SENATE BILL REPORT

                   SB 5941

              As Reported By Senate Committee On:

     Natural Resources, Parks & Recreation, March 3, 1999

Title:  An act relating to reviewing state funds that support recreational uses on nonhighway roads and off‑road vehicle trails.

Brief Description:  Reviewing state funds that support recreational uses on nonhighway roads and off‑road vehicle trails.

Sponsors:  Senators Kline, Haugen, Patterson and Fraser.

Brief History:

Committee Activity:  Natural Resources, Parks & Recreation:  3/1/99, 3/3/99 [DP-WM].

SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES, PARKS & RECREATION

Majority Report:  Do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways & Means.

  Signed by Senators Jacobsen, Chair; Oke, Hargrove, Morton, Rossi, Snyder and Stevens.

Staff:  David Johnson (786-7754)

Background:  Part of the money collected from the motor vehicle fuel tax is allocated to off-road vehicle and nonhighway road purposes.  The division of this money between off-road vehicle projects and nonmotorized use projects may not reflect the relative contributions by the actual users of these particular projects.

Summary of Bill:  A study is commissioned to determine the relative contributions of each user group to the motor vehicle fuel tax.  The Department of Licensing and the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation must contract with a private agency to perform the study.  The study must examine the portion of motor vehicle fuel tax revenues attributable to recreational use by nonmotorized and motorized users.  A report back to the Legislature with proportionate revenue allotment recommendations is provided.

Appropriation:  None.

Fiscal Note:  Requested on February 25, 1999.

Effective Date:  Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For:  This is a study which will give us the information we need to know about the actual contributions.  It is a matter of doing equity to those who pay into the fund.  Many nonmotorized users donate their time because they don=t get their fair share of funds.

Testimony Against:  The study doesn=t account for nonmotorized users of motorized trails.  Scenic drivers are motorized but might be counted as nonmotorized users.  The study would be very costly and difficult.

Testified:  PRO:  Tom Lucas, Elizabeth Lunney, Washington Trails Association; Jim King, Coalition for Parks and Recreation (w/amend); CON:  Ron Morgentholer, Northwest Motorcycle Association.