Red Wing ATV proposal sparks debate |
|
|
|
| Written by Post-Bulletin |
| Tuesday, November 10, 2009 |
|
Brett Boese RED WING -- A proposed change to ordinances regulating the use of All-Terrain Vehicles within Red Wing's city limits sparked heated debate at Monday's city council meeting. Police chief Tim Sletten was recently made aware that the city code is not consistent with the state statutes, as Minnesota updated its policy in 2007 to differentiate between Class 1 and Class 2 ATVs. Under the current system, Class 1 ATVs, which are defined as vehicles weighing under 900 pounds with motors smaller than 960cc, are illegal within the city limits, while Class 2 vehicles -- which weigh between 900-1,500 pounds -- are allowed. Sletten's proposal was intended to close that loophole. Instead, it met with stiff opposition from a local retailer and residents who have operated Class 2 vehicles within the city for years. "I don't like making the vehicle the issue," said Paul Hassett, a retired Red Wing police officer who owns a Polaris Ranger. "If the state thinks it's OK, the city has no business getting involved." "We're amending an ordinance that has no real merit," agreed John Wooden, the owner of River Valley Power and Sport, which has stores in Red Wing and Rochester. Hassett says he contacted 20 current Red Wing policemen, his former colleagues, seeking information about complaints and accidents involving Class 2 vehicles, which are often referred to as UTV or utility vehicles. He says none have been reported in nearly two decades. That's not good enough for Sletten and the council, who want to act before any issues arise. While the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources requires that each ATV and UTV be licensed, city officials are looking for other ways to reach a compromise that would appease both sides of the issue. "I want to make sure (the drivers are) licensed, they are street legal and insured before I make my decision," council member Jerry Cook said. Currently, operators can use the vehicles without any formal training or licensure program, proper lighting (brakes, turn signals, etc.) is sold separately and no insurance is required. Some compared the use of ATVs to golf carts or snowmobiles. The biggest difference, according to Sletten, is the complete absence of ATV trails in Goodhue County. If they were banned from the streets, there would be few, if any, placed locally to drive the vehicles legally. The proposal was tabled as officials intend to seek more information before voting on the issue. "We don't need to reinvent the wheel," Mayor John Howe said. "I'm sure there are other communities who have found middle ground on this." "We're all talking about the same thing, and that's safety," Sletten said. -- Source: http://www.postbulletin.com/newsmanager/templates/localnews_story.asp?z=2&a=424834
|
State by State Momentum
Community Voices
“Farmers as a group rarely tend to want more government regulation. But the growing problem of trespassing caused by illegal riders spurred our membership into action to pass common-sense visible identification and ORV enforcement measures. We are proud that we were able to work with rider groups to find a solution that all sides could agree to.” - Christopher Henney, Director of Legislative Relations, Ohio Farm Bureau Federation |









