UTV ordinance on agenda for third attempt at passage

Monday, February 5, 2024
On a snowy afternoon recently three DePauw University UTVs were spotted outside Music on the Square on the east side of the courthouse square in Greencastle. A proposed ordinance to allow UTVs to travel on the streets of Greencastle is scheduled for a third attempt at second reading when the City Council meets at 7 p.m. Thursday at City Hall.
Banner Graphic/ERIC BERNSEE

Third time the charm?

Proverbially that might be the case but will it be true for the proposed UTV ordinance when the Greencastle City Council meets Thursday night at City Hall?

The 7 p.m. meeting is open to the public.

When the Greencastle City Council convenes at 7 p.m. Thursday at City Hall, joining Mayor Lynda Dunbar (fourth from right) for the proceedings will be her newly sworn-in department heads (from left) Park Director Greg Ruark, Department of Public Works Director Andrew Rogers, Cemetery Superintendent Jason Keeney, City Planner Scott Zimmerman, Water and Wastewater Superintendent Oscar King Jr., City Clerk-Treasurer Mikayla Johnson, Mayor Dunbar, Police Chief Chris Jones, Fire Chief Rob Frank and City Attorney Laurie Hardwick.
Banner Graphic/ERIC BERNSEE

Second reading and adoption of Ordinance 2023-7, a measure allowing the use of certain recreational off-highway vehicles on the city streets of Greencastle, has twice been tabled by the Council.

The first time came at the December Council session, which was the final meeting for four lame-duck members, and then again in January when the new City Council and Mayor Lynda Dunbar took over for their debut meeting.

The UTV (utility task vehicle) ordinance was introduced at the November City Council meeting, passing 6-1 on first reading (former Councilman Russell Harvey was the lone dissenter) when several comments were made about continued use of the vehicles by DePauw University building and grounds employees at locations other than on campus.

After lengthy discussion at its December and January meetings, the Council voted to table the ordinance. Initially about a half-dozen UTV or side-by-side owners offered calm comment about the proposal before it became apparent the currently written ordinance was not likely to be the finished product. About a dozen UTV owners were on hand for the January session, while at neither meeting did anyone in the audience object to approval of the ordinance.

Specifically excluded by the ordinance for use on city streets are golf carts, ATVs, three-wheelers, four-wheelers and other slow-moving vehicles, all of which are not considered recreational off-highway vehicles and are not allowable by state statute.

Recreational off-highway vehicles, as defined by Indiana code, would be allowable under the ordinance upon adoption on second reading and the posting of proper signage around Greencastle. The necessity of signage at every street on which UTVs are allowed, as stipulated by state statute, has been an issue for city officials.

The Council is currently composed of Council President Stacie Langdon, Mark Hammer, Tina Nicholson, Katherine Asbell, David Masten and Darrel Thomas, all Republicans, along with Democrat Vince Aguirre, who cast the lone dissenting vote against tabling the UTV ordinance last month.

Another ordinance on the agenda Thursday night, Ordinance 2024-1, comes as a recommendation from the Board of Works to increase the rate of septage charges paid by septic waste haulers at the wastewater treatment plant from seven cents per gallon to 10 cents per gallon. City Attorney Laurie Hardwick has noted that there has not been an increase in septage charges since 2010.

Wastewater Supt. Oscar King Jr. said companies haul in septage after cleaning out port-a-lets as well as pumping out septic systems. Septage is also accepted from adjacent counties.

In addition to other items on the docket and reports from city department heads, a block of time is always reserved at the outset of the City Council meeting for items and concerns from the public not otherwise on the evening’s agenda.

Comments
View 11 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • I encourage all councilpersons to reject the proposal. This issue should go directly to the next ballot as a referendum, this would get the actual voice of the community. There have been 12-15 people attending meetings that are requesting this change and their voices have said there is maybe 100 UTV owners in Greencastle. That is roughly one precent of the residents of Greencastle.

    -- Posted by Alfred E. on Tue, Feb 6, 2024, at 6:25 AM
  • *

    Trying to survive, I'd love to hear your opinion directly. While I understand the banner graphic comment section has strongly disagreed with the ordinance I have yet to have someone reach out and talk to me from the banner comment section.

