Another Victory for OHV Use – Sacramento Court Says “Desert Riparian Policy” May Not Be Implemented Until Rule Making is Completed
SACRAMENTO – On Friday, February 2, 2007, the OHV community won
another victory over improper efforts to curb off-road recreation in
California. During an hour-long court hearing, a judge in Sacramento stated
that the California Off-Highway Motorized Vehicle Recreation Commission (the
“Commission”) may not implement its “Desert Riparian Policy” unless and until
it develops formal rules defining the policy’s terms and scope. As currently
drafted, the Policy would prohibit use of OHMVR grant funds for projects that
allow OHV use in desert riparian areas. EcoLogic Partners, Inc., along with
five OHV groups – the the California Off-Road Vehicle Association, San
Diego Off-Road Coalition, the American Sand Association, the Off-Road Business
Association, and American Motorcyclists Association District 37 – sued the
Commission last year over the policy, claiming that it conflicted with the
text of the OHMVR Act itself.
At the February 2 hearing, the Court heard arguments from the Commission, the
OHMVR Division, and EcoLogic, et al. And while the judge denied EcoLogic’s
request to dissolve the Desert Riparian Policy outright, he ruled that the
current language of the policy is so vague that it could lead to
interpretations inconsistent with the existing law. He also expressed concern
that the Commission might adopt future policies, with broad language similar
to that in the Desert Riparian Policy, which are designed to cut off
funding for OHV projects in other areas of the state. When viewed
cumulatively, such policies could effectively gut the OHVMR grant program.
For these reasons, the Court instructed the Commission and the Division to
develop workable definitions and rules that properly circumscribe the scope of
the Desert Riparian Policy. This, said the Court, must be accomplished prior
to implementation of the policy. Moreover, it must be done through an open
public process. Then the rules must be reviewed and approved by an
Administrative Law Panel.
Although the judge stopped short of telling the Commission what the rules
should contain, he explained that the OHMVR Act was adopted to promote
responsible OHV recreation, and any policy that retreats from that purpose,
or operates in conflict with it, will be subject to legal challenge. He
invited EcoLogic and the other OHV groups to participate in the rulemaking
process, and to come back to court if the rules adopted by the Commission
still create conflict with the text of the Act.
Counsel for EcoLogic, et al, David Hubbard, said he was very pleased with the
Court’s ruling. “This could not have worked out better. We claimed from the
beginning that the Desert Riparian Policy was jammed down our throats without
public input, without adequate definitions, without evidence as to need, and
without limits on its scope. The court has now leveled the playing field on
these questions and forced the Commission to justify the policy in an open
public debate. And if the rules adopted by the Commission would substantially
damage funding for OHV projects in the desert, we will be back in front of the
judge.”
When asked how long the rule making process would take, counsel for the OHMVR
Division estimated 18 months to 2 years. During that time, the Desert Riparian
Policy will remain dormant and unenforceable.
For more information regarding this press release,
Contact Ed Waldheim at edwaldheim@aol.com ,
800-42-CORVA.
(Ecological group
made up of CORVA, ASA, D-37, San Diego Off-Road Coalition and
ORBA )
Monday, February 5, 2007 – 10:50 a.m.