ATV association game plan....

fyi



From: Randy Harden
============================================


Dear WATVA members:

Once in awhile something comes along that jumps out at you, something that if we don’t become knowledgeable and then involved, it could take a direction that could really hurt our ATV sport and this industry. An example would be back in late 1999 and early 2000 when our ATV registration program was in jeopardy of losing almost a million dollars, in danger of being transferred to the state’s general revenue account, in what we termed a “legal steal”.

We’re proud to say WATVA and our membership responded in a BIG way to that threat. We appealed to lawmakers and the Governor and went to great lengths to get the information out to you and asked you to call, to send letters or visit your state lawmakers and the Governor’s office. We did our part; you did yours and the Wisconsin ATV program dollars we’re fully restored where they belonged, back into the ATV account!!

Something just as dramatic and just as important COULD happen again. I’m not saying it has happened yet, but if a few things unfold the wrong way, we’ve got the makings for a major catastrophe in our ATV registration program! Let me give you a little background to set the stage.

A local WATVA chapter in Langlade County (White Lake ATV Club) has been working diligently for an ATV trail system that would eventually hook Langlade to Forest County. At question has always been a segment of the proposed new trail that extends south into White Lake. This situation became a procedural issue about a certain segment of the proposed new trail to the point that the issue became contentious. Senator Roger Breske was then asked to pull together a meeting between the DNR and county folks, our local WATVA chapter (the White Lake Club) and our WATVA government relations and land use team. The same meeting also had some local silent sports enthusiasts present.

The meeting results were somewhat muddled to say the least. Could a certain segment of the proposed new trail be considered to go farther south into White Lake than the DNR told us it could? Also at issue was the a policy that centered around a funding stipulation of how in its use the adjoining property was currently designated – would an ATV trail on that segment violate a ruling of this sort ? As the meeting progressed Senator Breske suggested he would submit to the state legislature that an ATV trails study committee be formed to help investigate these kinds of issues as we told him we commonly have objections such as this based on less than clear and accurate facts, at least from our point of view. In the end it was decided this special legislative committee would encompass all trails as the logic was we ATVers interact with and contend with all trail users at one time or another.

Basically we felt then and we still feel today that Senator Breske is really trying his best to help the ATV tourism industry. His suggestion was acted upon in Madison and a special leg council was approved to study and recommend legislative initiatives to address trails in general and ATV access issues specifically. Once the committee was approved, the process for selecting other lawmakers and some citizens was out of Senator Breske’s control. Its important to be clear on this statement, Senator Breske had no control on who would make up the committee, he only made suggestions. The final make up of the committee was not Roger Breske’s doing, that was decided by other lawmakers and staff on the Joint Legislative Council.

In the end 4 other lawmakers were selected to this study committee plus 5 citizens. Senator Breske was appointed the chairman from the bipartisan Legislative Council under which this special committee operates. The 5 citizens include 2 very capable ATV representatives, 2 fellow State Trails Council members < recall that I sit on the Governors State Trails Council representing motorized recreation myself >, one representing equestrians and the other representing cross country skiing and silent sports in general. The 5th representative that was selected is the editor of Silent Sports Magazine, a personality that has constantly proven in his magazine editorials and blogs and message boards everywhere to make his views well known related to ATV recreational use. As you can see the ATV citizen representation numbers and extreme position against motorized silent sport editor on this special committee are discerning to us. Much like my position on the State Trails Council wher
eat I am asked to represent the ATV, dirt bike and 4 x 4 truck community <1 person for three different groups>, this special citizen group has two ATV reps while other non-motorized groups have 3 and one is extremely prejudice and biased.

This Special Legislative Committee’s primary responsibility is to examine major trail issues and problems identified by the legislature. At the first two meetings there were hours and hours of public testimony, including our own. By far there were many more testimonies in number from anti-motorized folks but really nothing we haven’t come to expect or anticipate. For those of you that responded to our all WATVA survey, clearly our major challenges remain in taking steps to further improve our image to the general public. I can say we’ve make major strides in that department but as evidenced by all these negative testimonies, we still have a ways to go.

This is major concern number two, who are the real ATVers and our leaders? Yes we know who you are but do the lawmakers and other decision makers that are NOT ATV advocates and biased against ATV enthusiasts, do they really understand that we do have capable WATVA chapter leaders who are as concerned about environmental impacts and sustainable trail systems as the opposition to ATV trails? The way the majority of public testimony read, you would think ATVers have caused the earth to tilt on its axis!!

