
Super Sponsor

Posts: 8710
Garfield County, Utah
Gender: male
02/17/21 at 16:27:23
Senate Bill 168 (Designated Vehicle Routes Amendments) has been introduced in the Utah Senate by Sen. Mike McKell (Spanish Fork)) and, if enacted, would destroy the very purpose of street-legal OHV registration status, as currently regulated by Utah State Law.
The bill was proposed to enable Moab (and other Utah municipalities which receive transient room taxes) to locally control where and when street-legal OHVs could operate. Utah counties and cities currently have the authority to control OHV (stickered, not street legal) OHV registered  vehicles.
It is important that street legal OHV owners contact their state representatives and senators and point out the damage this bill would do! The original legislation creating street-legal OHV status provided for requirements ensuring that vehicles have expensive registration (to cover both State Parks and DMV financial needs) Insurance, driver's licenses, and safety equipment (turn signal, mirrors, horns brake lights, headlights--not all of which are required on stickered OHV vehicles.
SB168 would replace state-wide consistent street-legal OHV travel regulations with a myriad of unknown, confusing and restrictive local ordinances.
Some background: Grand County and the City of Moab have a primary issue with the sound of OHVs. Clif Koontz with Ride With Respect, Brett Stewart and others have tried to work with both entities with very little success or cooperative efforts from the county or the city. Moab has a noise ordinance. Reports indicate it has not been used or enforced.
An important question is how many other counties and cities which fall under the 'tourist town' designation are or will be requesting local control over street-legal OHVs?  (The list includes Kanab, Springdale, Tropic, Virgin, Orderville, Panguitch, Brian Head, Bluff, Boulder, Escalante and Green River) The wider benefits of state-wide uniform street-legal OHV travel certainly trumps inconsistent and confusing local regulations.
Contact your senator and representative! Here is a short and sweet sample message you are welcome to share and/or modify:
I have become aware that Senate Bill 168 has been introduced to allow certain cities or towns to restrict the use of street-legal OHVs on their roads.
As an owner of a street-legal OHV I find such a proposal not only discriminatory, but frustratingly confusing ! How do I know where I will be able to use my otherwise legal unit when I travel and visit other communities within the state?
This bill may appease a certain special interest group or community but certainly is not appropriate to provide this uniquely targeted restriction on one class of street-legal vehicles.
I sincerely ask you to oppose this legislation.
Back to top

Hello, my name is: Jim

2020 Jeep Gladiator
-Falcon Shocks
-2" Lift, 37" Tires/Wheels
-Electronic rock sliders
2023 Polaris Sportsman XP 1000 (HO/EPS/Jet Black)
WWW   IP Logged
God Member

Posts: 254

Re: SB168
Reply #1 - 02/17/21 at 22:38:38
Good post.  I'll contact them.
Back to top
  IP Logged
Pages: 1
Send Topic Print