New Santa Barbara bike laws

[Alistair]

Originally Posted by benb

This would still not remove the need for there to be some sanity around eBikes that do 30mph without pedaling.

As it is today plenty of eBikes barely meet the standard of stable geometry going down a hill or brakes that actually function.

I'd be all for revising the 3-tier classification at a national level. Something like...

Class 1: 15mph max speed, pedal-assist only. I could be convinced 18mph makes more sense. Either way, this class would be intended to cover e-bikes used like normal bikes. That should cover most people just looking for an added boost, whether that be for group rides or hauling cargo. Allowed to use all existing bicycle infrastructure.

Class 2: 25mph max speed, pedal assist or throttle. Intended to supplement or replace existing moped/50cc rules. Can use on street with minimal registration and no M endorsement.

Class 3: Anything else. It's a motorcycle in the eyes of the law. Requires M endorsement and full registration, insurance, etc. Street only.

Yes, I realize that likely makes my wife's Specialized a "motorcycle", as it provides boost to 28mph. It's overkill - I'd happily have its controller reprogrammed to cap at 15 or 18mph.

EDIT - electric kick scooters, one wheels, etc should follow similar guidelines.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Originally Posted by jm714

I spent 30+ years in local government over a decade as a city manager for three different cities. I can say we never wrote an ordiance with the intent of profiling people.

Can some laws be used for profiling, yes they can, but I never saw it and I never thought I worked with a police chief that would allow it.

You can vouch unreservedly for the lack of bias in every city employee you ever had who enforced these laws?

I was a news photographer on the street where things happened. I saw it happen as it happened. It happened to me–being singled out as a member of the press and ejected from locations where the general public was unrestricted. I was out on police patrols with the officers as part of stories where I watched them do it and they had no problem admitting it or seeing me photograph it.

Trust me, just because you didn't personally see it in action or have any police chief who would admit to it happening, doesn't mean it didn't and doesn't happen.

Get real.

BBD

[OtayBW]

Originally Posted by Mark McM

I wonder if these local ordinances are all ;egal? In most states, local ordinances can't supercede state laws. So for example, if state law allows bicycles (e-bikes) to ride double file, a local ordinance can't require them to ride single file. A local town near me tried to make special laws governing bicycles on the local roads, but they were shot down because they violated state laws.

Agree. This one in particular:

Requires riders to use bike lanes where possible, and on streets without bike lanes, to ride close to the right curb or edge of roadway.

[froze]

Originally Posted by jm714

Really? Everytime I go to SB I take my bike and haven’t had an issue, plus the weather is some of the best in California for riding.

I agree, I lived there for about 20 years, still see family there, and when I do see family I take my bike, never had an issue either, and I've ridden all over that city and that county.

Most drivers are expecting cyclists, so they tend to more courteous of cyclists than some parts of the country. I see a lot more non-courteous cyclists, than I see non-courteous motorists!!

Now you can go down State street without all the heavy car and pedestrian traffic due to the city blocking off a large section of it starting at Haley to I think to Victoria where it turns into a 1-way street to Sota? Not sure if the businesses along that area of State like that idea. But I know starting on Friday through Sunday, going down State from Alameda to the pier was a 30 to 45 minute drive before they put those limitations up. And both the peds and the cyclists were just crazy, jumping out into oncoming cars, weaving in and out of cars, I saw a quite a few accidents during that time period, most were not the fault of the motorists either. Fortunately people are driving slow so injuries that I saw were pretty minor, there may had been much more serious injuries I just never saw them, it was more cussing and blame tossing then anything.

Just about every street in SB has bike lanes, it's great to ride around through there.

[Spdntrxi]

Originally Posted by Alistair

I'd be all for revising the 3-tier classification at a national level. Something like...

Class 1: 15mph max speed, pedal-assist only. I could be convinced 18mph makes more sense. Either way, this class would be intended to cover e-bikes used like normal bikes. That should cover most people just looking for an added boost, whether that be for group rides or hauling cargo. Allowed to use all existing bicycle infrastructure.

