APD decides to start targeted cracking down on bicyclists without warning
Back in March, APD Chief Art Acevedo addressed the Austin Cycling Association in an attempt to “reach out” to the cycling community and hear our concerns. The general consensus from the meeting was that he got a lot of tough questions and handled them well even if we didn’t always like the answers. The feeling was that we were entering a new era where APD was actually going to attempt to recognize the concerns and needs of the cycling community.
I think we can wise up and get back to business as usual.
The Bicycle Austin forum was active over the weekend with multiple reports of cyclists getting ticketed for failing to stop at stop signs. This is different from the previous crackdown in just the downtown area (which APD first said was an organized program then denied they were singling out cyclists in any way.) This appears to another program specifically targeted at cyclists with this report from a cyclist name Scott who was recently ticketed at Guadalupe and 46th.
A bicyclist friend of mine asked an APD friend of hers about this, and she was told that indeed “an email had gone out” instructing APD officers to step up citations for bicycle traffic violations, apparently in response to the recent bicycle deaths.
I’m all for more safety, but why must APD always choose the hammer over the velvet glove on these things?APD’s enforcement of these traffic laws have been inconsistent at best, so making a change like this should involve real community communication. If they really cared about our safety and well being, why not work with ACA, LOBV, the Bicycle Austin e-mail list, and sites like ATXBS and this site to communicate the importance of stopping and that you will be ticketed if you fail to stop? An actually community communication plan, which as I just outline would cost next to nothing, would go a long way towards making our streets safer and go an even longer way towards reducing the hostility that seems to be rising in the local cycling community towards our police. Maybe we could also actually look at the safety implications of treating stop signs as yield signs to see whether this actually causes accidents or might actually be a better way of traffic movement.
Well, consider these cyclists who were ticketed your APD community outreach. You’ve been warned.
If you are going ride at night without lights, do it in a car. It will cost you less!
To add insult to injury, DougMC pointed out that some of the City of Austin fines for bicycle violations are actually higher for cyclists than cars. The most glaring was riding without lights which will cost you $147 on a bike but only $137 in a car. So you are telling me driving a 2-3 ton steel machine at up to 65 miles an hour without lights is less dangerous than a cyclists on a 20-40 pound bike going 25 MPH at best?
The new Master Bike Plan calls for more education of the police department on bicycle law. We welcome that, but treating cyclists as a menace when the automobile is the leading cause of accidental death in this country is madness. It’s time for APD to engage with us, not just ticket or lecture us. Anything less will undermine the progressive plan we just adopted.
Related posts:
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 10:17 am
I also wonder if the $146 fine for sidewalk riding is legal.
The sidewalk law is a city law, which can be found at –
http://www.amlegal.com/austin_nxt/gateway.dll/Texas/austin/title12trafficregulations/chapter12-2bicycles?f=templates$fn=document-frame.htm$3.0#JD_Chapter12-2
which is fine, but the law also specifies the fines to be charged –
§ 12-2-36 PENALTY; ENFORCEMENT.
(A) A person commits an offense if the person performs an act prohibited by this article or fails to perform an act required by this article.
(B) An offense under this article is a Class C misdemeanor punishable by a fine not to exceed:
(1) $20 on a first conviction; and
(2) $40 on a subsequent conviction.
… so it really sounds like the fine for riding on a sidewalk where you’re not permitted to ride on the sidewalk should be $20 the first time, and $40 after that.
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 11:09 am
Doug, I think you have a good point there. Let’s find out. I have to say it does make me pretty unhappy to get run over by cyclists on the sidewalks downtown, though.
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 11:16 am
I sent an email to several CoA employees asking about the fine differences and in particular the sidewalk fine discrepancy. I posted the letter on ATXBS, and will let y’all know what I find out if/when I hear back.
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 11:35 am
If these are laws why do cyclist need warnings? If you want to use the roads you should follow the laws regardless if you are in a car, on a bike or on foot.
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 1:05 pm
Yes Jess. I’m sure you wouldn’t mind if all of a sudden everyone and their brother was getting $150 jaywalking tickets without the police notifying the public that the “crime” was going to be more strictly enforced?
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 1:17 pm
Mike,
They have been doing the jay-walking tickets on the UT campus the past few weeks and I have managed to walk within the law so why shouldn’t others?
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Isn’t it common sense to obey traffic signs whether you’re on a bike or in a car? I can’t believe people would bitch about something that saves lives. I’ve had NUMEROUS cyclists cruise through stop signs/intersections without a glance in the past. I would take $150 and a life lesson over death
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 2:20 pm
I don’t complain about speed traps where they suddenly “more strictly enforce” laws. Breaking the law is breaking the law– you took the risk, pay the fee.
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 2:32 pm
I think I goofed about the §12-2-36 part …
tomwald pointed out that that’s in the article about bicycle helmets, and the part about sidewalks is in another article. (The entire document is broken up into three articles.) So §12-2-36 wouldn’t apply to the sidewalk offenses, only to helmet offenses.
Oh well.
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 5:32 pm
To respond to the “it’s the law” argument everyone is throwing up, I think the problem here is two fold. First, there are no required bicycle traffic safety classes and bicycle law is barely touched on in driver’s Ed and defensive driving. Pair that with inconsistent enforcement and police officers who flat out don’t know the law, and you are asking for trouble.
Lot’s of people ride bikes because the barrier to entry is hundreds of time less than a car. Many of those people (children, working poor) don’t even have a driver’s license. If we really want things to be safer, we have to educate the public which APD has chosen not to do (unless you consider ticketing people education which is a pretty haphazard method at best.)
