Fenton aldermen direct staff to draft rules for golf carts, UTVs and ebikes after safety, enforcement debate

The Fenton Board of Aldermen voted Oct. 2 to direct city staff to draft regulations that would allow and define the use of alternative vehicles—such as low-speed vehicles, utility task vehicles (UTVs), all-terrain vehicles (ATVs), and electric bicycles—on city streets, and to return with permit and enforcement proposals.

The move followed more than an hour of discussion in the Police & Municipal Courts committee about safety, enforcement and where motorized devices should be allowed. Supporters cited the prevalence of existing vehicles and the need to update city code; opponents warned that many off-road vehicles were not designed for paved streets, that loud exhaust and high top speeds could create public-safety and noise problems, and that officers might have difficulty distinguishing vehicle classes in the field.

Mayor Moran summarized long-standing local practice, saying some residents have used these vehicles for years and noting multiple previous police chiefs had treated them as a nonissue. "I've had ATVs, I've had golf carts, different types of golf carts," Mayor Moran said during the discussion. He and other proponents argued municipalities should spell out requirements so owners can bring vehicles into compliance.

Aldermen who opposed broad legalization argued that some vehicles have knobby tires, limited braking, and are built for off-road use; they recommended limiting allowances to vehicles that meet clear equipment and safety standards. One alderman said, "They're much faster than a golf cart" and noted that knobby tires and high speeds pose risks in wet conditions and on paved streets (transcript excerpt). Those concerns were balanced by other aldermen who argued that if a vehicle is "street worthy" with required lighting, seat belts and a slow-moving-vehicle marker then it should be eligible for local approval.

Staff and the city attorney outlined two related points: (1) state law gives municipalities discretion to regulate low-speed and similar vehicles on streets; and (2) electric bicycles are treated differently under the state statute and may not be prohibited from streets where bicycles are allowed, though parks and paved multi-use paths can be regulated locally. Staff suggested using a permit or sticker program (several aldermen cited neighboring communities' $15 permit fee as an example) and providing vehicle owners a signed acknowledgement of ordinance requirements at issuance.

The board voted on a motion to have staff draft regulations and return to the board with proposed ordinances and permitting language. The motion passed on a voice vote.

What happens next: staff will draft ordinance language and permit requirements, and the parks committee will separately review restrictions for motorized devices on park paths and trails (staff discussed a 15-mph cap for ebikes on some paved park paths as a drafting example). The committee also discussed options such as limiting gasoline-powered bikes or requiring only electric propulsion, and whether inspections should be required or a permit/sticker plus owner acknowledgement would suffice.

Speakers quoted in this article are included in the speaker list below and are cited verbatim from the meeting transcript where indicated.