Committee hears bill to create registration and inspection pathway for 'street‑legal special purpose vehicles'

Senate Bill 63, introduced to the Kentucky Senate Committee on Transportation by Sen. Brandon Storm (R–District 21), would define and authorize an optional registration and inspection pathway for what the bill calls “street‑legal special purpose vehicles” (for example, UTVs/side‑by‑sides that meet equipment and safety requirements).

Storm said the bill exempts vehicles used primarily for farm or agricultural activities and does not mandate separate inspection or insurance for those agricultural vehicles. Under the draft language discussed, a street‑legal special purpose vehicle must meet safety features such as roll bars, seat belts and windshields; be inspected by a certified inspector; and register with the county clerk for a $10 fee and receive a motorcycle registration plate. A sheriff’s inspection fee of $25 was discussed in committee text. The bill prohibits operation on controlled‑access highways, federal highways, and limits continuous operation on center‑line highways to 20 miles.

Eric Hubbard of Backroads of Appalachia and other witnesses emphasized economic development from powersports and motorsports tourism, citing examples such as West Virginia’s Hatfield‑McCoy trail system and state comparisons where registration attracts out‑of‑state riders and local spending. Hubbard said, “Senate Bill 63 is an an opportunity for economic growth and adventure.” He and other proponents said Kentucky currently loses registrations and tax revenue to states that allow nonresident registration, citing Montana and Vermont as examples where nonresidents can register vehicles.

Committee members asked clarifying questions to ensure agricultural uses remain exempt and to confirm that the bill is optional for owners. Sen. Carpenter, who said he uses such vehicles on his farm, sought assurance the bill would not affect farm‑to‑farm use. Storm and colleagues clarified the bill is intended only for vehicles that owners choose to make street legal; recreational users who want to ride between trailheads, gas stations and local businesses would be covered if they register and meet inspection requirements.

A motion and second were recorded for the committee substitute and discussion continued, but a final roll‑call vote on SB 63 was not recorded in the provided transcript.

Proponents framed the bill as a tool for tourism, local business support and second‑chance employment in economically impacted regions, while committee members sought language clarity around agricultural exemptions, operational limits and enforcement.

Because the transcript ends during questions and discussion, the committee’s final recorded action on SB 63 (if any) is not included in the provided material.