Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ordinance 91 Atv Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident urges expansion of Ordinance 91 to permit Class 1 and 4 ATVs on rural county roads
Summary
A Klamath County resident asked commissioners to broaden Ordinance 91 to allow Class 1 and Class 4 ATVs on additional county roads to improve access to public wilderness; commissioners asked for a narrower, targeted proposal and input from public works and law enforcement before any ordinance change.
Jason Jennings, a Klamath County resident, asked the Board of Commissioners on Oct. 22 to expand Ordinance 91 — which currently permits ATV/UTV use on a small stretch (Crescent Cutoff Road) — so Class 1 and Class 4 off‑road vehicles can legally travel on additional county roads to reach public wilderness and staging points. “We’re just looking to be able to afford the same right to go from, like, my driveway up to Stouffville Mountain,” Jennings said, describing long trailers or forced detours to reach public land.
Jennings and a colleague showed maps indicating where county roads intersect Motor Vehicle Use Areas on federal lands and highlighted limited parking at common access points such as the Gerber Guard Station. Presenters said other Oregon counties, including Lake and Union, have broader ATV/UTV access and suggested Klamath could adopt a similarly scaled approach while excluding city streets.
Board members and a former county forest deputy raised implementation concerns. The former deputy said enforcement and infrastructure would be required: “As soon as we do that, we gotta put signage. How do we pay for those signs? It will increase law enforcement call logs,” and suggested contacting Deputy Steve Leslie at the sheriff’s office for enforcement input. Commissioners highlighted potential registration, staffing and budget impacts if the county implemented a registration or oversight program.
Commissioners signaled support for a targeted pilot approach rather than a countywide change. The chair asked the presenters to prepare a narrower proposal focused on specific rural corridors, to consult public works and law enforcement, and to return for further review and public input. “Why don’t you try to get together … come up with something a little more focused, not countywide, something a little smaller, and then reach out to one of us,” the chair said.
Next steps: Jennings and colleagues will draft a more limited proposal and work with county staff on scope and public outreach; the board did not take formal action or vote on ordinance changes at the meeting.
Ending note: Commissioners did not commit to a countywide ordinance and emphasized that future action would require staff review, law enforcement input and likely public notice before any formal ordinance change.
