City Council Rejects Golf Cart Ordinance

The Gulfport City Council rejected the proposed golf cart ordinance that has been a subject of much discussion in recent months. After another round of debate at Tuesday's council meeting the council voted 3-2 against adopting the new ordinance that would have created new regulations regarding golf cart usage in line with the city's safety standards, insurance liability, legality and geography.

As a result of the vote, golf cart users will simply have to comply with existing state statutes (316.212) regarding use on city streets. The proposed ordinance is now history, and any new ordinance would have to be re-created. It is unclear whether the council will attempt to do so, but there was no indication that it will come up again in the immediate future.

In recent months, the council has attempted to create a new ordinance to govern the use of golf carts, which are popular in Gulfport, on city streets. Safety of the users – as well as the automobile traffic they contend with – has been a growing concern, as has the city's liability in the event of an accident.

State statutes apply to golf cart use on city streets, but the council was attempting to address specific issues to prevent injury and lawsuits such as crossing roads like Gulfport Boulevard (under county jurisdiction) and others that are unincorporated. Council members have been in favor of continued use of the carts, particularly in the downtown (Beach Boulevard) section, but not if it means putting the users and the city at risk.

Resident Al Davis asked for a clarification of "street legal" in regard to the ordinance and stated, “I don't want to see the city open itself up to something that it is impossible to enforce.” He later added, “It strikes me that unless you meet the street legal criteria that the city liability is going to be significant in the event of the first problem.”

The definition of street legal was unclear as certain items including windshields, indicators and headlights are required for night driving in state statutes but not during the day. Also, seat belts are not required, which was a concern for some council members and Gulfport Police Chief Robert Vincent.

“One of the biggest concerns I have is we haven't actually done what ought to be done to make sure that it's safe,” Vincent said when called for his opinion. He said he would feel more comfortable with a traffic engineering study for more data about the roads and that members of the department would have to be trained to perform golf cart inspections according to state regulations.

“You're talking about occupants in these golf carts that are not belted in,” he said. “I think that's very dangerous, and I really don't want to be on the receiving end of taking the report where I have to tell you this person is hurt, injured or worse because we didn't follow these criteria.”

When it came time for a vote, Vice Mayor David Hastings insisted he was uncomfortable with the language of the proposed ordinance in regards to public safety. “I just don't agree with the statement that we have determined that it's safe to drive golf carts on the city streets that we're saying they can drive on,” he said.

State statute 316.212 also stipulates “efficient brakes, reliable steering apparatus, safe tires,” which council members agreed was vague language and difficult to enforce.

“We have a state statute that allows a golf cart to be modified into a low-speed vehicle. It has all of the equipment mandated in the state statute. We don't have any inspection station. We don't have to do any licensing. The police are not – pardon the pun – handcuffed into enforcing this. We're not creating all these new laws here. I'm still not in favor of us doing all this when we just allow what's already in the state statutes to happen,” Hastings stated.

One of the issues complicating the effort to force golf cart owners to adhere to the ordinance was enforcement.

“Burdening your police department would not be my pleasure,” Mayor Mike Yakes said near the end of discussion. “But allowing this (use) under a very complex ordinance – we have I don't know how many pages, it looks like it's about 15 – I think we have a lot of enforcement that can make this work, and I'm ready to vote.”

The final vote was 3-2 not in favor of the proposed ordinance with Council Members Barbara Banno, David Hastings and Sam Henderson voting no.