Three bills early on one morning is helpful in that it doesn’t consume much time, but the results were not that great.
First up in House Transportation Sub Committee 2 at the more civilized hour of 7:30 (earlier meetings have been at 7:00) was Senate Bill 228, the annual Northern Virginia effort to require “Motorists to Stop for Pedestrians in Marked Crosswalks.” This year it was patroned by Sen. George Barker of Fairfax County, with a few amendments. Although he did an excellent job of presenting the bill, it met with the same fate (Gently laid on the table) that its predecessors had eight previous times in the last decade. As Sen. Barker left the committee room, his parting comment was “See you next year”.
Next up was Senator Patsy Ticer of Alexandria with SB 566, the Senate version of Three Foot passing. After a brief introduction, since the Committee had just heard HB 1048 with Del. Kaye Kory last week, she introduced me and I immediately began fielding questions from Del. Oder from Newport News (who had supported 1048) who recounted an incident on his way to church with his wife last Sunday where he observed two cyclists passing too close to his stopped car and then running a red light, and asked if this behavior was legal, to which I replied “absolutely not”. He had some other comments about what apparently is a large, peloton-like, ride that he sees regularly on Sunday mornings in his area, and questioning me as to whether this riding behavior is proper. He concluded by stating that perhaps we should put in some bills with specific penalties for bicyclist misbehavior.
Del. Rust, from Herndon & the W & OD Trail area, then took his turn and recounted the publicized incident last spring where, on their MS Ride, a number of riders were ticketed for running a Stop sign, but the charges were dismissed in court.
Finally, Chairman Carrico, the retired State policeman, stated as he has consistently , that none of these passing distances are enforceable; and that this is an “Educational Problem”. He then called Linwood Buckner (the Legislative Affairs representative from DMV) forward and strongly requested that Linwood “work with the bicycling folks to improve the way the bicycling rules are presented in the DMV materials and driver’s exam”. Linwood agreed to do so, and we will meet after the conclusion of this legislative session, so we may yet get some benefit from all of this. All that having been said, the bill was promptly Tabled.
Then, it was downstairs to House Agriculture, which had been pushed back to a 9:30 start. Senator John Edwards was up second with SB 546. This bill will specifically include railroads (who often have easements, rather than owning their rights of way)in the existing Landowner Liability Statute as exempt from liability when they have granted permission to recreational users to cross their property. Although the representative from the Friends of the Rivers of Virginia (who have been the ones pushing for this bill), and Champe & I, were all prepared to speak in support of the bill, Senator Edwards had done such a good job of presenting it (since he is a trial attorney, the several others on the committee were satisfied that it was not a problem for them) that after the Chair saw no one opposed to the bill come forward from the audience, the bill was quickly unanimously reported., and should sail through on the House floor.
That just about clears the slate for this session for me, although I am still following Senator Norment’s SB517 bill that would ban cell phone usage by the driver of a moving motor vehicle, unless it is in hands free mode. This bill has passed the Senate and now will be heard on Friday morning in the House Police, Militia, and Public Safety Committee, which has the reputation of being a tough place to get a bill out of. The patron however is a respected veteran, so the bill has a chance.
Thanks to all who contributed by making calls and sending Emails. Even though it may not seem like it, you have helped further the cause, and we will keep on working to improve the safety of cycling.
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"//pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-ffAr_0M34f91E.gif\")
Comments on this entry are closed.
I look forward to laws that will make the roads safer every year. Even if we lost the 3 foot passing law, hopefully the hands-free cell phone law will pass and maybe they will sharpen the teeth on the “texting while driving” law.
As a police officer, I would also argue that the 3 foot law IS enforceable. Sure you can’t tell the difference between 2 feet and 3 feet without a measuring tape, when observing a motorist pass a cyclist too closely. But you can tell the difference between 3 inches and 2 feet… especially if it’s a difference between 3 inches and 3 feet. I’ve had motorists pass me and their mirrors graze my handlebars. That is NOT 2 feet! Of course, I was also hit from behind. That wasn’t 2 feet of clearance either.
How were Del. Rust’s comments relevant? Was he speaking in opposition to the bill? He’s my delegate (and I have contacted him), so I’d like to know – especially after his unexpected opposition to 1048 on the floor.
It’s a pity that, like many others, some of our elected representatives see the irresponsible actions of some bikers as justification for denying proper protection to all bikers. It’s also ridiculous that this can even be brought up this way – as if cyclists were a special breed given to lawbreaking – when so many drivers break the law on the regular basis. Vehicles don’t break laws… people do.
UPDATE:
Del. Rust’s response:
“I did not support HB1048 and SB 566 because of the practical objections raised by persons after it left the committee. The major objections to the bill included the difficulty of enforcement and the width of the travel lanes which would require a passing vehicle to enter the opposing lane. The committee felt this was an educational issue and both the Department of Motor Vehicles and the representatives of the bicycling community agreed to work together for the next year to attempt to improve the situation.”
This whole subject of “enforceablility” is a joke. State code 46.2-816 is “Following Too Closely”, a common charge when a motorist rear-ends another motorist. But how can a police officer determine how close is too close without an accident occurring. Perhaps this law needs to be removed from the Code of Virginia because it’s not enforceable except in cases of traffic crashes. Same could be said for the 3 feet law. Not enforceable unless a cyclist gets hit from behind.