Bills in CT Legislature Could Impact Riders

By Bud Wilkinson of RIDE-CT.com

The cost of riding in Connecticut – whether on a street motorcycle, an off-road bike, a quad or even a snowmobile – will increase if several bills proposed by legislators in the past couple of weeks or so get passed into law by the General Assembly. Some of the notions would impact all operators of motor vehicles, such as the establishment of tolls on the state’s highways. Other proposed laws, written with introductory simplicity and no doubt bound for revision if they gain any traction, are more specific.

“Proposed H.B. 5183” introduced by state Rep. DebraLee Hovey, a Republican whose district includes Monroe and Newtown, would require the registration of every all-terrain vehicle. Under state law that means any “self-propelled vehicle designed to travel over unimproved terrain that has been determined by the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles to be unsuitable for operation on the public highways.”

Under that definition, anyone owning a quad or snowmobile – or even a dirt bike – would be required to register it, regardless of whether it was owned solely for use on one’s own property. Under current law, registration of a quad, snowmobile or dirt bike is not required if it’s ridden on land you own or lease.

So, do you own a quad that’s used primarily to plow snow from the driveway? Under H.B. 5183, it would have to be registered. What’s next? Snow blowers?

Farmers and business owners – golf courses and ski areas, for instance – wouldn’t be exempt. In addition to quads, snowmobiles and dirt bikes, golf carts and snow grooming equipment could be interpreted as falling under the existing state statute. While that’s stretching the point, motocross enthusiasts are definitely vulnerable, even those who own bikes that are for competition use only – the kind that sit silently in the garage or trailer until hauled to the track.

Not only would there be a fee to register an ATV, but registration of ATVs would presumably open them up to local property taxes, making for a double hit on the wallet. Hovey’s bill would also “impose a fine on any person who fails to register any such vehicle.”

News of bill’s introduction isn’t being greeted with enthusiasm at dealerships.

“Any time you’re adding additional fees to a sale it makes it all that more difficult. We don’t need any additional fees. This is going to drive even more people to go out of state to buy stuff,” said Jim Tabor, co-owner of Willow’s Motorsports in Cheshire.

Dale Badura, owner of Enfield Motorsports, likewise views the bill as a money-grab by the state that will hurt business. “That’s why people are going out of state to buy their units. It would be a huge effect – lost sales,” she said.

Hovey has another proposal, too. She’s introduced “Proposed H.B. 5187” that would amend current statutes “by requiring all motor vehicles to undergo annual safety inspections.” The stated purpose of Hovey’s bill is “to improve road safety.”

State Rep. Patricia Dillon, a Democrat serving New Haven, is the legislator who wants the statutes “amended to establish tolls on Connecticut’s highways.” She’s introduced “Proposed H.B. 5125.” Its purpose is “to raise revenue through tolls.” Give her points for honesty.

Just asking, but will motorcyclists be forced to pay the same amount as drivers of cars and light trucks? We should get a break because our two-wheelers (and trikes) are more fuel efficient and less damaging to road surfaces.

One bill that motorcyclists can applaud is “Proposed H.B. 5248” from Rep. Fred Camillo, a Republican who represents Greenwich. He wants to increase fines for distracted driving, specifically “the fines for illegal use of a mobile telephone or other electronic device while operating a motor vehicle.” The purpose is “to increase penalties for distracted driving.” Shouldn’t it really be “to decrease distracted driving” or am I missing the point? That is, unless the point is simply to get more cash.

Based on how often drivers currently operate their vehicles with a phone smashed against an ear to converse or held up against the steering wheel to text, unless there’s greater enforcement, the chances of decreasing distracted driving are nil.

While there’s also a bill requiring an eye exam for anyone over the age of 65 seeking to renew their driver’s license and two bills that would outlaw the riding of bicycles two abreast and require single file operation on roadways, one that’s particularly irritating comes from state Sen. Len Fasano. The Republican, whose 34^th District goes from Wallingford down to the shoreline, has introduced “Proposed S.B. 166.” It would double the fine of unauthorized use of an all-terrain vehicle “on municipal or private land without the written permission of the landowner.”

Perhaps he should study why there might be a need for such a proposal and then urge all members of the General Assembly to investigate why a law passed in 1986 has yet to be implemented. It ordered that the then-Department of Environmental Protection “shall make available” state property for off-road riding.

Yes, 27 years have passed, and yet no land has been set aside, which makes Hovey’s play to require the registration of all ATVs all the more noxious. She wants to hit riders in their checkbooks while the state continues to duck delivering on a promise made to those same riders nearly three decades ago.

“They’ve been threatening this for a lot of years and it hasn’t come to pass,” said Tabor of blanket ATV registration. “Our stance has always been, ‘Why?’ What’s the purpose other than to collect money? If they were providing us with a place to use them, it would be a different story.”

Badura agreed, saying “There’s no legal riding in the state of Connecticut, so how can they make us register?”

(Originally published in “The Republican-American” on Feb. 12, 2013.)