Author: admin

Coalition of Arizona Bicyclist’s Annual member’s meeting 10/18/2016

 

There is a plan to hold an in-person meeting sometime in the Spring 2017 as we transition our corporate year for Arizona Corporation Commission purposes.

 

Below are the minutes of the meeting (approved at the 3/21/2017 Board of Directors meeting):

2016 Annual Meeting Minutes

Tuesday, October 18, 2016 Attendees: Bob Beane, Bob Jenson, Wayne Churchman, Ed Beighe, Peter Mather, Gail Hildebrant, Sharon Newman Matt, Lloyd Thomas, Jeff Kafleck, Radar Matt

Called to order at 1837

Treasures Report Gail Hildebrant Checking Account $725.15 Savings Account $515.53 High Yield Account $32,872.55 Total 34,113.23 Report was accepted. Spread sheet shows that regular spending is typically under $2,000/yr. Most of that is for the storage locker & the monthly conference bridge.

Overview of what we are working on: State level: GOHS, ADOT, More input into the drivers license testing. Improve PSA/bikes Power point that was created for GPD. Sierra Vista PD has made contact.

Maricopa County: E bike – California has law classifying an E bike as a motorcycle. Tempe is in the process of drafting its own city laws. We need to get ahead of this, so we don’t end up with a lot of city or county ordinances.

Pecos Freeway: PARC & GRIC are still trying to block it. Sit is still unclear if cyclist will have access to the shoulder. Next meeting is 10/20/16 at the State capitol.

Regional priorities: Tucson- Yuma- Tempe-Lloyd Thomas-Traffic counts support the traffic calming on McClintock. Metro Phoenix-Bob Jenson- Light rail is extending to Dunlap for Metro Center access. No increase in bike facilities on the light rail. City is looking into putting bike lanes on several E-W major streets. Next meeting 10/20 at College of America

Bike Summit: still questionable Fri 3/31 or Sat. 4/1 Wayne Churchman to get back to us next week, on whether Perimeter would split the cost of the rooms. We need to take a survey of what last year attendees would care for.

Elections: CAzB is now at 8 Board Members with the resignation of Ben Dodge.

3 Serious/Fatal crashes in Phoenix on Friday

On Friday 9/23/2016 in Phoenix, two bicyclists were killed, and a third was seriously injured injured in three separate incidents. Police have so far not released many details.

[24th St and 202, 36th Ave and Van Buren, the serious injury was at 16th St and Southern]

We lost two bicycle riders in Phoenix, yesterday, and a third is in the hospital with serious injuries. Three separate crashes. We will follow all three to try to insure that appropriate citations, if any, are issued and to (as always) see what we can learn from each crash that we can use to prevent similar tragedies in the future. That’s part of what we do. — Bob Beane, President, Coalition of Arizona Bicyclists

Such a string of events attracts a demand for breaking news coverage, below is a brief interview, and below that the news piece that appeared in The Arizona Republic on Saturday…

  • what are things bikes can do to be safer on the roads?
    (1) Be visible and predictable (bright clothing, lights, etc. in low light; signal movements, etc.),
    (2) Ride with traffic. It is NOT safe to ride facing traffic and it is against the law in AZ.
    (3) Always be aware and don’t assume that drivers will see you and/or do “the right thing”…in other words, ride your bike with confidence but defensively.
  • what are things motorists can do to avoid endangering bicyclists?
    (1) Make safe driving your #1, #2 and #3 priority…no texting, no phone calls, no Internet searches…put the phone down while driving,
    (2) Be on the lookout for Vulnerable Roadway Users including bicyclists, pedestrians, road workers and law enforcement/emergency personnel,
    (3) Remember that it only takes a few seconds to save or end a life, depending on your attitude and level of care.
  • why do you think many incidents involving bicyclists and cars go unreported to police?
    Actually, over 800 have been reported so far this year in AZ. Thankfully, only a small percentage of those have been serious or fatal. My guess is that some incidents involving little or no injury are agreed between the parties as not necessary to report.
  • what specific reform do you think Arizona needs to help reduce bicyclist and motorist fatalities?
    Several: (1) More and better education of both motorists and bicyclists as to safe “co-existence” on the road, including re-testing of drivers every five or ten years as laws change and required testing within 90 days for drivers moving in-state,
    (2) Comprehensive texting, Internet and hand-held phone use ban with penalties comparable to DUI…in other words, we need to return to the concept that safe driving is priority one and various distractions that result in injury and death need to have significant consequences.

