Texas - Texas Safe Passage Bill

Anyone else heard about this? I just got an e-mail at work about it and haven't read anything here on BF.

http://www.legis.state.tx.us/tlodocs/81R/billtext/html/SB00488I.htm

Basically, it gives protection against drivers that buzz, threaten, throw things, cut off, or fail to give clearance when passing you, among other things.

Apparently, a previous version didn't get passed because it was limited to bikes, but now it includes any "vulnerable road user", meaning motorcycle, farm or construction eqpt, horse, etc.

Call up your state rep/senator and ask for support!!

At least it's a step in the right direction.

This is worth a letter/e-mail.

Edit: It looks like it's a done deal and will take effect on Sept. 1

Nice. I got a cup thrown at me on Saturday.

Edit: It looks like it's a done deal and will take effect on Sept. 1
Citation? Link in the OP is just a bill.

How will this be enforced??

How do you think? Probably a fairly low chance of someone actually getting caught, but if they do, at least there are consequences.

Our state senator (Wendy Davis) was one of the sponsors. Our local bike clubs actually helped get her elected because of her promise to support this bill.

Citation? Link in the OP is just a bill.

At the very bottom of the linked page:


SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2009.

How will this be enforced??
If someone throws something at you, remember their plate.

At the very bottom of the linked page:
That link is a link to the text of the bill. That's proposed legislation. The part at the bottom only goes into effect if the bill is passed, along with the rest of the text.

This wasn't illegal before? Figured it would fall into the same category as road rage? I had some guy buzz me in a Mita, I chased him down, but he turned and I'm not in as good shape as I thought. I wanted to ask him why he felt the need to do it when the other lane was free and there was no traffic.

-Nate

This wasn't illegal before? Figured it would fall into the same category as road rage? I had some guy buzz me in a Mita, I chased him down, but he turned and I'm not in as good shape as I thought. I wanted to ask him why he felt the need to do it when the other lane was free and there was no traffic.

-Nate
Probably already illegal under assault statutes, but I guess this gives us more leverage on the people who don't actually do you much physical arm, people throwing soda cups, yelling, buzzing, etc.

Probably already illegal under assault statutes, but I guess this gives us more leverage on the people who don't actually do you much physical arm, people throwing soda cups, yelling, buzzing, etc.

I wonder how many people actually do this in front of cops (I'm sure someone has been caught doing it). It is annoying, then again I've learned to stay away from busier streets during certain times. It really sucks that there are people who act like this. What I love best is when someone honks or buzzes me and then I catch them at the next light. I'm like hey don't get jealous your wife checks me out instead of your fat lazy butt.:D

-Nate

I wonder how many people actually do this in front of cops (I'm sure someone has been caught doing it). It is annoying, then again I've learned to stay away from busier streets during certain times. It really sucks that there are people who act like this. What I love best is when someone honks or buzzes me and then I catch them at the next light. I'm like hey don't get jealous your wife checks me out instead of your fat lazy butt.:D

-Nate
This guy in a Chevy Blazer hit me right in the back of the head with his bag of McDonald's trash one time and he and his buddy cackled off down the road. I caught him at the light almost a mile later when I'm sure I was now a distant memory and threw a half-full bottle of Gatorade in his window with the cap off. Then I made a right turn and cackled off down the multi-use path.

Helmet cam has been used in other states as evidence.....

this guy in a chevy blazer hit me right in the back of the head with his bag of mcdonald's trash one time and he and his buddy cackled off down the road. I caught him at the light almost a mile later when i'm sure i was now a distant memory and threw a half-full bottle of gatorade in his window with the cap off. Then i made a right turn and cackled off down the multi-use path.

lol!

There is a little more info here. http://www.februarylegs.com/?p=685

I think its funny how our state cares so much about cyclists. Even a bill that is supposed to primarily improve a cyclist only states the word "bicycle" twice, and one of those is stating that a cyclist doing something illegal is immune from this bill. Only the phrase "including bicycle" allows us to have protection.

On a side note, it does state that, according to 551.104b, you must have a white light on front and rear reflector, if I read correctly.

I believe it is just the rear light/reflector that is required for the defense. And only at night.

I agree that this section should not be in there.

So it'll still be okay to buzz ninjas? Kewl!

Ok, first of all, PLEASE look up your state house rep and senator and send a note in support, even if you think it's pointless. Consider it a small favor for a fellow cyclist, mmkay? Costs less than lending me a spare tube and I know you'd do that, wouldn't ya?

Second, the language is intentionally broad to include wheelchairs, tractors, etc, so that it can't be attacked as being a special interest bill. I agree with this strategy and think we should use it more.

Finally, you may not be aware but there have been several cases in recent years of cyclists bein killed / injured by rearview mirrors, most famously Larry Schwartz a few years back. It does happen, it is a real issue and it needs addressing.

Here's my screed for copy n paste. Thanks.
===================================

It's the "safe passing" / "3 foot bill," now back in session. It was defeated before by a few reps from rural / pickup truck areas, and also quite frankly by a lack of interest and awareness in the cycling world.

If you're tired of being "buzzed" then spend a few minutes to look up your reps, copy paste edit and hit send.

Look up your reps:
http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/se...embers.htm#FYI (http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/senate/members.htm#FYI)
http://www.house.state.tx.us/resources/faq.htm#who_rep

Sample letter below, edit the appropriate part, and please fwd to your Texas cycling friends.

Dear Esteemed Senator / Representative Name:

I am writing to ask for your support of HB 273, the bicycle passing amendment to the Transportation Code, section 545.0535.

As a bicycle rider living in (city), I ride my bicycle (to work every day/ on the weekends, in traffic, safely etc). (talk a bit more about how / when / where you ride, what you do for a living, how you're a good citizen, some bad thing sthat have happened to you that this law might address, etc. Keep it brief, 3-4 sentences).

This very important House Bill will codify behavior that a person exercising due care should use when passing bicycles, a clearly legal vehicle on all roads except freeways. While most motorists use due care when passing me and my friends, this bill provides for clear penalties when due care is not used. Currently, without clear penalties, due care is left to the interpretation of a court system that errs on motorist’s side and not for bicyclist’s rights and safety.

This bill brings Texas into line with a majority of other states in the Union that provide this law for their bicyclists (http://www.bikeleague.org/action/bik...tate_laws.php) (http://www.bikeleague.org/action/bikelaws/state_laws.php)). Please help Texas protect bicyclists at least at the same level as other states.

Please respond to me via email, mail, or phone as to your position with respect to this bill. If you intend to not support this bill in this session, please provide as much detail as possible so that I may understand your position.

Thank you,
(sign it)

Great idea. Let's hope this gets passed.

You want to know the irony? I grew up driving farm equipment, and in the 10 or so years of doing so, I don't think I ever even got honked at. Drivers tend to give 20 ton vehicles quite a bit of clearance for some reason.

But don't tell any of the rural reps this, I'm sure they haven't thought this far. :innocent: As long as it helps out the little man, they're all for it.

I agree, the bill looks to be a good thing.

Throwing things at cyclists was always illegal -- it's called assault. But it's good to make it more explicit.

However, it's not all good here.

(k)It is a defense to prosecution under this section that at the time of the offense the vulnerable road user was a person operating a bicycle in violation of Section 551.103 or 551.104(b)(2)

... so, if somebody doesn't have a light, it's OK to throw things at them? OK to taunt them? I understand that you might buzz a bike ninja and you shouldn't be punished for that, but that's the only part that should be excluded if the cyclist isn't obeying the law.

Also, the penalties given in this section for assault are generally less than the standard assault penalties. I guess in theory if somebody seriously assaults a cyclist, they should be prosecuted for violating both sections, but in practice they may just pick this one. A minor nit, I guess.

However, it's not all good here.

(k)It is a defense to prosecution under this section that at the time of the offense the vulnerable road user was a person operating a bicycle in violation of Section 551.103 or 551.104(b)(2)

... so, if somebody doesn't have a light, it's OK to throw things at them? OK to taunt them? I understand that you might buzz a bike ninja and you shouldn't be punished for that, but that's the only part that should be excluded if the cyclist isn't obeying the law.

Also, the penalties given in this section for assault are generally less than the standard assault penalties. I guess in theory if somebody seriously assaults a cyclist, they should be prosecuted for violating both sections, but in practice they may just pick this one. A minor nit, I guess.

It's also a defense if the cyclist is not riding as near as practicable to the right of the lane. So, if you're taking your lane, drivers can honk, swerve, throw stuff, etc. without fear of reprisal.