    I have heard from a few people outside of my ward who do not want this to pass, but everyone in the 4th Ward I've spoken to is in support of it and after researching myself I have also come around to truly support it.

    With that said I'm always open to hearing perspective, but I'm personally drawing my line that the banner graphic comment section is not heavily weighted in my decision making unless people put names to their words. I truly do hope to hear from you, and I promise I will take the time to listen if you take the time to reach out.

    vaguirre@cityofgreencastle.com

    -- Posted by Vincent Aguirre on Tue, Feb 6, 2024, at 7:25 AM
  • I really don't think the UTV proposal is a city/county issue, it should be a state issue. If the owners want to drive them on the streets and roads they should be registered, plated, and required to carry insurance just like any other automobile/truck/motorcycle!

    Please do not pass this ordinance!!

    If for some reason the ordinance would pass - how is it going to be decided which streets UTV's are allowed on?

    -- Posted by Homegrown765 on Tue, Feb 6, 2024, at 12:50 PM
  • *

    Homegrown765 , the will be allowed on all city street, but not state highways.

    -- Posted by Vincent Aguirre on Tue, Feb 6, 2024, at 1:55 PM
  • I agree with homegrown 765. This should be a state issue ,not county or city

    -- Posted by Nit on Tue, Feb 6, 2024, at 2:04 PM
  • Are we just going to skip over Depauw operating UTVs on city streets illegally? Btw, there was a fourth UTV parked next to the other 3 at one point. It should be apparent to law enforcement the UTVs weren't dropped there by helicopter and they were all driven there.

    -- Posted by Old Soul on Tue, Feb 6, 2024, at 4:22 PM
  • old soul; good call !! This whole ordinance is for De Pauw . Enforcement will be non-existent :(

    -- Posted by Falcon9 on Wed, Feb 7, 2024, at 9:15 AM
  • Yesterday I looked up Indiana cities that have a UTV ordinance, just to see if there were any nearby. I happen to be in southern Indiana currently, and found out that the city of Booneville allows UTVs and is nearby, so I decided to take a quick drive through town. Guess what? Not a UTV road sign to be found anywhere. Do they not know about the sign law, or are they ignoring it? Or, maybe the law doesn't actually say you need signs in the city? Just throwing that out there...

    -- Posted by Raker on Wed, Feb 7, 2024, at 1:50 PM
  • Biden said Mitterand told him signs weren't needed!

    Plus, the town has to be full of Trumpites so no respect for law! Double whammy

    #SSSLCLiconFDRputpeopleinprisoncampsbasedonrace/nationality

    -- Posted by beg on Wed, Feb 7, 2024, at 2:37 PM
  • How absolutely absurd some of these comments. Especially ones without names. Bold move Cotton!

    As far as state laws. MY UTV IS registered and IS licensed in the State of Indiana. It is also Insured!

    As a UTV operator it is MY responsibility to know where I can and can't drive it. Signs are simply a ploy in my opinion to pass a silly $100 city tag so that a utv can be driven on city streets.

    I digress. Bainbridge, Roachdale, Ladoga, Danville, Russellville are just a few towns that allow UTVs to travel on their streets. For us, it's the availability to travel the back roads and enjoy our beautiful county. KNOWING that I can not drive on state roads yet I am ALLOWED to cross them to get from one county road to the next.

    Not being able to drive our "buggy" into the sacred privileged city of Greencastle does not stop us from going around said forbidden streets. We simply take our buggy and spend our money elsewhere, where we are welcomed. Not everyone that has a UTV is wild and crazy. Just like not everyone who drives a state plated automobile is a good aware safe driver.

    Come on peeps. This is NOT a Depauw issue, although we sure would like to make it one. Ya know the Trumpsters Vs well the world attitude? Please. Common ground, middle ground. We forgot how to even get there now. Someone or something has to be the blame for our woes.

    Pass it, don't pass it. I'll keep going to the same places we always went and that's around the privilege streets of Greencastle.

    -- Posted by rick and Cammie johnston on Wed, Feb 7, 2024, at 9:31 PM
  • Good post Johnston’s. Thank you.

    -- Posted by Nit on Sun, Feb 11, 2024, at 9:14 PM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: