Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utvs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senators discuss two‑track approach for UTVs; committee asks staff to pursue options
Summary
After lengthy discussion about neighborhood, agricultural and on‑road uses of utility terrain vehicles (UTVs), the committee asked staff to prepare drafts that would treat UTVs either as medium‑speed vehicles or via a dual‑track approach and carried the bill over.
Senate Bill S222, a proposal addressing utility terrain vehicles (UTVs), drew extended committee discussion about how to reconcile neighborhood uses, farm needs and highway safety. Senators directed staff to prepare draft options — including treating some UTVs as medium‑speed vehicles or creating separate tracks for agricultural and neighborhood uses — and carried the bill for further work.
Committee members described two principal user categories: local/neighborhood use (similar to golf carts) and agricultural or rural cross‑road travel where a vehicle may need to move between properties on higher‑speed roads. The chair summarized the dilemma: UTVs that are suitable for slow, neighborhood travel are not engineered for sustained on‑road use, yet some farmers and rural property owners need limited on‑road access for agricultural tasks.
Charlie Stabler and other supporters of UTV legalization asked senators to consider practicality for local users and noted significant public support. Stabler told the committee he wanted to ensure people who traveled to testify were recognized and that he would answer questions based on prior submittals.
Senators proposed two paths: 1) regulate UTVs as medium‑speed vehicles with safety equipment and titling like MSVs, opening access to roads up to 45 mph; or 2) create a dual‑track approach allowing UTVs to operate with low‑speed vehicle rules for neighborhood uses (up to 35 mph) and provide a narrowly tailored rural/agricultural exception to allow limited on‑road travel for farm operations. Supporters of the medium‑speed approach argued UTVs with required lighting, seat belts and other safety features are more akin to MSVs than golf carts. Others cautioned that UTVs built for off‑road use often have higher centers of gravity and soft off‑road tires that increase rollover risk on pavement.
Committee members also said an amendment addressing liability and production issues (discussed with Honda representatives and others) is being prepared. The chair asked staff to draft language for both tracks so senators could compare options at the next meeting. The committee carried S222 over for additional drafting and review.
No formal vote to advance the bill was taken; the committee’s action was to ask staff for drafting options and to reconvene with refined text.