It's also a defense if the cyclist is not riding as near as practicable to the right of the lane. So, if you're taking your lane, drivers can honk, swerve, throw stuff, etc. without fear of reprisal.
It is not practicable to ride in the gutter where there are sharps, puddles, untreated potholes, trash.

It's also a defense if the cyclist is not riding as near as practicable to the right of the lane. So, if you're taking your lane, drivers can honk, swerve, throw stuff, etc. without fear of reprisal.

I'll be the judge as to where is safe and practicable for me to ride my bike. If the safest part of the lane is to the left of the center of the lane, then that's where I'll ride.

I never really ride that close to the right, like others have said there are always seems to be standing water or trash in that area. I also don't generally ride down very busy roads often, and when I do I try to keep up with the flow of traffic. As bad as it sounds, and as risky as it is, I love riding through downtown traffic during rush hour.

-Nate

I got this email back from my Senator today. Looks like we are starting over again...

Thank you for contacting me regarding bicycle safety. I absolutely share your concerns about the safety of cyclists in our area.

During the last session, I voted for SB 248, which would have required that drivers maintain a distance of at least three feet from bicycles. The bill passed the Senate but was delayed in the House late in the session and did not become law. The current session convened on January 13th, and already identical legislation has been re-filed. You may track the progress of HB 273 via the Texas Legislature Online at www.capitol.state.tx.us (http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/).

I will keep your comments firmly in mind as this legislation is debated and hope that you will not hesitate to contact me again regarding issues of importance to you.

Very truly yours,
Senator Jane Nelson

If you live in Tarrant county you might want to let Wendy Davis know. She defeated Kim Brimer who was blamed for the bill not passing in the last session. You can reach her at:

http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/Senate/members/dist10/dist10.htm

Too Many Laws. Too Many lawyers.
We don't need any more Traffic Laws.

If you live in Tarrant county you might want to let Wendy Davis know. She defeated Kim Brimer who was blamed for the bill not passing in the last session. You can reach her at:

http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/Senate/members/dist10/dist10.htm

Wendy Davis has been on breakfast rides with our club; she's in our corner.

Wendy Davis has been on breakfast rides with our club; she's in our corner.

Sweet! If only I could have had the pleasure of voting against Sen. Brimer, but I live in the wrong district.

This Monday evening, Feb. 2, at 7pm, the Fort Worth Bicycle Association (FWBA) is hosting Bike Texas Executive Director Robin Stallings at their meeting. Mr. Stallings will be speaking on up-coming legislative efforts related to safe cycling access and funding in our state capitol; specifically this year's Safe Passing Bill for Cyclists. I strongly urge each of you to check your schedules and attempt to make this meeting.

Please come out to this meeting and show there are a lot of interested cyclists in Fort Worth, Tarrant County, and North Texas.

I believe its a great thing that FWBA has invited Bike Texas to speak at this meeting and I greatly appreciate their sharing this event with other clubs and cyclists like ourselves. Increased awareness and forward movement on greater/safer bicycle access in our region is not an individual need, nor can it be accomplished by a single club; however, when cyclists gather together we are a majority standing before our local, regional and state representatives... lets all show-up and learn more about this year's process and show this region is concerned.


Details about this Monday's meeting:

Date: Monday, 2 Feb 2009
Time: 7:00pm
Location: 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd, Fort Worth
The meeting will be held at 7:00 pm on Monday
February 2 at the University of North Texas Health Science Center, 3500 Camp Bowie Blvd. ,
Fort Worth , TX , Building #2, room 2-100.
Map: http://www.fwbaclub.org/membership/meetings.cfm

State Bill 248 was passed Aug 9,2008 by a vote of 95 yay and 5 nay! Google it!

Yeah, and Brimer weakened it with amendments. He's not around this time.

From a local message forum:


As a means to again remind folks of this meeting, I thought I'd add some new information on this year's Safe Passing Bill for Cyclists (Senate Bill [SB] 488)

In the Senate Journal of the 81st Legislature Regular Session, Wednesday 28 January 2009 our district's Senator Wendy Davis was added as "Co-Author" of this Bill. (http://www.journals.senate.state.tx.us/sjrnl/81r/pdf/81RSJ01-28-F.PDF#page=2)

That's a big change for this district. A very similar Bill was basically killed by our previous Senator. Forward movement regarding safe cycling in our region?

