|
By: Robert Janis
A Coalition of
Diverse Groups Gets Comprehensive OHV
Legislation in Arizona -- A Case Study
No one knows more about the importance of
regulating off-highway vehicle use than the OHV
enthusiasts themselves. They understand that
state laws are necessary to develop an apparatus
to raise funds for the maintenance and creation
of trails, for the policing of the use of those
trails, for the proper marking of the trails,
and providing the authority for off-highway
riders to cross different designations of trails
or roadways to get to the actual trails they
wish to traverse.
The OHV community in
Arizona realized that there were certain things
lacking, and they coalesced along with other
groups who had a vested interest in using trails
and were able to get a law passed out of the
state legislature and signed by the governor.
The Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Coalition was
the initial group that got the ball rolling. The
coalition, under the direction of Jeff Gursh,
hired a lobbyist, Nick Simonetta, and teamed up
with a state representative dedicated to the
issues, Jerry Weiers.
In conversations they
isolated what issues needed to be addressed in a
comprehensive bill. The issues included:
- Funding and creating a proper mechanism to
disperse and account for the use of the funds
- Proper marking and maintenance of the trails
- Proper Law Enforcement
- Proper Environmental Stewardship
- The recognition of the use of crossing trails,
state trust land, BLM land and roadways to get
to the designated OHV trails
- Creation of an education program that would
alert the users on the proper use of the trails
- Creation of safety programs
Simonetta
indicated that as far as OHV recreation was
concerned, things were a mess. “Public land
managers were threatening closures, and OHV
owners were having a hard time knowing where
they could ride,” said Simonetta. “And, although
there was a funding process, it was highly
lacking. It was based on a portion of the gas
tax that contributes a disproportionally low
amount to the OHV fund. On top of that, since
that funding mechanism was created, off-highway
vehicle use went up 350 percent. This combined
with regular fund sweeps during the state budget
processes has resulted in a lack of adequate
money to create trails, maintain the trails,
mitigate damage, provide education on how to
maximize responsible enjoyment in the use of
trails, and to address safety issues.”
Moreover, money that was raised was not properly
tracked. Agencies that had the right to the
funds were using it in diverse ways other than
OHV recreation. This contributed to the fact
that there was not enough money for the trails.
The result was bad management all around.
“When things are not properly managed, there is
a downward spiral effect,” said Simonetta. “You
wind up with land managers who say that they
don’t have the money to deal with things that
are necessary. So, they can’t deal with or
ignore complaints from users of the trails or
local residents who happen to live next to the
trails.
“Ultimately, land managers find it
easier to consider shutting things down because
they don’t have the money to deal with key
issues,” continued Simonetta. “In these
circumstances, you have people who have a
legitimate recreation to pursue, but they don’t
have any place to pursue it. So you wind up with
people all over the place “free for all’ing” and
that creates more danger, more damage, and
generally putting people who want to do the
right thing into a position of breaking the
law--a position they should never have to be
in.”
This was the situation facing OHVers in
Arizona in 2007 when Representative Weiers
introduced his first attempt at a comprehensive
bill.
Drafting the Bill
The concern of
raising funds in the 2007 legislation
concentrated on the sale of a permit sticker for
an approximate fee of $20 per year. Now some may
look upon this as a tax. However, OHV
enthusiasts realized that it was the only
workable way to raise funds; and they went along
with it. Moreover, a procedure was included to
assure accountability. That is, a mechanism was
included that monitored how the money was being
spent by the state agencies receiving it. So, it
went to OHV concerns and not to other issues.
A number of things were used to address the
problem of crossing different designations of
land to reach the OHV trails. Many of those
crossing areas are actual roads. So, an OHV
crossing these roads would have to be street
worthy. The law included what constituted a
street-worthy OHV, and a fee of about $4 was
added so that the OHV rider would not have to
spend more money for permission to use these
roads. Therefore, the authority to cross state
trust land was allowed for people who had the
permit without need to purchase the typically
required recreational permit.
Usable trails
would be clearly marked. Currently, trails are
generally not adequately marked nor are they
well thought out so people ride into dead ends
and would have to turn around and come back out
again. Or, they would follow a non-marked trail
and would be surprisingly confronted by a mine
shaft. It became a question of safety and
connectivity so the trails would make sense on a
number of levels, noted Simonetta. The
legislation also called for funds to be used to
mark trails and to develop materials that would
help riders navigate different areas.
Representative Weiers was able to build a
coalition that included the Arizona Off-Highway
Vehicle Coalition, other ATV and OHV
associations and groups, local clubs, sportsmen
and hunting groups, and other groups who had a
vested interest in a managed trail system.
One important constituency was lukewarm toward
the bill--they didn’t oppose it but they didn’t
promote it, either. That group was
conservationists.
The bill passed the Arizona
State House of Representatives, and it was sent
over to the state senate. The bill didn’t come
up for a vote in the senate until the last day
of the legislative session, and it lost by one
vote. Simonetta believes that the fact that it
was voted on the last day of the session when
some senators were not in attendance and the
lukewarm reaction toward the bill by the
environmental community caused the defeat.
So, after the legislation failed, Simonetta,
Gursh, and Weiers began working together with
other stakeholders to draft a new bill for the
2008 legislative calendar.
They worked hard
to develop the same coalition of support they
had for the 2007 bill, but this time included
conservation groups as fully interested partners
in the effort. They worked with each and every
group or organization to assure that they had
input in the modification of the legislation.
Through the process, all groups ultimately felt
they had a vested interest in the success of the
legislation.
For the most part, the same
things that were in the 2007 bill were included
in the 2008 bill with adjustments that sharpened
the focus of the scope, use, and accountability
of the funds. In short, everyone was onboard.
The bill passed the State House of
Representatives, the state senate, and was
signed by the governor. It goes into effect at
the end of September this year, and the OHV
funding mechanism begins January 1, 2009.
“All parties worked together in good faith and
rallied behind the leadership of Representative
Weiers as the prime sponsor with tremendous help
from Senator Linda Gray. Everyone coalesced
around issues each group cared about, and we
worked together to satisfy everyone’s various
needs. That’s why we had such a broad level of
support that included hunters, sportsmen,
conservationists, law enforcement groups,
recreational groups, OHV dealers, responsible
trail groups, and others. We could all work
together in good faith because we all believed
we had a good product that could benefit the
public, the state, and all the stakeholders,”
concluded Simonetta.
|
