BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 628
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 628 (Conway)
As Amended August 30, 2011
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |54-10|(May 31, 2011) |SENATE: |29-7 |(September 7, |
| | | | | |2011) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: TRANS.
SUMMARY : Authorizes a pilot project to allow off-highway
vehicles (OHV) to operate on combined-use highways in Inyo
County, under certain conditions.
The Senate amendments:
1)Clarify that a majority of the Inyo County Board of
Supervisors (not a majority of the Board's quorum as
previously proposed) must vote to approve the procedures for
designating highways or roads for inclusion in the pilot
project; also, require the pilot project to include procedures
for the removal of a combined-use designation.
2)Restrict Inyo County's authority to establish a pilot project
for combined-use highways to highway segments no more than 10
miles long and only if the Commissioner of the California
Highway Patrol (CHP) finds that the combined-use designation
would not create a potential traffic safety hazard.
3)Expand the reasons for which a pilot project can be
established to include, in addition to providing a unified
system of trails for off-highway motor vehicles, preserving
traffic safety, improving natural resource protection,
reducing off-highway vehicle trespassing on private land, and
minimizing impacts on county residents.
4)Require Inyo County, as a part of the pilot project, to
include an opportunity for public comment at a public hearing.
5)Modify reporting requirements to add specific areas of impact
to be evaluated as well as a description of the public
comments received at a public hearing on the program.
AB 628
Page 2
6)Make other, technical amendments.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides, generally, that a person may not drive a motor
vehicle upon a highway, unless the person holds a valid
driver's license.
2)Does not require a person to have a driver's license to
operate a registered off-highway vehicle (OHV) off the
highway, including incidental highway crossings.
3)Provides that a valid on-highway registration allows a vehicle
to be operated both on and off the highway, although not all
OHVs are eligible for on-highway registration (e.g.,
all-terrain vehicles).
4)Prohibits a vehicle registered as an OHV from being operated
on public streets, except as noted below.
5)Provides that an OHV may be operated on a highway if the use
is to cross the highway or under the condition that a local
authority, a federal government agency, or the Department of
Parks and Recreation (DPR), for highways under their
respective jurisdiction, designates a highway segment for
combined use of OHVs and regular traffic; the highway segment
cannot be longer than three miles long and must meet one the
following criteria:
a) Provide a connecting link between OHV trails segments;
b) Link an OHV recreational use area and necessary service
facilities; or,
c) Connect lodging facilities with an OHV recreational
facility.
6)Prohibits, explicitly, a freeway from being designated for the
combined use of regular traffic and OHVs.
7)Authorizes the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission
to propose highway segments for combined-use designation.
8)Provides that, prior to designating a highway for combined
AB 628
Page 3
use, a local agency, federal agency, or the Director of DPR
must notify the CHP Commissioner and may not designate a road
for combined use if the CHP believes doing so would create a
potential traffic safety hazard.
9)Requires signs approved by the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) on designated combined use highways
before the designation can become effective.
10)Makes it unlawful to operate an OHV on a designated
combined-use highway under the following conditions:
a) During darkness;
b) Without a stop light or rubber tires; and,
c) Without a driver's license appropriate for the class of
vehicle being operated.
AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY , this bill was substantially similar
to the version passed by the Senate.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to Assembly Appropriations Committee:
1)Minor, absorbable costs in 2014-15 and 2015-16 to Caltrans,
CHP and DPR to evaluate the pilot project.
2)Unknown, potentially significant legal liabilities to the
state associated with potential injuries.
COMMENTS : According to the author, this bill is intended to
provide Inyo County with the opportunity to link existing OHV
trails to trailheads and neighboring towns via combined-use
highways for distances greater than the current restriction of
three miles. This more-extensive trail will boost economic
development by better serving Inyo County's OHV-based tourist
industry. The author asserts that the Paiute All-Terrain
Vehicle trail system in Fishlake National Forest (Utah) has
demonstrated positive outcomes to its neighboring rural
communities, residents, and tourists and anticipates that the
eastern Sierra in Inyo County would enjoy the same positive
impacts if they had more flexibility in combined-use highway
restrictions.
AB 628
Page 4
The author points out that this bill does not waive driver's
license requirements or alter limitations on the use of combined
highways by OHVs to operate, for example, during hours of
darkness.
Writing in opposition to this bill, opponents argue that the
bill sets a bad precedent that other counties may seek to
follow, compromises the safety of Inyo County residents, and
threatens the emerging balance between OHV use and other users
of public lands. Opponents further argue that a small minority
of off-roaders has wreaked havoc on ranchers, domestic
livestock, homeowners, rural property owners, and public lands.
They fear that this bill will undo the limited constraints that
are in place now to curb destructive and disruptive activities.
Previous legislation: AB 2338 (Conway) of 2010 addressed the
same issue, albeit in a slightly different approach. That bill
passed out of the Legislature without a single "NO" vote.
However, AB 2338 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger who
stated in his veto message, "This bill could expose the state to
liability issues if the CHP allows joint use by off-highway
vehicles and vehicles on roads in Inyo County and an accident
occurs. This liability could result in significant costs to the
state." According to the author, the concept of a pilot project
as proposed in this bill was developed in consultation with the
CHP and is intended to address concerns raised in the veto
message.
Analysis Prepared by : Janet Dawson / TRANS. / (916) 319-2093
FN: 0002533