Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rulemaking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Division proposes OHV-grant rule to allow limited legal work for access protection, with guardrails
Summary
Counsel presented a proposed amendment to the Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Grant rules (R650-301-7) to permit grant funding for certain legal work that documents or defends public rights-of-way, subject to restrictions against duplicative efforts, claims against private landowners or state agencies, and allowable travel and overhead rules.
The commission was notified of a proposed rule amendment to the Off‑Highway Vehicle (OHV) Recreation Grant program that would permit access‑protection grants to fund certain legal work, including narrowly scoped litigation or briefs, so long as guardrails are met.
Counsel Shane Stroud explained the change as an accommodation to the OHV community after prior public feedback. "Opening up the the, availability of grants to fund certain types of litigation or other legal work was probably in the best interest of the OHV community, and in the spirit of a legislation that enables this grant," he said. He added that the division will evaluate requests to ensure the work is not duplicative of county, city or PLIPCO efforts and would not conflict with other access-protection legal work.
The proposed rule (listed in the packet as R650-301-7) allows funds to support projects that document existing OHV routes or further preservation of those routes, and—when appropriate—pay for legal tasks that produce a deliverable product. Stroud gave concrete examples of qualifying requests: funding an amicus brief supporting an action PLIPCO is pursuing or funding an OHV user-group intervention to advance access protection interests. He emphasized several prohibitions: grant funds could not be used to bring claims against private landowners or any state agency or political subdivision; funds could not be used for overhead; and travel expenses will be allowed only if the division finds them necessary and reasonable.
The rule is informational to the commission at this stage; staff will seek final approval from Director Ferri and then file the amendment with the Office of Administrative Rules. No formal commission vote was requested during the meeting.
