An act to amend Section 5090.24 of the Public Resources Code, and to add Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 38610) to Division 16.5 of the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles.
AB 1613 would create the California Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Safety and Stewardship Program within the Division of Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation. The bill directs the division, working with the Department of Parks and Recreation, to convene a stakeholder group by June 30, 2027 to design a new safety and stewardship course for off-highway motor vehicle operators. The stakeholder group must submit recommendations by March 1, 2028, and the division must implement the course by January 1, 2029. The course must cover safe operation, legal requirements, safety gear, trail etiquette, environmental stewardship, protection of cultural and natural resources, respect for private property, and hands-on skills training. The bill also allows the course to be offered online, permits outside vendors to develop or deliver it, and requires the division to consider whether reciprocal out-of-state safety programs should satisfy the requirement.
The bill would also create a new operator-card system. Anyone 16 or older operating an off-highway motor vehicle on covered lands after July 1, 2029 would need to carry either a California operator card or proof of completion of an approved reciprocal program. Children 15 and under would need to be supervised by a parent or other adult who has the required card or reciprocal proof. The division would issue electronic operator cards valid for five years, establish renewal procedures, and may charge fees for the course and cards, with a required initial course fee of $25. Those fees would be deposited into the Off-Highway Vehicle Trust Fund. Violations would be infractions punishable by mandatory course completion and fines of $100, $250, or $500 depending on the number of violations, but would not add points to a driving record.
In addition to creating new Vehicle Code provisions, the bill amends the Public Resources Code to require the Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation Commission’s periodic program report to include an evaluation of the new safety program’s effectiveness. The division must also collect baseline accident and injury data before implementation and report on whether the course reduces accidents, injuries, and resource impacts. The bill states that no state reimbursement is required for local agencies because any local costs would arise from the creation or change of a crime or infraction.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill’s movement appears generally favorable, with the measure advancing through policy and appropriations committees by comfortable margins. The findings and intent section frames the bill as a safety, stewardship, and access measure modeled on programs in neighboring states, suggesting support for education-based regulation rather than stricter enforcement alone. The absence of recorded committee transcript opposition limits insight into detailed debate, but the committee votes indicate majority support.
Likely points of contention include the new mandatory training and card requirement, the $25 fee and potential future fee increases, and the enforcement structure for operators and supervising adults. Stakeholders may also differ over reciprocity for out-of-state courses, whether the course should be multilingual, and the role of outside vendors in course development and delivery. Environmental and conservation interests may favor the stewardship components, while recreation, business, and user groups may focus on cost, administrative burden, and how the new rules affect access to off-highway recreation.
AB 1613 would add a new chapter to the Vehicle Code establishing a statewide off-highway motor vehicle safety and stewardship certification regime, and it would amend Public Resources Code Section 5090.24 to require program evaluation in the commission’s regular report. It would create new duties for the Division of Off-Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation, including stakeholder consultation, course development, operator-card issuance and renewal, fee-setting, reciprocity review, and program evaluation. It would also create new infractions for noncompliance, affecting operators age 16 and older and adults supervising riders age 15 and under, while directing fee revenue to the Off-Highway Vehicle Trust Fund.
The bill appears to have broad procedural support in committee, advancing with majority votes and no recorded transcript opposition in the provided materials. Its framing emphasizes safety, environmental stewardship, and responsible recreation, which likely contributes to its favorable reception. At the same time, the measure introduces new mandatory requirements and fees, so support is likely strongest among safety, conservation, and program-administration interests, with more cautious views possible among user and industry stakeholders.
The main areas of contention are likely the mandatory nature of the course and operator card, the $25 fee and authority to raise it, and the new enforcement penalties tied to both operators and supervising adults. Stakeholders may also disagree over whether reciprocity should be broad or limited, whether the course should be available in languages other than English, and how much discretion the division should have to contract with outside vendors and revise the curriculum. Because the stakeholder group includes recreation, business, environmental, tribal, county, federal, and law-enforcement representatives, those groups may also differ on the balance between access, safety, and resource protection.