 

 

Separate traffic collisions in Phoenix kill 2 bicyclists, seriously injure another

SAUNDRA WILSON sewilson@arizonarepublic.com

THE REPUBLIC | AZCENTRAL.COM

Three separate collisions occurred between bicyclists and motor vehicles in Phoenix on Friday, leaving two bike riders dead and one more in the hospital with serious injuries.

One of the cyclists was killed Fridaymorning around 6 a. near 24th Street and Loop 202. Five hours later, a second cyclist died after colliding with a truck around 11 a.m.

Phoenix police reported a third bicycle- car collision near 16th Street and East Southern Avenue at about 11:30 a.m. The cyclist, an adult man, suffered serious injuries and was transported to a local hospital, police said.

The collisions prompted temporary lane closures to allow police to investigate on Van Buren Street from 37th to 39th avenues, and on Southern Avenue between 16th and 18th streets.

According to records from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 29 Arizona bicyclists died in motor vehicle collisions in 2015. Fifteen of the incidents were in Maricopa County, the data show.

Countless more bicyclists have been seriously injured, a number that remains elusive because only an estimated 10 percent of bicycle crashes causing serious injuries are reported to police, data from pedbikeinfo.org revealed. [This isn’t quite the case, longer explanation and details here]

The average age of bicyclists killed in traffic collisions is 43, a NHTSA report said. An overwhelming percent of bicyclists killed are men and nearly half of the fatalities occur between 4 p.m. and midnight, according to the report.

Bob Beane, the president of the Coalition of Arizona Bicyclists, believes Arizona needs “more and better education of both motorists and bicyclists as to safe ‘co-existence’ on the road.”

“We need to return to the concept that safe driving is priority one and various distractions that result in injury and death need to have significant consequences,” Beane said in an email.

In order to be safer on the roads, Beane said bicyclists should wear bright clothing and ride bikes with lights to be more visible to motorists.

“Ride your bike with confidence but defensively,” Beane said, emphasizing that bike riders should not assume drivers see them.

Beane said motorists can contribute to bicyclist safety by remembering that “it only takes a few seconds to save or end a life, depending on your attitude and level of care.”

Republic reporter Megan Janetsky contributed to this article.

 

 

CAzB seeks Board Members

Are you interested in improving conditions for bicyclists in Arizona? The CAzB is actively seeking Board and Officer candidates especially with any of the following experience:

  • Grant writing for non-profit entities, preferably bicycling-related.
  • Donor fund-raising, preferably bicycling and/or community-oriented.
  • Membership development campaigns.
  • Bicycling event planning, organizing and management for paid events >200 bicyclists.

Can’t commit to a leadership role? The Coalition is always seeking individuals that can contribute in any way.

Contact us: cazbike@cazbike.org, or message us on facebook.

 

Lobbying

The Coalition is an exempt organization recognized by the IRS as a public charity under 501(c)3 since 2002. Our primary public purpose is bicyclist traffic safety education.

501(c)3 charities are “absolutely” prohibited from endorsing any candidate for elective public office.

Influencing legislation (“lobbying”) is, however, permitted so long as it does not amount to  a “substantial part of its activities”. The Coalition does, from time to time, participate in influencing legislation, however it does not amount to a substantial part of our activities. Note that lobbying does not include activities involving “executive, judicial, or administrative bodies” (examples include ADOT, MAG, PAG, etc).

Below is reference material from the IRS:

The Restriction of Political Campaign Intervention by Section 501(c)(3) Tax-Exempt Organizations
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.  Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances.  For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner …more

 

Lobbying
In general, no organization may qualify for section 501(c)(3) status if a substantial part of its activities is attempting to influence legislation (commonly known as lobbying).  A 501(c)(3) organization may engage in some lobbying, but too much lobbying activity risks loss of tax-exempt status.

