Skimming across some headlines this morning, I was struck by some well-intentioned but ill-informed bicycle-related bills showing up in state capitals this year.
While legislators in some states are proposing bills to protect cyclists and other vulnerable road users, lawmakers elsewhere are proposing bills that would stifle the use of bicycles for transportation and recreation.
Here are two examples where a phone call to a local bicycle advocacy group may have helped the lawmaker rethink some preconceived notions before filing:
No kids in trailers
Oregon — Rep. Mitch Greenlick (D-Portland) has submitted HB-2228, which prohibits putting children age 6 or younger in bicycle trailers or on the backs of bicycles.
Greenlick is a professor of public health and preventative medicine at Oregon Health Sciences University. When contacted by BikePortland.org, he cited a recent OHSU study that 30% of “serious bike riders” suffer a “traumatic bike accident” every year, with 8% serious enough to seek medical attention from a doctor. (A “traumatic bike accident” can be something as minor as a scraped knee; most accidents in the study resulted from potholes, train tracks, etc.)
There is nothing in that quoted OHSU study, however, about children in trailers or riding on the backs of bicycles. Greenlick said that he submitted the bill to start a debate on the issue, which he has.
Greenlick's office has been flooded with emails, and BikePortland has received dozens of comments regarding the bill. The author of the Seattle-based Totcycle website is deadset against it, saying there's no evidence to support such legislation. More reaction to this bill.
Bicycle license plates
[The legislator withdrew this bill the day after NJ.com first reported it on Wednesday. It pays to battle bad bicycle bills.]
New Jersey — Assemblywoman Cleopatra Tucker (D-Essex) has submitted A3637, which would require that every bicycle in the state carry a license plate. The plates would clearly be marked “BICYCLE” and cost $10. Failure to ride without one could bring a $100 fine.
In addition the owner would have to supply the bike's year, make, model, color, weight and serial number, along with the owner's address, the date it was purchased, and the amount of state sales tax they paid on the bike.
Tucker said she sponsored the bill after several senior citizens contacted her after they had been knocked down by kids on bikes but were unable to identify the miscreants. She says the number on the license plates would help them identify the perpetrators.
The NJ.com website reports that there's already opposition to the bill, and the Assembly leadership said it wasn't high on their list of bills to push through this session.
Catching flack
Meanwhile, a Washington state bill that requires motorist to give cyclists a 3- to 5-foot gap (depending on speed) when passing is catching some flack for restrictions it places on bicyclists.
The bill, HB 1018, contains provisions that bicyclists remain in the bike lanes or the right edge of the road when they're moving slower than traffic. However it goes on to stipulate that bicyclists don't have to ride on the shoulder or bike lane if they determine it's not safe because of potholes, debris, or other reasons, such as an open-door zone.
Sponsor Rep. Jamie Pedersen, D-Seattle, says he included such requirements after his last bill failed because it didn't spell out how bicycles riders can contribute to road safety. It's dubbed the Mutual Responsibility Bill and has provisions similar to bicycling bills in Colorado and Vermont.
You can read more about the bill, including a explanation of each new provision, at Bicycle Alliance of Washington.
Meanwhile, the state of North Carolina has posted an online survey asking how to make bicycling safer in that state. It can be found here and takes about 10 minutes to fill out.
More about 3-feet bills in Washington state and Virginia and a Colorado bill that would restrict bicycle bans.
Recent Comments