Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances bill to boost off‑highway vehicle funding amid highway maintenance concerns
Summary
Senators advanced HB 59 to raise the off-highway vehicle program cap from $850,000 to $1 million (a $350,000 increase) so vehicle users get a larger share of motor-fuel-derived allocations; proponents said committee hearings showed broad support and the change yields a net-zero FY04 fiscal note, while some senators warned it would divert maintenance funds from highways.
Senator Allen, speaking as floor sponsor for House Bill 59 (Representative Goodfellow sponsor in the House), told the Senate the bill would increase the cap on off‑highway vehicle program allocations from $850,000 to $1,000,000 by moving $350,000 into the trails/off‑highway account. "We have currently in place a process for funding our boating ... and off highway facilities by the assessment of their tax revenues ... that cap was 850,000," he said, adding that the new cap would be a million and that the bill passed both committees unanimously.
Allen said the change produces a net-zero fiscal note for FY04 because money is moved between the transportation fund and the general fund for accounting in that year. He told senators the allocation is based on conservative estimates of usage and represents more direct investment in trails and off‑highway facilities used by the fee-paying population.
Several senators pressed for clarity about fiscal impacts. Senator Valentine warned the Senate was "struggling right now to keep our highways going" and said moving $350,000 risks diverting maintenance and operations dollars from the highway system. Supporters responded that the off‑highway allocation represents funds generated by those users and that UDOT has not been directly maintaining those facilities.
Senator Eastman declared a conflict and explained he believed the transfer was a modest share of funds expended by off‑highway users and that UDOT did not oppose the transfer in committee. On roll call, the Senate approved HB 59 with 25 aye votes, 1 nay and 3 absences, and the bill advanced to the third‑reading calendar.
What happens next: HB 59 moves to the third‑reading calendar; fiscal and local impacts will be picked up in subsequent appropriations and implementation discussions.
