Post by Wyldcomfort on Apr 6, 2007 6:16:54 GMT -5
Wow....it is actually coming together. Just think back a month or two and we sure have come a long way. Tom Tobey has been working very hard on the amendments with Parks. Devlin's office has actually come on board and they too have been very helpful. We found out today that Sen. Metzger will give it another chance so we have to have it all done and turned in tomorrow. For ATVs we will have rider fit with no minimum age, supervision for under 16 years old, back to public lands vs. lands open to the public, supervision with the unaided eye and able to come to the immediate aid rather than having to be on the same type of OHV, and hands on training for youth, online for adults new to the sport, and a test out for those who have been riding and are over 16. If you would have told me a month ago that this may be possible I would have laughed really hard.
We proposed rider fit no minimum age at the Parks meeting for motorcycles but the motorcycle guys didn't want rider fit at the time and wanted to negotiate supervision for 12 then 14, then 15. Considering we have fought and won SB 49 based on supervision, I could not in good conscience fight Parks on that portion of the bill. They did say they would go to 15 and after having a meeting said they could support to age 16 but they still wanted no minimum age and no rider fit. Since the minimum age for MC is current law and Senate Bill 101 isn't changing or addressing that portion, it would really be a stretch to get that through without something like rider fit to replace it. Even then it would have been a tough sell. We really wanted to align ATVs and MC on rider fit and still hope to pursue it in the future. It now looks like the motorcycle guys are open to rider fit/no min age but that wasn't until this afternoon and our deadline for having the amendments in is first thing in the morning. Keep in mind we have been working on it night and day and back and forth to get just the ATV part complete. We also had to drum up support from the other Senators so that it could move forward. When I asked the Senators if there might be a chance to change it at this late stage of the game they made it clear that they would not even consider dropping the minimum age in this bill but rider fit could possibly be added. I will leave that up to the MC folks to decide. It may be a great start for them but until we could work on the minimum age in future legislation it would mean they would have both. Hopefully we can all begin to work with Parks and the Senators towards that for next session. Our long term goal is to simplify the training and rules and have no min. age and rider fit for both. If we can get 101 through, it will only strengthen the argument for rider fit. If the MC guys would like I would be happy to get sponsorship for that type of bill for next session but will leave it up to them. The National and other local MC groups are in full support of what we are doing.
Parks has also been really wonderful. A few people worth your continued support and who have been very instrumental in meeting with Parks is Gary Sargent, April McVay and Monty (sorry Monty - I can't remember your last name but my guess is everyone knows you by Monty!!). These three are involved with the Power Sports and Oregon Dealers Assoc. - Gary also owns Sargents Motor Sports in Portland. They participated in the meeting with Parks and have signed up to help with training, legislation, and the whole ball of wax. It broadens our field of expertise and will certainly help with planning the type of training program that will be implemented. The AMA and ATVA have been critical in their help and support. They even drafted the original amendment for us! What we are doing in Oregon is hoped to set a precedent for other states to follow. I wish that I could put into words just how amazing this all is. We should all be so proud!
I don't have the final draft with me - Tom will be sending it to me in the morning as well as Kyleen at Parks. I can try to send it to everyone but I am not sure if my computer will be able to send that much information to everyone at once. I'll try tomorrow but if for some reason you don't get it - please drop me a line and I will send it directly. It will be presented to Legislative Council for the legal writing and that may take up to a couple weeks. Then off it goes through the Senate and House. We may need to send letters and make calls in support of this but I will let everyone know to whom and when if needed. Please review it and let me know what you think!! Thanks again, Lindy
We proposed rider fit no minimum age at the Parks meeting for motorcycles but the motorcycle guys didn't want rider fit at the time and wanted to negotiate supervision for 12 then 14, then 15. Considering we have fought and won SB 49 based on supervision, I could not in good conscience fight Parks on that portion of the bill. They did say they would go to 15 and after having a meeting said they could support to age 16 but they still wanted no minimum age and no rider fit. Since the minimum age for MC is current law and Senate Bill 101 isn't changing or addressing that portion, it would really be a stretch to get that through without something like rider fit to replace it. Even then it would have been a tough sell. We really wanted to align ATVs and MC on rider fit and still hope to pursue it in the future. It now looks like the motorcycle guys are open to rider fit/no min age but that wasn't until this afternoon and our deadline for having the amendments in is first thing in the morning. Keep in mind we have been working on it night and day and back and forth to get just the ATV part complete. We also had to drum up support from the other Senators so that it could move forward. When I asked the Senators if there might be a chance to change it at this late stage of the game they made it clear that they would not even consider dropping the minimum age in this bill but rider fit could possibly be added. I will leave that up to the MC folks to decide. It may be a great start for them but until we could work on the minimum age in future legislation it would mean they would have both. Hopefully we can all begin to work with Parks and the Senators towards that for next session. Our long term goal is to simplify the training and rules and have no min. age and rider fit for both. If we can get 101 through, it will only strengthen the argument for rider fit. If the MC guys would like I would be happy to get sponsorship for that type of bill for next session but will leave it up to them. The National and other local MC groups are in full support of what we are doing.
Parks has also been really wonderful. A few people worth your continued support and who have been very instrumental in meeting with Parks is Gary Sargent, April McVay and Monty (sorry Monty - I can't remember your last name but my guess is everyone knows you by Monty!!). These three are involved with the Power Sports and Oregon Dealers Assoc. - Gary also owns Sargents Motor Sports in Portland. They participated in the meeting with Parks and have signed up to help with training, legislation, and the whole ball of wax. It broadens our field of expertise and will certainly help with planning the type of training program that will be implemented. The AMA and ATVA have been critical in their help and support. They even drafted the original amendment for us! What we are doing in Oregon is hoped to set a precedent for other states to follow. I wish that I could put into words just how amazing this all is. We should all be so proud!
I don't have the final draft with me - Tom will be sending it to me in the morning as well as Kyleen at Parks. I can try to send it to everyone but I am not sure if my computer will be able to send that much information to everyone at once. I'll try tomorrow but if for some reason you don't get it - please drop me a line and I will send it directly. It will be presented to Legislative Council for the legal writing and that may take up to a couple weeks. Then off it goes through the Senate and House. We may need to send letters and make calls in support of this but I will let everyone know to whom and when if needed. Please review it and let me know what you think!! Thanks again, Lindy