OHV dollars under attack

[jps8460]

https://cohvco.clubexpress.com/cont...CPOETJ6obLD9eAvj_4Da1BGdl5B95kzBX0dPAqq0B58n0

 

[DaveInDenver]

Not surprised, will write asap.

 

[Yeti]

Thanks for the heads up. emails sent.

 

[FunkyYota]

Emails sent.

 

[DaveInDenver]

[Sen] or [Rep] So-and-so:

It has come to my attention through membership in a 4WD club in Colorado that the Joint Budget Committee (JBC) is considering sweeping a significant portion of the Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Registration Fund revenue into budget items that have no connection with OHV use. The money collected via the $25.25 OHV registration fee is a primary funding source for OHV maintenance projects.

Spoiler: Removed this Paragraph

If I might, please recall that C.R.S. 33-14.5-106 reads,

"All fees collected from the registration of off-highway vehicles and all fees collected from the sale of off-highway use permits, plus all interest earned on such moneys shall be credited to the off-highway vehicle recreation fund, which fund is hereby created, and shall be used for the administration of this article, for information and awareness on the availability of off-highway vehicle recreational opportunities, for the promotion of off-highway vehicle safety, for the establishment and maintenance of off-highway vehicle routes, parking areas, and facilities, and for the purchase or lease of private land for the purposes of access to public land for uses consistent with the provisions of this article;  however, any moneys collected in excess of four dollars per original or renewal registration shall be used exclusively for direct services and not administrative costs.  The general assembly shall make annual appropriations from the off-highway vehicle recreation fund for the purposes enumerated in this subsection."​

Redirecting these earmarked funds jeopardizes partnerships and projects and will have negative repercussions that linger for years. The communities where OHVs users recreate do not have deep budgets to absorb shortfalls when projects go unfunded and will be harmed disproportionally.

I therefore respectfully request that the JBC do not reallocate OHV Registration funds now or in the future. It is incumbent upon the Legislature to leave untouched these voluntarily paid funds to be used for their targeted purpose.

Regards,
[name]
[contact info]

 

[DaveInDenver]

BTW, there's an error in the COHVCO notice. The JBC chair is Representative Daneya Esgar. They have her email going I think to the Senate. Her email is: daneya.esgar.house@state.co.us

 

[FunkyYota]

I got this response from Kim Ransom.

I agree with you, and will oppose any "sweep" from the OHV fund. For the record, I also oppose sweeping any other fund that consists of fees similar to the OHV fund. Unfortunately, a ruling of the Colorado Supreme Count disagrees and the majority party is pursuing these sweeps. By the way, there were cash funds that were spent for general fund expenses during the last recession, so this is not a new issue. See the below paragraph, part of the JBC document, admitting the problem with existing obligations. I hope you'll contact all of the JBC members (if you haven't already) and also your State Representative and Senator, explain the source and intent of the fund, and give them your input about why the balance should remain in the fund for the intended use.

From the JBC document

Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Fund Primary Revenue Source(s): Fees collected from the registration of off-highway vehicles and fees collected from the sale of off-highway use permits. balancing Fund Purpose: The fund supports the Off-Highway Vehicle (OHV) Program, which is responsible for the administration of OHV registration and grants. The program provides promotes the availability of OHV recreational opportunities, and encourages safe and responsible use through brochures, news releases and other media. The program is also responsible for OHV safety awareness through the promulgation and enforcement of rules and regulations. Impact of 50.0% Transfer: According to the Department, the fund appears to have a large balance, but much this balance is obligated for specific projects. As of April 2020, approximately $5.0 million of the balance has not been obligated as grants or operating funds. If 50.0 percent of the fund’s net current assets, or approximately $9.0 million, was transferred to the General Fund, the fund would not have a balance sufficient to pay its outstanding grant and operating obligations. Leaving the fund without sufficient reserves to cover existing obligations would jeopardize OHV grant projects statewide, including capital equipment purchases, trail development, maintenance, and rehabilitation, and temporary staffing supporting these activities.

I just want to make sure I'm reading this correctly. 50% of the net fund's current assets is 9M. If that were to be transferred to the general fund, the OHV fund would be insufficient to pay the outstanding grant and operating obligations.

What exactly are the implications of coming up short on grant and operating obligations - just curious?

 

[Inukshuk]

Anyone know the outcome?

 

[DaveInDenver]

Anyone know the outcome?

I haven't seen minutes, summary, potential legislation or anything posted yet. Most recent documents appear to be from 5/4/2020 ("now" being 5/13/2020, 9AM).

https://leg.colorado.gov/committees/joint-budget-committee/2020-regular-session

 

[Notyourmomslx450]

Woooo!

 

[jps8460]

Wahoo!!