Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Snowmobile Trail Funding topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee hears bill to add $5 rental fee for snowmobile grooming funds; FWP describes formula-based distribution

Senate Finance and Claims · February 11, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

SB 165 would charge a $5 fee on snowmobile rentals and return proceeds to local grooming clubs through Fish, Wildlife & Parks’ existing grant formula; proponents said roughly $380,000/year would be available for high-use tourism areas while FWP explained annual allocation and reporting processes.

Senator Barry Usher introduced Senate Bill 165 to add a $5 fee to snowmobile rentals to raise funds for grooming trails that have seen increased wear from tourism. Fred Bailey of the Montana Snowmobile Association said tourism and rental volumes have grown sharply in some areas and that a $5 per rental fee would be “adequate to fund those high use areas.”

Proponents described the mechanics: rental vendors would collect the fee, report counts to Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP), and remit funds to a state account that would follow the program’s existing grant allocation process. FWP assistant administrator Beth Shumate explained the department conducts an annual allocation meeting with snowmobile clubs and distributes funds using a formula that considers permit sales and local needs; she said the current program distributes roughly $460,000 annually across 26 clubs and that rental fees would be an add-on to that process.

Committee members probed administration and compliance questions: who collects the fee, whether vendors will have to indicate where machines are ridden versus where they are rented, and whether there are vendor commissions or administrative costs for processing remittances. FWP and proponents said vendors would remit revenues directly to FWP and the amended bill language aims to address technical fiscal-note concerns and administrative processes.

What happens next: The committee accepted technical clarifications and later moved SB 165 forward in executive action (bill ultimately passed Finance and Claims as recorded in executive-action votes).