Legislation includes action by Congress, any state legislature, any local council, or similar governing body, with respect to acts, bills, resolutions, or similar items (such as legislative confirmation of appointive office), or by the public in referendum, ballot initiative, constitutional amendment, or similar procedure.  It does not include actions by executive, judicial, or administrative bodies.

An organization will be regarded as attempting to influence legislation if it contacts, or urges the public to contact, members or employees of a legislative body for the purpose of proposing, supporting, or opposing legislation, or if the organization advocates the adoption or rejection of legislation.

Organizations may, however, involve themselves in issues of public policy without the activity being considered as lobbying.  For example, organizations may conduct educational meetings, prepare and distribute educational materials, or otherwise consider public policy issues in an educational manner without jeopardizing their tax-exempt status.

..

Beane: ADOT needs to broaden its concept of transportation

Commentary by Coalition President Bob Beane, regarding the South Mountain Freeway (the last remaining unbuilt portion of Loop 202), set to begin construction later this year…

Beane: ADOT needs to broaden its concept of transportation

Posted: Tuesday, January 12, 2016 4:56 pm
Commentary by Bob Beane Special to AFN (Ahwatukee Foothill News)

Roughly six years ago, a locally based Federal Highway Administration official assured me (verbally, of course) that ADOT would be required to accommodate the bicycling community (transportation-oriented and recreational/fitness) if/when the 202 “Pecos” freeway was built going around South Mountain to the west. The “accommodation” requested was/is a road or pathway to connect to 51st Avenue from the western edge of the Ahwatukee Foothills.

Initially, ADOT was gathering related input from bicyclists. But, somewhere along the way, the ”accommodation” seems to have evaporated. Possibly, it coincided with the inability to achieve an alignment that didn’t require costly blasting through two ridges at the west end of South Mountain. So, within a $1.75 billion project with four freeway lanes in each direction (really?), cost savings need to come from NOT providing for any means for bicyclists, pedestrians or any other non-vehicular mode users to be able to cover roughly four miles (or less) between the western edge of the Ahwatukee Foothills and 51st Avenue.

As it stands today, no accommodation is planned that I know of or can discern from publicly released plans. There are no connecting frontage roads, and there are no plans for a bike path in the right of way (as have been built in places such as Colorado or Utah).
However, a concerned group of bicycling advocates and some community leaders from Phoenix, Chandler and Tempe are seeking to at least get ADOT to design in enough space within the right of way to allow a bike path to be constructed. I can’t speak for everyone in the group, but the consensus seems to be that having this connectivity in place would be an equitable and extremely positive non-vehicular transportation connection and recreational amenity that would enhance the neighboring communities.
Setting aside the issue of whether this freeway project is truly needed, it seems to many that ADOT still stands for “Arizona Department of Trucks (and Cars)” and that ADOT remains miles away from being a true transportation department that has a broader vision of its role and potential in contributing a multi-modal environment to the communities in which it operates. ADOT leadership, to date, seems to lack any vision of contributing to the overall health and community environment in a way that other DOTs have embraced for years.
A fraction of a fraction of the cost of this massive project could not only allocate space within the design, but fund a bike path for at least four miles, or so. But, that’s, sadly, not in the plans…yet. As I mentioned, there is a significant constituency that is asking for ADOT to incorporate non-vehicular connectivity into the 202 freeway plans. We are hopeful that ADOT can take a significant community-oriented step forward by approaching this request with a “how can we help make this happen” attitude, rather than the perceived car-centric, liability and cost-based blinders that seem to have guided past decision-making.
Ahwatukee resident Bob Beane is president of the Coalition of Arizona Bicyclists.

PDF of print edition: BeaneAFN_Guest_Commentary

More about the South Mountain Freeway

Official ADOT homepage for SMF. The South Mountain Freeway is the last piece to complete the Loop 202 and Loop 101 freeway system. The freeway is a part of the Regional Transportation Plan funding passed by Maricopa County voters in 2004 by Proposition 400, a 0.5% sales tax, proceeds of which predominantly fund freeway construction.

 

Arizona Legislation 2016

Arizona’s 52nd Legislature – 2nd Regular Session is now in full swing. Below is a brief guide to following legislation in Arizona… For the nuts-and-bolts of how a bill becomes law, the multiple “readings”, and the COW, and so forth, see e.g. this document from azleague.org Continue reading Arizona Legislation 2016

Look Ma, no hands!