Class 2: 25mph max speed, pedal assist or throttle. Intended to supplement or replace existing moped/50cc rules. Can use on street with minimal registration and no M endorsement.

Class 3: Anything else. It's a motorcycle in the eyes of the law. Requires M endorsement and full registration, insurance, etc. Street only.

Yes, I realize that likely makes my wife's Specialized a "motorcycle", as it provides boost to 28mph. It's overkill - I'd happily have its controller reprogrammed to cap at 15 or 18mph.

EDIT - electric kick scooters, one wheels, etc should follow similar guidelines.

I have a class3 28mph max which is nice for commuting, but it's pedal assist only. Personally not in favor of 15-18. Maybe 22-25 is enough.

[Likes2ridefar]

Originally Posted by Spdntrxi

I have a class3 28mph max which is nice for commuting, but it's pedal assist only. Personally not in favor of 15-18. Maybe 22-25 is enough.

My commuter caps at 20, which seems to mean more like 19mph in practice. I’d strongly prefer 28mph. It is a crawl in nearly every scenario where I ride it.

If mine were capped any slower I’d not bother using it. I can already commute faster on my all road bike as it stands with no assist but the etility bike is more comfortable with its storage options…

[jm714]

Originally Posted by BumbleBeeDave

You can vouch unreservedly for the lack of bias in every city employee you ever had who enforced these laws?

I was a news photographer on the street where things happened. I saw it happen as it happened. It happened to me–being singled out as a member of the press and ejected from locations where the general public was unrestricted. I was out on police patrols with the officers as part of stories where I watched them do it and they had no problem admitting it or seeing me photograph it.

Trust me, just because you didn't personally see it in action or have any police chief who would admit to it happening, doesn't mean it didn't and doesn't happen.

Get real.

BBD

What’s with the get real statement???

Cities are a magnet for lawsuits, trust me. None of my cities were ever served with a lawsuit for profiling or discrimination. Can I speak for all 2000 employees that were under me at some no, but again I never had a lawsuit presented speaking to your claims.

Get off your high horse with the all government is corrupt line of thinking.

[Alistair]

Originally Posted by Spdntrxi

I have a class3 28mph max which is nice for commuting, but it's pedal assist only. Personally not in favor of 15-18. Maybe 22-25 is enough.

Is it strictly a desire to go faster, or does it make you feel safer on the road?

IMO, if you want to travel at motorcycle speeds, you should be on a motorcycle (whether that's a literal motorcycle or an e-bike that's classified as such). Bike infrastructure should be kept at reasonably safe speeds for the average transportation user.

[Spdntrxi]

Originally Posted by Alistair

Is it strictly a desire to go faster, or does it make you feel safer on the road?

IMO, if you want to travel at motorcycle speeds, you should be on a motorcycle (whether that's a literal motorcycle or an e-bike that's classified as such). Bike infrastructure should be kept at reasonably safe speeds for the average transportation user.

if I'm going over 15.. 100% road and or bike lanes. I dislike MUP very much and avoid as much as possible.

100% 15mph is not fast enough when sharing the road with cars.

[cgolvin]

Originally Posted by jm714

What’s with the get real statement???

Cities are a magnet for lawsuits, trust me. None of my cities were ever served with a lawsuit for profiling or discrimination. Can I speak for all 2000 employees that were under me at some no, but again I never had a lawsuit presented speaking to your claims.

Get off your high horse with the all government is corrupt line of thinking.

Reading BBD's comments, the highlighted text above is an unfair characterization. Using your personal experience to counter what are well documented abuses by LEO in a wide range of communities puts you on extremely thin ice and/or shaky ground, and 'get real' is a pretty inoffensive comment in that light.

When I look in the mirror I remember to imagine the words "you are not a representative sample" tattooed in reverse.