This special committee is again meeting on January 4th down in Madison. Their senior analyst and staff attorney for the Legislative Council has sent out 7 bill drafts that have been submitted to this committee for consideration and possible action to vote on. The intent of the chair (Senator Brekse) is to discuss these bill drafts to reach a consensus and make any requested changes and then take final action by voting to approve or not approve them.

As I understand the procedure, if the committee decides on action to approve (with or without adjustments) they would then send these bill on to the main Joint Legislative Council asking for introduction in the upcoming legislative session. Keep in mind the primary purpose of a bill draft is to propose changes to state statutes. The bill draft may create a new provision in the statutes, repeal an existing one or make modifications to one currently in place. These changes occur when, and if, the Legislature passes a bill and then the bill is signed by the Governor.

This is important to note because if a “bad or harmful to us” piece of legislation does gets introduced, we must influence it to counter it in either an Assembly and/or Senate Committee hearing via our testimony. You can bet the anti-motorized crowd will also make their presence known there too. Should it come to this, it is then we will be e-mailing and calling upon you, the members, to again speak up loud and clear with your state senators and state representatives telling them the “real story” versus the doom and gloom they hear from the others. We can also make similar voices heard in the Governor’s office as he can veto a proposed bill that gets passed if he so chooses. Then again, the anti-motorized group has the same option open to their point of view.

This message is to get you “on call and ready” in case the upcoming decisions go badly for the ATV program.

What generally happens is we represent you, we make the personal appearances and testimony to support your calls and letters. Of course anyone is invited to also attend in person if their schedule permits attending these committee hearings but they generally happen during the weekday making it inconvenient for most folks to attend. Regardless, your calls and letters to your state lawmakers are powerful, especially when we are testifying and know you have sent them as we reference them at that time.


Ok enough on that now, here are the initial bill drafts summaries. The intent of the bill draft for the committee is to offer a starting point for discussion. So that you know, WATVA will be attending the January 4th meeting to listen and hear what is decided. There is no public input that day but it is a public meeting.

You can bet we’ll be watching these closely. I assume by the time of the Annual Meeting in Stevens Point on March 31 and April 1 we’ll have lots of updated information to share with you.

Bill draft #1) Relates to trespass by operators of snowmobiles, ATVs and other off-road vehicles -

Current state law contains a general provision on trespass for any person entering the land of another without the express or implied consent of the owner or occupant. This provision applies whether or not the person is on a vehicle or not. It also has one especially for trespassers on a motorized vehicle. The current penalty is a Class B forfeiture which is a civil penalty not to exceed $1,000. However, current law is enforced by local law enforcement authorities, as DNR wardens do not have authority at this time to enforce the trespass statute if the person is not on a motorized vehicle. The trespass citation is enforced by a citation system, similar to a bond for a traffic citation. In essence the typical deposit for a trespass citation who pleads no contest is only $249.

The NEW DRAFT, as it appears before the 1/4/07 meeting, expands the property that is subject to trespass by applying the prohibition to public property as well as private property. I would assume this applies to those ATVers that go off trail while on public property trail systems. It also increases the penalty. If the judicial conference sets the deposit amount at the minimum of $250, the deposit for this violation would then be $438 . It is also possible the DA could issue a complaint and summons and seek forfeiture up to the maximum of $1,000.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land use team: Indeed as I write this we do not had sufficient insights to be sure of the intent other than what we’ve interpreted ourselves by reading their draft nor have we had time to discuss with you, our constituents, to gather your input and insights. However, WATVA has generally agreed with increasing trespass penalties for those rogue riders who violate the trespass laws. WATVA has spoken about adding an element of restitution for offenders that trespass and cause property damage on top of the violation fines. If we’re going to introduce stronger language then we think we should ask the offenders to also pay for damages plus the fines. We also think the same should apply to trespassers who cause property damage but are not riding a snow or off-highway vehicle.

Bill draft #2) Relates to increasing certain appropriation segments within the ATV registration program in the following areas. No set amount of increases have been established at this point in time but these are the areas to be considered.

