Washington State Legislation affecting OHV's

[bbbom]

EEEErrrrrrrrrrrccccccchhhhhhhhhhh back up, hold on!!!!!

Okay, Rep. Condotta just called me with more information and an explanation of what he is trying to accomplish (due to my emails last night opposing SHB2919).

Basically, the fee increase in SHB2919 is packaged with the new NOVA Distribution Bill HB2489 and the legalization of ORV's on some non-highway roads & parking lots HB2356.

According to Rep. Condotta, the new NOVA bill will help provide a larger amount of money for motorized uses. He did say that the real winners are the new classification of "other users" but the way the bill is written, the motorized uses should be able to crossover somewhat with the "Other" classification.

The Fee's in 2919 will go into the NOVA Account but all Fee's collected according to the new NOVA bill will be used only for and at the discretion of the motorized users. In addition, the new NOVA bill gives us closer to 40% of the total funding available (if I caught this correctly, I'm waiting for the latest version of HB2489 to show up in my email).

Also in HB2489 is a requirement to make registration of ORV's mandatory. Rep. Condotta feels that this is necessary because due to the lack of registration numbers, the motorized community is underrepresented in census numbers similar to the Fuel Use Study. If you don't register your ORV then it doesn't exist and it doesn't need a trail.

So, in talking with Rep. Condotta (a new experience for me as I've never had a Washington State Rep that I couldn't vote for ever return a message until now) the three bills need to get through the house intact.

I have to say that I will give my support to the three bills. He is a motorized user he says, he's worked on the package for the last year and this is the best we can get for now apparently.

Now I have to go back & change my letter & send it out again.

 

[bbbom]

The NMA's position on HB2919

Subject: House BIll 2919 ORV Tag Fee Increase


Representative Cary Condotta -

The current ORV tag bill (HB 2919) seeking to increase our ORV tag fee from $5.00 to $18.00 basic fee ( + handling fees of course) does NOT appear to currently contain any of the conditions established by the Northwest Motorcycle Association as the initial criteria for backing this Bill which were established back in September of 2003.

Why does the current HB 2919 only raise the fee and not address any of these other issues?

At last night's NMA Meeting a new motion was made by the Tacoma Motorcycle Club representative to that meeting and seconded by another. It has not yet been voted on but will be soon. That motion is to prevent the NMA from supporting an ORV tag fee increase until such time as the motorized users contributing those funds, are give binding, not advisory, control of those funds as administered by the IAC. This motion further states there must be a written guarantee (immediate sunset provision) in this Bill that these ORV tag fees will totally cease to exist if appropriated in any way differently by the Legislature at some point in the future.

What do you think of these additions to the criteria for supporting HB 2919?

Sincerely,

Dave Hiatt


By way of review -

The link I obtained the detailed language for HB 2919 tonight was -
http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2003-04/House/2900-2924/2919_01222004 .txt


Here is an excerpt from the September NMA Board meeting record of decisions.

"Condotta's proposal is to raise the ORV fee portion of the tag from $5 to $15. We discussed the conditions the NMA wants in order to support Condotta on this.

1) Only the motorized users will be able to vote on projects applying for these funds.
2) Isolate these funds from the gas tax money and make sure our percentage of the gas tax NOVA percentage does NOT include these funds, i.e. we get our 20% (or XX amount share) of the gas tax money PLUS the sole use of these ORV sticker funds.
3) Requires detailed accounting of all NOVA gas tax funds utilized by DNR
4) ORV tag comes with your parking pass to state recreational areas such as DNR land like hunting license does for wildlife funded parking areas. No extra charge to ORV owners for use of State Lands!
5) If possible, push for motorized NOVA funds to be administered by private Trust instead of IAC."

 

[splatt]

Thanks for the heads up.

Steve

 

[Tod]

Watch out for SB6234! Another bill to steal most of our ORV funds.

 

[Tahuya Rat]

Subject: House BIll 2919 ORV Tag Fee Increase

The first I'd heard of the proposed increase was @ a Tahuya Focus group. The DNR's rep for the NOVA meetings described it exactly as the NMA has, essentially a fund set up by us for us and administrated by us in cooperation with the powers that be. He made it very clear that there was absolutely no confusion with or opposition to this concept by anyone, including other user groups such as the WTA.

