welshTerrier2

On one level, I agree ... on another, not so much.

Sure, bleeding-edge consciousness raisers often alienate almost everyone. Perhaps it's true that public officials will become "enemies". I'd like to believe, though, that at least a few well-meaning officials will look beyond the tactics to assess whether legitimate public policy concerns have been raised. Not everyone throws out the baby with the bathwater.

kickstart

I think its important to set aside personal opinions, and remember meaningful changes require resources controlled by elected officials who also represent the other 98% of road users.

benjdm

She is not trying to prove a point, she is just trying to get from A to B in the manner she deems safest. All this Uncle Tom b.s. needs to stop.

Here is her latest video update:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DDvc-q88QL4

Please support her appeal fund:
Appeal fund by Cherokee Schill - GoFundMe

wphamilton

Except that, as someone mentioned in the other thread, the statute in her state says as far right as practicable "on the highway" and not "in their lane." Since the highway includes the shoulders it's hard to argue that she could even be in the lane. But even in the lane I think you're right that she should be near the right side and not in the middle.

dru_

The as far right code applies to vehicles, which under Ky are not permitted to drive not he shoulder (bikes are explicitly granted that exception), so the argument would be that if she seized the lane due to dangerous shoulder conditions, she still had to maintain a right hand lane position unless there was debris in the lane making it unsafe to do so.

benjdm

Where does it say that vehicles are not permitted to drive on the shoulder?

ETA: AFAICT, here is the law about where vehicles should be on the roadway. I don't see anything prohibiting automobiles from being equally required to travel on the shoulder.

No, the lane being too narrow for a car and a bike to safely travel side by side is a hazard that allows you to travel away from the right hand part of the lane already. Debris is immaterial in the lane.

banerjek

She's an idiot. And if something needs to stop, it's this perpetual victimization complex that so many cyclists seem to have.

I had a 40+ RT commute for more than 10 years, almost all of it on 2 and 4 lane highways that aren't nearly as good as what she has. These roads are considered among the most dangerous in the state, and I sometimes went months without seeing another cyclist on them. All the same, I once went 47 months straight without taking the car to work.

Her method encourages hatred and harassment of cyclists while endangering herself and others. Yeah, motorists should pay attention. But we all know that too many of them don't, and it doesn't help anyone if she gets flattened or someone in a giant SUV plows into a line of cars who did see her and kills someone who was paying attention.

Share the road means exactly that. It means respecting others. She fails on both counts and alienates those we need on our side.

wphamilton

So your reasoning here is that the "highway" is ambiguous in the statute, so you can use a construction here that "highway" in that particular statute must refer to the travel surface and not the entire highway as in other statutes. Right so far? It sounds reasonable to me, but I'm guessing (not being a lawyer) that a judge could go either way on it. He might even say, presuming that the construction works for motor vehicles which cannot use the shoulder, the bicycle is an exception which may use it, and so "highway" for the bike includes the shoulder after all?

The odd part to me is that the statutes in states that I'm familiar with say "roadway" in the FRAP statutes so it's not in question. It seems like if Kentucky has it as "highway" instead, maybe it's deliberate.

dru_

Right hand boundary is the specific wording. The Boundary of the highways is defined as the road markings (the white line) and does not include the shoulder.

I cannot find this wording anywhere in the Ky law. Many other states do provide this, and I expected to find it in KY as well, but couldn't find it in the codes. Debris or unsafe conditions, yes, but nothing about sharing the lane.

Keith99

Same for me, save my abilities to take 'insane' roads has waned. The key is options. I once rode the right traffic lane on a freeway at night. What made that safer? I was well lit, it was downhill so I was going over 50 MPH and it was reported that the shoulder had drainage grates with the slots parallel to the roadway.

dru_

As I went trolling through the KY laws, there are a bunch of curious wordings. A good lawyer good have a heyday with some of them. ( FWIW, I am not a lawyer, my job however has forced me to learn way more about law than I ever really wanted to know )

trailmix

I live and commute in Lexington and have ridden the road in question. A few years ago, I travelled from Lexington to northern Jessamine county for work. I only rode my bike a few times before i decided that road was just too dangerous. Overall, the shoulder is rideable but it does disappear in a few places, debris is higher than average (for this area) but still passable. The main problem with this road is the crazy drivers, most people run well over 65 or 70 and switch lanes to get ahead at the stoplights. I have thought about this case quite a lot and have formed a couple of opinions:
-personally i don't think she should be taking the lane on this road
-i think there should be some improvements on this road to facilitate cyclists so they have no reason to consider taking the lane
-they need to enforce the laws and cut down on the excessive speed and aggressive drivers on this road
I was hoping both sides would compromise and something good might come out of this but it looks like both sides are digging their heels in for a fight.

I did a club ride last night and one of her attorneys was on the ride (he is a member of the club and, in my opinion, an arrogant @$$). He was blathering on about the case and you could tell by his attitude that he assumed that everyone agreed with his point of view. In reality, the ones i talked to were not on her side or the side of the county-they were for for a solution that benefited the cyclist but didn't make the rest of us a target of angry motorists in the area.

benjdm

No, that's the definition for 'roadway.' 'Highway' includes the shoulder. Here are the definitions in Kentucky:

https://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=6291


Not being able to travel side by side safely would be an unsafe condition, IMO.