I do think the Idaho way, which allows cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs, is something we should seriously consider and would effectively recognize what nearly every cyclist, including I’m betting most of the people here, does at least once in a while.
on Jun 22nd, 2009 at 9:18 pm
Does anybody know what the cause/situation around the “recent bicycle deaths” were?
I must confess I am a bit pissed by the attention given to the stop sign thing, as if this is really making things safer for bicyclists, as if motorists and etc. give a flip about the safety of cyclists in the first place.
You don’t see that concern when they are passing you with 1/2″ clearance, or when they execute a right turn into you, or a left turn into you, or pull out into you. Those are the most frequent accidents, and nobody gives a flip about ‘em.
Sure, when some cyclist takes the right of way when it is clearly not theirs, or shoots thru an intersection without regard for the vehicles already waiting their turn… those people are not so much cyclists as idiots, and very similar to their counterparts in cars.
The typical cyclist may not stop completely at a stop sign, but you can bet they are going to follow the spirit of the situation and take their turn as per law, otherwise they will be “the bug on the windshield” as some put it.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 1:22 am
I can’t say i’m totally against this. I’ve always said that mutual respect of drivers and cyclists would be increased if they were treated on a somewhat equal level, as towards rightful use of the roads. This might begin with cyclists yielding to cars at stop signs where they should. I don’t know how many people it pisses off when they see a cyclist disregarding the laws. It gives them (us) a bad name, and one of the ways we can work to resolve it is by moving predictably, and that means following the rules.
That is not to say that I am in favor of the aforementioned “idaho-type” law…
I also have to say that I was the victim of a car on bike accident, where the car basically made a right hand turn in front of me, where he actually said he SAW me. I’m sure that he “thought” he passed me, but didn’t realize that bikes can (and do) actually travel at speed.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 1:43 pm
After re-reading some of these comments, what seems most obvious to me is that there is obviously an us versus them mentality on both sides and also a lack of understanding (in my opinion) of the non-cyclists out there. I don’t know a single cyclist that thinks it’s OK to just blow through a stop sign at 15 mph. We’re the ones that get smeared on the pavement in the case of an accident. As pointed out by someone else here, the problem, if any, with slowing to a near stop and coasting through a stop sign while on a bike is a perceived lack of predictability. Thus the use of the law requiring all to come to a “complete stop.” I challenge even the most law abiding citizen out there, however, to tell me with a straight face that you come to a *complete* stop at every stop sign, every time, at all hours. It is so rare (to do so unfailingly), that it really is silly to chose to enforce the same restrictions on a cyclist, especially since it is the cyclist that risks paying the price not only monetarily, but also physically. And for that matter what is defined as a stop? What about those that can balance on their bikes without moving or putting down a foot? Is this still a fine able offense? This is the absurdity of the “a law is a law” argument. It is really a question of what is the correct law that makes sense and is safe for everyone? I personally do not understand why we cannot amend the law for cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs. This is just commons sense, but unfortunately I feel commons sense is one of the first things to go when discussing even the simplest of matters.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 2:01 pm
“mike”, as a matter of fact, I see ‘cyclists’ going through stop signs at a full cruising speed on a regular basis.
If cyclists came to the same rolling stop as motorists do, nobody would complain – but they don’t; those of us who both cycle commuted and car commuted know there’s a real difference – and it’s not just the juvenile anarchist brigade either; the brightly-plumaged-and-helmeted folk using Shoal Creek do it too.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 9:40 pm
I drive a car and I ride a bike. I follow the laws while using both. I don’t understand why it is so difficult for some people to follow rules. If you choose to drive a car it is your responsibility to know and follow the laws. If you choose to ride a bike it is your responsibility to know and follow the laws. I can’t tell you how many times I have almost run over cyclists because they were not following the law…and all I can think is who is going to feel horrible for killing that person, who will have the fingers pointed at them, and who will get the punishment from the law–probably me in the car. People in cars need to respect cyclist and cyclist need to respect people in cars–plain and simple, but to do this people must also follow the law and use common sense. Common sense tells me that if I am riding a bike I am no match for a 2 ton car and I would probably lose that battle so I should really do things like stop at stop signs. That is what they are called after all.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 10:18 pm
The overall truth is that driving in austin, with the level of traffic we have, is very frustrating. Motorists cannot take out this frustration on other motorists, so they take it out on cyclists. The liberties that bicyclists take, even when perfectly safe, are very irritating to them. Witness that talk about registration fees, insurance, etc. for bicycles.
Jess: don’t worry so much about killing that cyclist, its not even a ticketing offense in Austin. They deserved it, they all run those stop signs.
on Jun 23rd, 2009 at 10:27 pm
While I’m being cranky, what’s up with those drivers who won’t take their turn once I come to a stop? Lots of times they are over there, trying to direct traffic behind their opaque tinted windows. Sheesh. I’ve already given up my energy to stop, so getting to proceed in front of some lethal weapon doesn’t seem like such a wonderful option to me.
on Jun 24th, 2009 at 1:23 pm
So they want to crack down on scofflaw bicyclists to reduce injury and death, huh? And they target cyclists who don’t come to a complete stop at stop signs? Give me a break!
APD should be directed to give citations to the ninjas, the salmon and the sidewalk scofflaws that result in the majority of injuries/deaths.
on Aug 24th, 2009 at 2:13 pm
[...] It appears these orders are being given verbally (although an officer earlier this summer said an e-mail had gone out to officers.) I guess were are back to the unverifiable double [...]