There is a special law applying specifically to bicyclists; it often gets repeated as

You must have at least one hand on the handlebars at all times

Which is what appears both on the Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (AZ GOHS), and the City of Phoenix websites, it is a misrepresentation.

While this is the law in some places, e.g. Utah (41-6a-S1112); the law in Arizona actually reads:

ARS 28-816. Carrying article on bicycle

A person shall not carry a package, bundle or article while operating a bicycle if the package, bundle or article prevents the driver from keeping at least one hand on the handlebars.

So, while you should and must ride under control for safety’s sake, it’s not intrinsically illegal to ride with no hands.

 

 

Overtaking Bicycles and Arizona’s Three Foot law

this is the next in an occasional series on laws governing bicycle use in Arizona

In the last installment, we noted that a bicyclist is subject to the rights and responsibilities of a “driver of a vehicle”, as well as some special rules which apply specifically to bicyclists; and that there were important legal distinctions between the driver of a motor vehicle and a bicyclist. Today we examine a special responsibility applicable only to the driver of a motor vehicle — the duty to overtake a bicyclist proceeding in the same direction not only safely, but with a minimum of three feet of clearance.

The general rule for a driver overtaking another vehicle is as follows:

§28-723. Overtaking a vehicle on the left
The following rules govern the overtaking and passing of vehicles proceeding in the same direction:
1. The driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left of the vehicle at a safe distance and shall not again drive to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the overtaken vehicle…

 

A special rule was created by bicyclist advocates in 2000, HB2625, to bring attention to overtaking, allow for increased fines for violators, and to provide for additional educational opportunities. The rule applies only to the driver of a motor vehicle when overtaking a bicyclist, the new statute reads, in full:

§28-735. 28-735. Overtaking bicycles; civil penalties
A. When overtaking and passing a bicycle proceeding in the same direction, a person driving a motor vehicle shall exercise due care by leaving a safe distance between the motor vehicle and the bicycle of not less than three feet until the motor vehicle is safely past the overtaken bicycle.
B. If a person violates this section and the violation results in a collision causing:
1. Serious physical injury as defined in section 13-105 to another person, the violator is subject to a civil penalty of up to five hundred dollars.
2. Death to another person, the violator is subject to a civil penalty of up to one thousand dollars.
C. Subsection B of this section does not apply to a bicyclist who is injured in a vehicular traffic lane when a designated bicycle lane or path is present and passable.

 

Note that the minimum safe distance of not less than three feet, subsection A, applies on all streets in Arizona. Streets come in a wide variety of configurations, most streets are divided into lanes, but others are not, some have shoulders, or no shoulders, paved or unpaved, some have designated bicycle lanes, many do not. The minimum safe distance of not less than three feet applies on all streets in all configurations regardless of the position of the bicycle to be overtaken.

R4-11 BMUFL sign with Change Lanes to Pass placard

On many streets with lanes, the lane is not wide enough to safely share side-by-side with a vehicle and the bicycle. Drivers of vehicles in this situation will need to change lanes, at least partially, in order to pass safely and legally. Since the adjacent lane must be clear to move even partially into it, the Coalition encourages drivers to make a full lane change when passing, the same as when passing any other vehicle.

There is a misunderstanding that the minimum safe distance of not less than three feet does not apply on streets with designated bike lanes; this is simply not true. Subsection C states that the enhanced fines of subsection B do not apply if a bicyclist is struck while riding outside of a “passable” designated bicycle lane. It has no relevance to Subsection A. Subsection A always applies.

Note that Subsection C is presumably poorly drafted in that it does not allow for a bicyclist  who is legally turning left to be “protected” by subsection B — although an overtaking motorist is still, as always, required observe the minimum safe clearances specified in subsection A.

Education

In addition to the minimum three foot passing law, HB2625 also added a new directive to include “those practices and laws relating to bicycles” (underlined below) and as a result ADOT/MVD has added a question relating to bicycles to the Arizona’s drivers license test

§28-3164.B. The (drivers license) examination shall include all of the following:

1. A test of the applicant’s:

(c) Knowledge of safe driving practices and the traffic laws of this state, including those practices and laws relating to bicycles.

.