I'll take these notes with me to Thursday's meeting and see if I can get any feedback.

Thanks for keeping us posted :clue:

 

[Tahuya Rat]

HOUSE BILL REPORT
HB 2919
http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/2003-04/House/2900-2924/2919_hbr_02042004.txt
As Reported by House Committee On:
Fisheries, Ecology & Parks

Title: An act relating to off-road vehicle use permits.

Brief Description: Adjusting ORV fees.

Sponsors: Representatives Condotta, Cooper and Hinkle.

Brief History:
Committee Activity:
Fisheries, Ecology & Parks: 2/3/04 [DPS].

Brief Summary of Substitute Bill·Increases annual off-road vehicle (ORV) use permits from $5 to $18, and
increases temporary 60 day ORV use permits from $2 to $7.


HOUSE COMMITTEE ON FISHERIES, ECOLOGY & PARKS

Majority Report: The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do
pass. Signed by 9 members: Representatives Cooper, Chair; Upthegrove, Vice Chair;
Sump, Ranking Minority Member; Hinkle, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Buck,
Hatfield, O'Brien, Pearson and Simpson, D.

Staff: Jeff Olsen (786-7157).

Background:

Persons wishing to operate an off-road vehicle (ORV) in Washington must obtain an
ORV use permit from the Department of Licensing (DOL) or an authorized agent. There
are several exceptions to the ORV use permit requirement including ORVs operated by
federal, state or local governments and ORVs operated on lands owned or leased by the
operator. In addition, ORVs registered as vehicles for valid operation on state highways
are not required to obtain an ORV use permit.

Currently, an annual ORV use permit or a renewal costs $5. Temporary permits, which
are valid for 60 days, cost $2.

After retaining sufficient funds to cover administrative expenses for the DOL, moneys
collected for ORV use permits are deposited in the Nonhighway and Off-road Vehicle
Program Activities (NOVA) account, along with NOVA funds from the motor vehicle tax
refund. The Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC) oversees the NOVA
grant program, providing funding for the development and management of ORV and
nonhighway road recreation facilities. Moneys from ORV permit use fees may only be
expended for ORV recreation facilities.



Summary of Substitute Bill:

The price of an annual ORV use permit or a renewal is increased from $5 to $18.
Temporary 60 day ORV use permit fees are increased from $2 to $7. After retaining
funds to cover administrative costs for the DOL, revenues from the ORV permit use fee
are deposited in the NOVA account for ORV recreation facilities.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:

The proposed substitute bill establishes a November 1, 2004 effective date for the bill.



Appropriation: None.

Fiscal Note: Available.

Effective Date of Substitute Bill: The bill takes effect on November 1, 2004.

Testimony For: This bill represents the last piece of the changes being proposed for the
NOVA program. With the proposed redistribution of fees from the NOVA program, the
motorized community felt it was necessary to add more funds to the system. The
motorized community has not seen a fee increase since 1971. The motor sports dealers
support the bill, it is an excellent way for users to provide funding to preserve riding
opportunities. This bill gives the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) the
opportunity to work with ORV users to provide trails and facilities. The DNR
appreciates all of the volunteer time provided by ORV users to help manage ORV areas.

Testimony Against: None.

Persons Testifying: Representative Condotta, prime sponsor; Mark Briant, Washington
State Motorsports Dealers Association; Pene Speaks, Department of Natural Resources;
and Eric Andersen, Washington State Department of Licensing.

Persons Signed In To Testify But Not Testifying: None.

 

[MACE]

HB2413 - Limiting nuisance noise from off-road vehicles. This one restricts your right to ride your OHV on your own property within 250 feet of another property owner's residence, barn stable, or penned livestock. We need to fight this one HARD!!

And finally there is the wonderful HB2919 - increasing ORV tag fees from $5 to $18 This one was actually suggested by the NMA (Northwest Motorcycle Assoc.)