FenderTL5

i don't know her specific starting and ending points, but putting Nicholasville to Lexington into Google Maps or MapMyRide makes it an one hour and forty-eight (1:48) trip going several miles east and around. In previous articles, she indicated her trip was about an hour.

Paul Barnard

Not just no but...

dru_

Thanks, that's what I found, but I read interpreted it a little differently. The problem I tripped on is the Right Hand Boundary. The Highway definition includes a very broad definition and inclusions, that are generally NOT navigable, even for a more traditional vehicle. In a subsequent section in that same section (under intersection) they do define boundary as the road markings. I can't find any redefinition of boundary, so my reading carried the boundary definition forward. It is murky enough that I think a good lawyer could make a case with it if desired.


While I agree wholeheartedly (and I would further point out that this very justification would be the reason for choosing a road with two lanes in the same direction over one with single lanes, as it provides a safe passing area) on a personal level, at a legal level, it is not codified, so it is open to interpretation. That is a gamble that you'll lose as often as you'll win.

dru_

BTW, if it not obvious, I think every rider that wants to take any role in advocacy needs to have a good long sit down to read, print, and understand the laws in their state (and track pending legislation). This stuff is complex, nuanced, and varies wildly by state and even municipality. As advocates, we absolutely must understand this stuff, so this type of discussion is extremely valuable. @benjdm

kickstart

My thoughts exactly......

billyymc

Trailmix, thanks for the local insight and flavor...good post.

Banerjek - also some very good comments imo.

This woman is not helping the cycling cause at all. I'd be pissed if she rode in my area. The motorists on my commute have proven to be generally tolerant and careful. If I rode the way this woman rides, with no respect for others, they would be rightfully pissed off I think.

rydabent

The point is that shoulder is NOT alway "wonderful". And as I have posted on the other thread on this, IMO it is ALWAYS up to the cyclist to judge what is FRAP

VTBike

For her, the shoulder is ALWAYS horrible. That's the problem.

The law does not agree with you about it always being up to the cyclist, wish it to be true as you may.

benjdm

Not true. Watch her most recent video.

Just a doctor

Ms. Schill is trying to push something in a region that isn't ready for it, and she doesn't appear to have the qualities necessary to productively advocate for change. Lots of places are into fossil-fuel energy reduction and decarbonization (including coal-use curtailment...mmm, KY, not open to the arguments), shifting commuting to mass transit, biking and walking, and being progressive in general.

So Ms. Schill could consider moving to Minnesota, Colorado, Washington State or Oregon, places with gold and platinum state and community ratings by the LAB,i.e. places that backed environmentalism decades ago, and whose cyclists effectively got gov't to create very good (and still expanding) bike-commuting. infrastructure. Kentucky is ranked 48th bicycle-friendly state. Ms. Schill is an unlikely candidate to lead an effective crusade to move the state up the rankings significantly.. So, she might be happier moving to a place where bike commuting is well-ingrained, rather than trying to be a pioneer.

If I heard correctly, she was driving without insurance, and got a DL suspension. That's not a record that would gain support among local LEOs and courts.

So if she wants to stay where she is, her best recourse might be to pull out the old trike, get some semi-fast wheels, maybe 28 Spring Classics or 32mm touring tires , with Kevlar or Vectran belts, and ride on the shoulder. With a trike geometry and touring wheels, she should be able to handle shoulder holes, cracks, and most debris.

This is possibly somewhat academic as she apparently no longer has a 16 mile commute, having apparently lost her job for missing too much work for court appearances, but if she does get another job in Lexington, outfitting a trike that can handle the intermittent rougher terrain seems potentially doable.

VTBike

The "I've just been arrested" damage control video? Too bad it doesn't match up with actual observations of her.

nichcylist

She claims the CA wants to make her an "example during an election year."
Truth- The current County Attorney is running unopposed.
She claims that everyone harasses and bullies her.
Truth- She bullies and harasses motorists and there is video she recorded showing this.
She claimed that she had to commute to work. Now that she is no longer working thanks to her GoFundMe account, she claims she is going to school.
Truth- She is using the GoFundMe account for her own personal expenses. Her Defense Attorneys worked pro-bono, meaning that they would only be paid if she won. Guess what people, she lost and you're still donating money.
Local cyclists do not condone the way she has gone about this.This is because local cyclists know her and know the other legal issues she has had outside of the cycling world. Out of town cyclists have made her their poster child for injustice not realizing that they have a con-woman for a representative. Congrats on giving away your hard earned money. She has said repeatedly that she could care less about you supporters. This is about her and only her. She cares about noone but herself.
Jessamine County is a great place to live. She has stated this herself and she has stated that her children love it here. Get a clue out of state people! There is more to the story than what you see in her smoke and screens, but you are too biased to understand that so keep on sending the money. As long as you do that, she won't have to work. The only reason she is not one of the motorists that you cyclists hate, is because her license is suspended and she cannot get it back.