A) Trails currently located on state property – the current appropriation amount is $225,000.
B) State law enforcement positions – current full time equivalent (FTE) was recently increased from 4 to 9 equaling $1,088,000 in 05-06 and $1,102,000 in 06-07.
C) Trails currently located on county property - the current appropriation amount is $1,600,000 on 05-06 & the same for 06-07.
D) Recreation aides via the ATV safety program – The Safety Enhancement grant is currently $250,000 and has been this same figure since 2001
E) County Law Enforcement – Financial aide to county sheriff’s that participate in ATV enforcement is shown at $200,000 but DNR LE has applied for an emergency 13.10 order to increase this year (05-06) to $400,000. DNR staff (Larry Freidig) had indicated he submitted his budget to increase to $500,000 in 06-07 but needs confirmation if that is so?

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: As stated above, we have not had sufficient time to discuss with our constituents to gather their input but our initial input for each appropriation is logged below –

A) It is certain that some trails currently located on state property need major rehabilitation and updates such as the Richard Bong Rec area in Kenosha County. Initial estimates to get that location to a point that better serves the ATV / OHV community is estimated in the $500,000 range. This would be a one time rehab project but more annual maintenance should be planned for because more ATV traffic will obviously use this property once it is improved. Brigit Brown should be consulted for these details. We are also working very hard to get ATV trails implemented in the Northern Highlands – American Legion State Park up in Vilas, Oneida and Iron Counties. We need to anticipate a fairly high funding level to get these high profile systems installed the proper way. This property will be under a microscope if we are successful in this 10 year battle to finally realize some Atv trails in our state’s largest forest!
B) WATVA greatly supported increasing the FTE back in 2002 – 2003 from its 4 FTE to its current 9 FTE. This permitted additional Recreational Safety Warden positions being added and accounting for a Madison administration position, thus conserving a field warden funding. As of this writing we have not had time to confer with the Bureau of Law Enforcement to hear what their analysis of staffing needs are related to current ATV positions. WATVA was proud to support the more than doubling of FTEs from 4 to 9 but hesitates to support additional increases without first conferring with the Dept.
C) Without a doubt, this is the one segment of appropriations that should be given the most priority. The majority of ATV trails in Wisconsin are on county property and we need to keep these trails maintained and within Best Management Practices (BMP). The Wisconsin County Foresters Association (WCFA) should be conferred for input, they are the organization that has the in-depth knowledge and on the ground understanding of needs.
D) The Safety Enhancement Grant, established back in 2001, has produced our sport with a huge positive image as it enabled the recipient of the grant (NOHVIS Group at current time) the ability to provide human support to start new clubs, help existing ones, work with county, city, village, town, state and federal land managers pertaining to ATV access challenges. The focus of this program is to do the work that better recruits safety instructors and the Ride Smart Trail Patrol Ambassadors. Another key element that continues to produce positive results is in helping and mentoring instructors to conduct more ATV safety class graduates. To highlight the value of this program, it is designed to promote public operation of ATVs in a safe and ethical manner, provide support to local clubs, collect data such as our surveys that produced the positive results of the Dept. of Tourism Economic & Demographic Profile of ATVers and other important findings, continue recruiting and
helping train instructors and ambassadors, increase grassroots involvement, help create outreach programs that inform local communities about the positives the ATV industry can bring to those that invite us, and build and improve relationships with the tourism industry, dealerships, manufactures, the snowmobile community and others. This program has operated at the same financial level through massive gasoline price hikes and normal cost of living increases.
E) Much effort and energy has been spent to encourage county law enforcement to participate in the ATV enforcement program. To maximize the best work results of the Trail Ambassador’s we need ample levels of credentialed law enforcement to support our self-policing. Many counties have started to participate as we have wanted but now this line item category needs additional dollars to keep up with the increased county participation! WATVA and the Wisconsin County Forests Association (WCFA) have asked the DNR to fund an emergency request for this year to increase this level from $200,000 to $400,000 using unallocated dollars generated by higher than projected ATV sales. As we understand it, Larry Freidig requested the future levels be increased to $500,000 in his budget submission. WATVA also feels strongly that the law be adjusted to permit town or city police departments the ability to apply and qualify for this fund, no different than county law enforcement. There are s
ome town police departments that can do ATV enforcement as effectively as county or state officials but have no ability to apply for these funds. We feel this should be addressed with the same overview criteria by the DNR Bureau of Law Enforcement.

