Committee advances limited street use for 'street‑legal special purpose vehicles' including UTVs

The Kentucky Senate Committee on Transportation voted to report favorably on Senate Bill 63, which would create a new category for "street‑legal special purpose vehicles" (UTV/side‑by‑side style vehicles) and allow owners to register and operate them on specified public roads under defined conditions.

Senator Brandon Storm, sponsor of SB 63, said the bill is optional and does not apply to vehicles “primarily used for farm or agricultural activities.” The measure defines required safety features for a vehicle to be street legal, sets a 20‑mile limit on travel on center‑lined highways, prohibits operation on federal highways or controlled‑access systems, and allows cities, counties or the Department of Natural Resources to prohibit use on particular roads. The bill requires inspection by a certified inspector (the transcript cites a $25 fee to the county sheriff for inspection) and registration with the county clerk for a $10 fee; registered vehicles would receive a motorcycle registration plate to meet the bill’s requirements.

Eric Hubbard, executive director of Backroads of Appalachia, testified about economic benefits, citing multi‑state examples where powersports and trail systems generate visitor spending and jobs; testimony referenced an economic impact figure and visitor counts from events organized in Eastern Kentucky. Sponsor Storm and advocates argued that without state action, some Kentuckians buy registration from permissive states (for example, Montana) and take registered vehicles into Kentucky, diverting tax revenue.

Members asked whether farm uses would be affected; Storm replied the bill specifically excludes vehicles primarily used for farm or agricultural activities. He also said local governments retain authority to ban use on particular routes, and that the provision limiting 20 miles on center‑lined highways was intended to prevent long‑distance commuting on these vehicles while permitting short trips for gas, food or trail access. Senator Burt urged strong helmet encouragement for riders; the transcript records his comment as a safety appeal but the bill does not, in the text presented to the committee, mandate helmets.

The committee adopted a committee substitute and, by roll call, reported SB 63 favorably with the expression of opinion that it should pass. Several senators explained their aye votes and some said they would prefer an opt‑in approach for local governments rather than opt‑out; the bill as passed in committee gives cities and counties authority to prohibit use rather than requiring them to opt in.

If enacted, the measure would be optional for owners who wish to make a vehicle street legal and would leave decisions about local allowances and enforcement to cities and counties under the terms set by the bill.