If you live in Tarrant county you might want to let Wendy Davis know. She defeated Kim Brimer who was blamed for the bill not passing in the last session. You can reach her at:

http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/Senate/members/dist10/dist10.htm

I was kind of disappointed that I didn't get a response from her, but then today I got a nice letter in the mail confirming that she is a co-author of the new Safe passage Bill and was a cyclist herself. Seems like we will get much more support then we did from K Brimer.

A law exists on a page in a book, or, these days, in a computer. It is not a shield that will deflect a motor vehicle, like a Star Trek force field. This does not mean I do not support such a law, because if a safe distance is specified, it is a tool that can be used by law enforcement in its role to protect the public.

That being said, I am not optimistic it will cause many motorists to give cyclists more room. People still buzz me when my patrol car is parked at the side of the roadway, with the emergency flights flashing, and I have the power to stop what I am doing, and chase down the new violator. There is a new law requiring motorists to either vacate the lane next to a stopped emergency vehicle, or slow down to a specified speed if impossible to vacate the lane. It might be difficult to "make the case" regarding whether a motorist slowed sufficiently, but I see plenty of motorists who have room to change lanes, and don't, and maintain their speed right past me. If motorists won't give me room when I can ruin their day, will they give me room when I am on my bicycle? Some few will; most won't.

Just to be clear, I do support a safe passage bill.

Disclaimer: I do not work for the PD of the city shown in my profile.

I see three problems with the bill. Fix them and it'd be great!

#1 - Motorcycles and Farm vehicles are motor vehicles, contrary to the bucket the bill puts them in. Give them their own bucket since they're vulnerable, but ARE motor vehicles.

#2 - I think the requirement to move over a lane on multi-lane roads is confusing. Certainly it's right if the outside lane isn't easily shareable, but I'd just as soon not have cars swerving over a lane when they can pass safely. Sometimes, we're safer if the car just continues on without adjusting course at all.

#3 - The BIG problem is that, absent a major publicity campaign, most motorists won't even be aware of the revised law, and most that are, are the ones that are courteous and competent already. Cyclists will, of course, but they're not the ones throwing stuff. A useful companion would be to require questions about the duties & obligations of motorists toward vulnerable road users in the written Texas license test.

I like this bill much better than the one that failed. There's no reason that cyclists should receive treatment differently in this regard than other vulnerable operators. The stuff about harassment & turning are redundant relative to other laws, but they give a cop another, clear thing to cite the perpetrator on.

Both versions of the bills in question (the old one that was passed two years ago in the Senate and died in the House b/c it was submitted so late) and the new version (vulnerable vehicles) have been passed on to committee. The Senate passed along the vulnerable vehicle one and the House passed along the previous version. Hopefully we'll have something new on the books in September.

I think the public needs to be educated about new laws the get passed. My dad was one of those people that didn't slow down for a stopped emergency vehicle, and got ticketed for not changing lanes either. He simply wasn't aware of that law. He knows now, and the only reason I know is because he told us how/why he got the citation. I wish I had enough money to start a PSA campaign on radio/tv/newspaper and educate people about cyclist's rights. Maybe if enough people knew about it we'd see a change? Yes, there are plenty of jerks out there, but there are probably also a whole lot of people that are just ignorant to the rights and laws concerning bicycles on the road.

A law exists on a page in a book, or, these days, in a computer. It is not a shield that will deflect a motor vehicle, like a Star Trek force field. This does not mean I do not support such a law, because if a safe distance is specified, it is a tool that can be used by law enforcement in its role to protect the public.

That being said, I am not optimistic it will cause many motorists to give cyclists more room. People still buzz me when my patrol car is parked at the side of the roadway, with the emergency flights flashing, and I have the power to stop what I am doing, and chase down the new violator. There is a new law requiring motorists to either vacate the lane next to a stopped emergency vehicle, or slow down to a specified speed if impossible to vacate the lane. It might be difficult to "make the case" regarding whether a motorist slowed sufficiently, but I see plenty of motorists who have room to change lanes, and don't, and maintain their speed right past me. If motorists won't give me room when I can ruin their day, will they give me room when I am on my bicycle? Some few will; most won't.

Just to be clear, I do support a safe passage bill.

Disclaimer: I do not work for the PD of the city shown in my profile.

Agree 100%.

What the law does however, is give the officer the ability to ticket the driver at the scene while the ambulance rolls away with the mangled meat that is the cyclist. After the cyclist recovers in a month or two the ticket will provide great leverage in the pending lawsuit - the insurance company's attorneys won't have much to stand on.

