Scott County fiscal court members agreed to circulate a short online questionnaire to gather public input before deciding whether to adopt an ordinance allowing street-legal special purpose vehicles (SPVs) such as ATVs and UTVs under Senate Bill 63, which took effect June 27.

Judge Covington said the county should collect neighborhood-level responses and noted examples of the survey questions, including residency, vehicle ownership, levels of support and perceived benefits such as convenience or tourism. "Senate Bill 63 became effective June 27," Covington said when introducing the outreach plan.

The court discussed the ordinance's likely geographic scope. JR asked whether county roads are posted at 35 mph by default and whether the city must also opt in; Covington and staff agreed cities would need to adopt their own ordinances to allow SPVs on city streets, and the draft survey should make that distinction explicit. Covington said the survey should note it applies to county roads outside incorporated cities and that private roads and gated subdivisions would not be covered unless specifically named in an ordinance.

Sheriff Nettles confirmed the state law requires a valid driver's license and certain equipment such as lighting and seat belts but does not mandate helmets. "It does not mandate helmets," Sheriff Nettles said. Court members suggested removing redundant questions about equipment that the law already requires and leaving open-ended fields for other suggested restrictions. Several members recommended linking directly to the text of Senate Bill 63 so respondents can review the statute themselves.

Members also raised procedural concerns about survey accuracy. One commissioner worried that anonymous or repeat submissions could skew results and asked staff to explore options such as collecting an email address to reduce duplicate entries while preserving anonymity where needed. The court agreed to post the form for one week, avoid launching during the July 4 holiday weekend, and review results at the next meeting.

Court members said they would also review model ordinances used elsewhere and noted outreach plans to the three cities in the county so municipal leaders could coordinate any separate decisions. No vote was taken; staff will revise the draft, add clarifying language about jurisdiction and state law, and publish the survey for one week.