Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears competing views on allowing certain ATVs on Oregon highways outside interstates
Summary
House Bill 3155 would permit class 1, 3 and 4 ATVs on non‑interstate highways subject to equipment and registration requirements. Supporters said the change would reduce local regulatory patchwork and help rural mobility; ODOT warned there are no federal on‑road equipment standards and highlighted logistical questions.
Representative Jamie Kate (House District 11) described House Bill 3155 as an attempt to replace a confusing patchwork of local rules with a single statewide standard allowing the on‑road use of certain classes of all‑terrain vehicles outside interstate highways, provided vehicles meet specified equipment standards and are registered.
“For the record, my name is Jamie Kate, and I'm the State Representative for House District 11,” Kate told the committee, urging lawmakers to “correct this patchwork of regulations and prioritize the passage of House Bill 3,155 this session.”
The nut graf: proponents said a uniform registration and equipment standard would aid enforcement, create rural mobility and economic opportunities, and accommodate growing markets — including electric side‑by‑sides. Opponents and agency witnesses cautioned that equipment and safety standards for on‑road use are not federally defined and that the bill leaves open many implementation questions.
Dealers and industry representatives argued registration and inspection are feasible with existing systems. Gary Sargent, representing powersports dealers, testified he has been an Oregon dealer for five decades and said technical inspection and registration could be handled under existing dealer and DMV authorities. “This is my fiftieth year as a powersport and automotive dealer,” Sargent said, and outlined existing mechanisms dealers use to certify equipment and the potential to adapt plate and registration systems.
Local riders and county jurisdictions testified in support. David Schomburg, a Clackamas County resident and OHV rider, told the committee, “To my knowledge, there has never been a fatality, in Lake County on an OHV on a county road,” and cited local economic benefits when counties open roads to OHVs.
State transportation staff raised logistical and safety concerns. Amy Joyce of the Oregon Department of Transportation said there are “no federal equipment standards for on road use of ATVs,” and noted wide variation in vehicle types that could be implicated. ODOT emphasized that registration, inspection protocols, enforcement roles and whether urban highways should be included would need resolution. Joyce also pointed to uncertainty about emissions testing, licensing requirements and how local jurisdictions would interact with a statewide rule.
Committee members probed safety, urban versus rural application, and whether other states have workable models. Several members said legislative counsel and further outreach to other states and agencies would help clarify whether local jurisdictions could exclude specific roads or municipalities and how to structure any registration program. No committee vote was taken; the hearing closed after extensive Q&A and public testimony.