Great synopsis BBBOM. I'd just like to add a bit. I am very concerned about giving HB2413 any publicity. It is one of those bills that will probably just fade away unless it catches the interest of the media and non-riding public. It sounds like a no brainer common sense bill until you unearth the fact that it is really an anti home track bill. I guarantee that if KOMO news gets ahold of it we are in deep poo. I think we should watch it and NOT even mention it unless it gets out of committee. If it gets out of committee we need to call out the calvalry.

HB 2919 The fee increase was certainly NOT suggested by NMA leadership. They were approached and asked to support the bill and replied that theywould oppose the bill without the stipulations already mentioned. There are several examples of other states "stealing" funds from ORV registrations and putting them in the general funds. The NMA is working hard to ensure that any fees taken from ORV users are used to Preserve and Enhance the ORV community.

 

[Tod]

Mace is right on the mark (as usual) concerning HB2413. It is definately an anti-home track bill. If noise is an issue, then there are already laws addressing this. If dust is an issue, the law books cover this too.

As long as this bill does not get out of committee, watch, listen, but do not act unless it's one on one, face to face with a house of representatives member that represents you, is strongly on our side and is a member of the applicable house committee. Silly bills come up every year and the vast majority die from self imposed dumbness.

If it does move to a vote of the full house, then it is time to blast away.

Please concentrate you effort on the bills that will steal your gas tax funds. That is theft. Don't waste time. Hammer your representatives hard. Once the funds are reappropriated, you'll never get them back, but you will keep paying anyway.

Yeah, I'm back in the USA and pissed off again :p

If you want to see what happens if you don't fight for your rights, go to France :uh:

And a parting thought: :thumb:

"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animating contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!"

Samuel Adams

 

[bbbom]

Thanks for the insight Mace & Tod, looks like HB2413 and HB2858/SB6429 fell victim to their own idiocity - neither have made it out of Committee from what I saw and none of them were on the Agenda's up to the cutoff date.

HB2919, guess I misunderstood the way it came to be but anyways, it's out of the FEP Committee and on the Capital Budget Committee Agenda for tomorrow. Incidentally, I saw absolutely NO provisions for the Tag Fees to go anywhere near any type of moto fund.

Just sent my letter of opposition off to my Rep on the Capital Budget and a few others.

Why can't the ORV tag fees be treated like the snowmobile tag fees? They go directly into the Snowmobile Program Fund, where's our ORV fund?

 

[bbbom]

EEEErrrrrrrrrrrccccccchhhhhhhhhhh back up, hold on!!!!!

Okay, Rep. Condotta just called me with more information and an explanation of what he is trying to accomplish (due to my emails last night opposing SHB2919).

Basically, the fee increase in SHB2919 is packaged with the new NOVA Distribution Bill HB2489 and the legalization of ORV's on some non-highway roads & parking lots HB2356.

According to Rep. Condotta, the new NOVA bill will help provide a larger amount of money for motorized uses. He did say that the real winners are the new classification of "other users" but the way the bill is written, the motorized uses should be able to crossover somewhat with the "Other" classification.

The Fee's in 2919 will go into the NOVA Account but all Fee's collected according to the new NOVA bill will be used only for and at the discretion of the motorized users. In addition, the new NOVA bill gives us closer to 40% of the total funding available (if I caught this correctly, I'm waiting for the latest version of HB2489 to show up in my email).

Also in HB2489 is a requirement to make registration of ORV's mandatory. Rep. Condotta feels that this is necessary because due to the lack of registration numbers, the motorized community is underrepresented in census numbers similar to the Fuel Use Study. If you don't register your ORV then it doesn't exist and it doesn't need a trail.

So, in talking with Rep. Condotta (a new experience for me as I've never had a Washington State Rep that I couldn't vote for ever return a message until now) the three bills need to get through the house intact.

I have to say that I will give my support to the three bills. He is a motorized user he says, he's worked on the package for the last year and this is the best we can get for now apparently.

Now I have to go back & change my letter & send it out again. :uh:

 

[bbbom]

SHB2919 - increasing ORV tag fees, SHB2489 - changes in the distribution of NOVA funding, and ESHB2356 - allowing ORV's on certain non-highway roads have all 3 passed out of the House of Reps and are currently in the Senate's Parks, Fish & Wildlife Committee.

They are on the PF&W Committee Agenda for Monday, February 23rd. Get your comments in to the Committee ASAP.