#1 - Motorcycles and Farm vehicles are motor vehicles, contrary to the bucket the bill puts them in. Give them their own bucket since they're vulnerable, but ARE motor vehicles.

The term is "vulnerable road users" (VRUs). It also includes pedestrians and joggers. The point is that they are not fully enclosed. There is a reason they were included though. It increases the number of constituencies that would favor the bill. Cyclists by themselves are not as big of a group as cyclists, motorcyclists and farmers put together. There are ideal laws that would do only what a specific group might want, but those don't get passed because no one else cares and when in doubt, people tend to vote against new things. The point of including more people in the VRU classification is to get more people to pester key lawmakers in favor of the bill.


#2 - I think the requirement to move over a lane on multi-lane roads is confusing. Certainly it's right if the outside lane isn't easily shareable, but I'd just as soon not have cars swerving over a lane when they can pass safely. Sometimes, we're safer if the car just continues on without adjusting course at all.

But... it makes it easier to prosecute violations. In actual practice, if a driver can pass safely and does so, they won't get a ticket even if they don't follow the letter of the law.


#3 - The BIG problem is that, absent a major publicity campaign, most motorists won't even be aware of the revised law, and most that are, are the ones that are courteous and competent already. Cyclists will, of course, but they're not the ones throwing stuff. A useful companion would be to require questions about the duties & obligations of motorists toward vulnerable road users in the written Texas license test.

Let's get it on the books, then worry about publicizing it, mmmkay?


I like this bill much better than the one that failed. There's no reason that cyclists should receive treatment differently in this regard than other vulnerable operators. The stuff about harassment & turning are redundant relative to other laws, but they give a cop another, clear thing to cite the perpetrator on.

Agreed.

The point is that they are not fully enclosed.Neither are people in convertibles. Are they covered? :)

Part of the education campaign will obviously be with cyclists. I was buzzed and short-stopped by a Deputy in a pickup that hadn't the foggiest idea what the law required of motorists or cyclists. Next time, I'll be wearing one of these:


http://www.shop.3feetplease.com/images/1220719426217-1534566594.jpeg


Check it out here (http://www.3feetplease.com/)

FYI, the House Transportation committee heard witnesses for/against the Vulnerable Road Users version of the bill earlier this week. You can see the testimony as a RealPlayer file at http://www.house.state.tx.us/committees/broadcasts.php?session=81&committeeCode=470. Pick the latest file, the one from the afternoon of March 24th. I forget how far in you have to go to hear all the testimony and questioning. Checking out the bill, HB 827, it's still "left in committee." I think they'll pick it up again before putting it on the general house to consider.

Next time, I'll be wearing one of theseOK, but that's just going to confuse motorists and cyclists. What, cyclists who are three feet wide, please? Eh? But this rider isn't more than 1.5 feet wide? Perhaps `Three feet wide' is some riding club? Are they a bunch of fatties? This woman isn't ...

A much clearer way to illustrate a 3' passing distance would be a rod extending to the left of your bike, three feet past your handlebars. Have a flag at the end of the rod that says `3 feet please' (add `it's the law' if it is.) Make sure the rod/flag is very visible, and make sure it will bend very easily and not snag if a car hits it -- because they will, and you don't want that to send you out of control.

But as made, the jersey is just plain confusing unless somebody already knows about the three foot passing law.

You mean something like this? http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1187/1162738120_8e84a6fe08_o.jpg
Not sure if the above is this http://nollij.blogspot.com/2007/02/flash-flags-now-you-see-them_1576.html But for 3ft you'd need a pole twice as long.

Picky picky. Make your own jersey if you have to be hypercritical. All I know is I wore it on my last ride and I got much more space. The point remains: part of the educational responsibility is ours. Or we can just curse the darkness. Very effective that.

Hypercritical? Well, a large portion of your target audience isn't going to understand your message. If pointing that out is being hypercritical, then so be it.

It's certainly a bright jersey, that alone will get you some more passing room. And people may spend a little time trying to decipher it's meaning. So it's not all bad. And some people will understand it -- though I imagine those are the people who already give you lots of space.

And since you're in Texas, the part of the jersey that says `it's the law' is flat out wrong (if your jersey says that, of course.) It's not the law yet. (Fortunately, that part is on the front, so nobody passing you is likely to ever see it.)