Bill Draft #3) Relates to increasing revenue into the ATV fund. The previous bill draft pertained to categories of spending levels for the ATV program, this bill pertains to how those spending increases would be paid for and funded! These are some outrageously high percentage increases in this draft, one of the main reasons WATVA wanted to put you all on high alert. I have categorized the spending segments below:

A) Public registration – Every two years is currently $30
B) Private & Ag registration – Once per owner is currently $15 one time
C) Commercial / Dealer plates – Currently $90 for three plates, $30 per plate additional over 3
D) Non-resident trail pass – Currently annual only at $18 per year

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: As we stated above, we have not had sufficient time to discuss with our full board or with you, our members, but these are our initial thoughts.

A) Public use registration, currently at $30 for two years, Keep in mind the first registration fee level was $12 from 1986 through 2003. WATVA and our members were generally supportive, based on the
surveys we received and meetings we attended, to increase the fees to $30, as long as the dollars stay in the ATV program. The first draft bill all of a sudden has the $30 two year fee increasing to a whopping $75!!! While WATVA and our members will likely be supportive of certain increases if we agree on the need and results, this percentage increase is totally out of line without a huge public awareness forum that shows why the program fees would increase to this level.
B) Private use registration, currently at $15 for a one time fee for agricultural or private use would be increased to $20. At least the percentage of increase is not as drastic as the public increase.
C) Commercial ATV certificate is currently at $90 for two years. This bill is proposing to raise that fee to $125 for 3 dealer plates. For any plates over the 3 included in the $125 cost, the current additional cost for more than 3 plates is $30. This bill would raise that additional plate fee to $50. We need to speak with our Wisconsin Powersports dealers Association and WATVA dealer members but this is also a substantial percentage of increase from $90 to $120 which equates to $40 per plate per year, with $50 per plate for a those dealers that buy more than 3 which is even more than the $75 every two years for public registration!
D) Non-resident trail pass, a new provision we asked for back in 2003, is currently priced at $18 ($17.25 plus resale fee of .75). The new proposal is to increase to $75 (with $74.25 base with .75 to retailer). This new proposal also establishes a new 7 day non-resident trail pass for a fee of $37.25. I assume that total would be $38 after adding the 75 cent retailer fee.


Bill draft #4) A new bill to create an ATV damage claim program. You may recall we met last year with our peer group in Minnesota as their state instituted such a plan but they had some bad experiences with abuses in their program with some disingenuous anti-motorized folks who then tried to take advantage of their ATV dollars. The concept is to establish a funding source and system to pay claims for the cost of restoring property that is damaged by the operation of ATVs. Currently there is no ATV damage claim program.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: In the past the WATVA leadership has generally accepted this concept and has looked to the leadership of the ORV Council who has spent time and effort to establish criteria and oversight management to avoid abuses that Minnesota has experienced. As long as the ORV Council and WATVA remain part of the review team for this new category, we would likely support this initiative. As we stated on each reply above, I write this BEFORE having an opportunity to have input from our WATVA clubs and leadership and members so my answer is subject to getting our members thoughts and input before taking an official response. As with most things, the details of the program parameters would determine our support or opposition.


Bill draft #5) An act to repeal and recreate a new formula for the state gas tax that goes into our ATV program. Currently our state gas tax provision that is combined with our registration fees uses an outdated and very underformualted figure of 25 gallons of gas used on average per year by Wisconsin ATVers. This gallon figure was instituted in the original legislation back in 1986. Federal surveys used for the RTP program have consistently shown the gallons used on average are close to 70 gallons per year. Snowmobiles, boats and ATVs all use a formula that calculates the gallons used off road. Snowmobiles currently use the 50 gallon mark for their tax formula plus a multiplier that includes some GPR dollars. The ATV fund does not get that benefit even though the Dept. of Tourism and Minnesota study clearly show ATVing contributes a huge economic impact to Wisconsin’s general economy in sales tax revenue, in travel expenditures, and in payroll and jobs.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: WATVA has been concerned about this outdated formula for years and brought it up in the legislation we worked with lawmakers on in 2003. At that time the Wisconsin DOT representatives admitted to us the ATV program was being shorted in gas tax revenue but then proceeded to tell us they felt the boating program was getting too much and they weren’t sure about the snowmobile gas tax percentages and formula. At that time our expenditures were not oversubscribed so we chose to ask our lawmaker sponsors to pull the increase gallons request until we could work with the Snowmobile community, DOT and DNR to find an agreed upon method and formula that the ATV program wouldn’t take away from the snowmobile program without consensus on the formula that made that determination. WATVA and the association of Wisconsin Snowmobile Clubs (AWSC) have been working hard over the past years to find ways to work together and in partne
rship as indeed many Wisconsin citizens either ATV and snowmobile while many other snowmobilers’ have converted to ATVing. WATVA recognizes the value the other programs (snow and boating) bring to Wisconsin and do not want to drive a wedge between the three groups. We’d much prefer to make this change in a concerted effort with our two state agencies and the AWSC and boating colleagues. We feel certain if a new law forces the 50 gallon formula for ATVing, the DOT will simply take away from the other programs to realize the same level of their funding. Our other concern of just picking a 50 gallon figure versus doing a more scientific survey is that we will again be shorting the ATV program because we feel strongly the gallons are closer to 70 on average, not 50!