[prototoast]

Originally Posted by jm714

What’s with the get real statement???

Cities are a magnet for lawsuits, trust me. None of my cities were ever served with a lawsuit for profiling or discrimination. Can I speak for all 2000 employees that were under me at some no, but again I never had a lawsuit presented speaking to your claims.

Get off your high horse with the all government is corrupt line of thinking.

I think it's great if any cities you worked for avoided any of these problems.

I also don't think that what BBD is suggesting necessarily qualifies as corruption.

I think he raises a valid concern that is a statute is written in a way that is both broad and vague, with the assertion that it will be applied "reasonably," that creates a high risk that it will be applied inconsistently.

Everyone involved can be acting in good faith, but two different officers could have very different views on what counts as "reasonable" and it can be hard to guarantee that their views are not even subconsciously affected by characteristics of the perpetrator that are unrelated to the specific conduct at issue.

[BumbleBeeDave]

Originally Posted by jm714

What’s with the get real statement???

Cities are a magnet for lawsuits, trust me. None of my cities were ever served with a lawsuit for profiling or discrimination. Can I speak for all 2000 employees that were under me at some no, but again I never had a lawsuit presented speaking to your claims.

Get off your high horse with the all government is corrupt line of thinking.

I prefer to look at it as a acknowledging reality.

Not saying at all that all government is corrupt. But it's become painfully apparent in the last few years that a certain percentage of people are just no damn good because public affairs have given them the idea that it's OK to show it through their behavior. That applies to public employees as well. No matter how you define "corruption," the chances that zero percent of your 2000 employees ever engaged in any is . . . zero percent. Particularly with LEO's, the court system has been rigged for many years to protect officers from any accusation, no matter how credible. It's only been recently that the ubiquity of private citizen video cameras (and now police body cams) has shown how often profiling and bad or jut plain ignorant behavior takes place.

Plus I never said anything about lawsuits. To believe that just because lawsuits were never filed over this behavior means it never happened is naive at best.

I can absolutely guarantee you that certain Santa Barbara city employees at some time will use these newly passed laws to profile some group and/or individuals because of personal prejudice or even indirect instructions from superiors. It may be blacks, Hispanics, "those damn college kids," or just some poor raggedy looking homeless guy passing through town. But it will happen.

That's just the reality because people are people and some are just not very nice people. That applies to members and employees of local governments as well.

BBD

[benb]

In retrospect the article never compares to the # of auto collisions Santa Barbara has, the amount of damage/lives those cost, the resources & cost for the city in that, etc.. so it really is probably all much ado about nothing and they're just targeting bikes/eBikes in some feel good way while probably ignoring the elephant in the room.

Sometimes it seems like the police just run from one auto incident to another all day long. It is a major major component of their work here every single day. A couple of bike incidents a year will generate all the headlines.. but the severe bike incidents are always a driver committing multiple moving violations resulting in a cyclist paying the price, so that's still just an auto incident.

[aaronffs]

Originally Posted by benb

In retrospect the article never compares to the # of auto collisions Santa Barbara has, the amount of damage/lives those cost, the resources & cost for the city in that, etc.. so it really is probably all much ado about nothing and they're just targeting bikes/eBikes in some feel good way while probably ignoring the elephant in the room.

Sometimes it seems like the police just run from one auto incident to another all day long. It is a major major component of their work here every single day. A couple of bike incidents a year will generate all the headlines.. but the severe bike incidents are always a driver committing multiple moving violations resulting in a cyclist paying the price, so that's still just an auto incident.

but the right to cars and reckless driving is enshrined in the constitution, and cyclists are just a scourge on society

[froze]

Originally Posted by aaronffs

but the right to cars and reckless driving is enshrined in the constitution, and cyclists are just a scourge on society

Please show what part of the Constitution that says the right to cars and reckless driving is enshrined, and cyclists are the scourge of society.