Bill draft #6) A new bill relating to promulgating of rules to establish standards for certifying ATV trails and routes. Under current statutes, the DNR is directed to encourage and supervise a trail system of trails and routes.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: WATVA is unsure of the intent here. While we fully support responsible trail siting, planning, and maintenance to provide sustainable trails that we can enjoy the ATV trails for generations to come, the recent addition of the policy for state owned trails has been such a system of bogged down administrative paperwork because the anti-motorized crowd has used it as a tool in some instances to insert their differences and definitions of standards to the point that it has great potential to be abused in this manner. Just as the state asked for input from a diverse group on their first set of guidelines then seemed to disappear and take their policy internal to make their own decisions on what was best and then ask us all to abide by those standards. The county land managers who oversee the vast majority of our trail systems weren’t even asked for their input on the current policy which we feel is an injustice to t
hen as the state asks them to abide by standards that are possibly flawed in their views anyway. WATVA is concerned because we felt we were heading in the right direction in this regard several years ago but then the process seemed to us to be high jacked to arrive at guidelines that many county managers feel are unworkable. Now trying to force it may not produce the desired results?

Bill draft #7) This draft applies to where and how the individual ATVs display registration identification. Currently ATVers receive two stickers from the DNR that are to be placed on the each side of the ATV. This bill creates a new requirement that the ATV owner displays in a more prominent manner. We assume this will be a rear plate? It doesn’t say but that the Dept. should make rules.

Initial thoughts of WATVA government relations & land team: WATVA did a rider survey on this concept change back in 2002-2003. The results showed a slight majority of riders that supported a rear license plate type identification. WATVA recently did an all membership survey in 2006, showing a more favorable percentage of members that supported a different method of displaying. We did speak with the Bureau of Customer Service and Licensing (DNR) some time back who advised us that the DNR has spent thousands of dollars on integration to get consistency in how they provide registration sticker for snowmobiles, ATVS and boats. I quickly found if we asked for plates, it would not be consistent with their efforts and be a very costly change. WATVA then conferred with our peers in Minnesota once again as they use a rear plated identification/registration system whereat the owners have to provide their own plate made to certain dimensions the state provides. We feel strongly that
if a rear plate is required, the owner should likewise provide their own plate according to state specified dimensions, include a number assigned from the state AND include the same two stickers they currently get, with one sticker on the plate and one on the left side. In this manner the state system remains the same with the exception of formulating a number to match the stickers which would be placed on the ATV owners rear plate along with one of the stickers with the remaining sticker placed on the left side of the ATV which is more visible from the trail as they pull off to the right. The sticker on the left side is more visible plus it has to match the number on the rear plate to curtail those owners who own more than one machine, preventing them from switching plates if they own more than one ATV. Again, we need time and more details to prepare you, our membership and leaders, with ample opportunities to comment to these proposed changes!!



=========================================================

I know this is a lot of reading to digest; we ourselves have had little time to prepare before the January 4th meeting. Like my memo states, this may or may not go anywhere, we’ll know more soon but we wanted you to be ready and prepared ahead of time.

This is but one reason you want to send representatives or attend the March 31 & April 1 workshops and meeting yourself in Stevens Point! We will be discussing these topics, where we are on them, what happened at these meetings and where you think we want to take it ourselves as we meet with other lawmakers and land managers throughout the state.

Remember to “Ride Smart – Get Involved and Tell Others” to do the same!

Randy Harden
President
Wisconsin ATV Association