[NMCycling] Fwd: HB 192 (5-Feet To Pass Bicycles) Final Vote Help

[Jennifer Buntz via Bike-racers]

All,
We can't know how the wording of the amendment WILL be interpreted, and
therein lies the problem, in my opinion anyway.  I used the link below to
contact the Governor, and sent the message you can read if you're interested
(see below).

https://www.governor.state.nm.us/contact-the-governor/

Happy riding everyone,

Jennifer

________________________________________________________________

Governor Lujan Grisham,

Please consider vetoing HB192, the 5 fee to pass bicycles bill. The bill
was given a last minute amendment before it went to the Senate Floor, which
I believe transformed the bill from one that was positive for bicyclists
into one that could have very negative, if unintended, consequences for
cyclists.

The amendment puts cyclists right to use roadways into an ill defined space
that is not where the State should go with regard to supporting alternative
forms of transportation.  The amendment states that "To the extent
practicable, a person shall not operate a bicycle within a vehicle lane if
a separate posted or painted bicycle lane or pathway is provided within or
adjacent to the roadway."  It is the use of the word "practicable" and its
ambiguity that is objectionable to cyclists who routinely use roadways.

Take the example of Tramway Boulevard in Albuquerque.  The
north-south portion of Tramway Boulevard has a path adjacent to the
roadway, the Tramway Recreation Trail.   While this is a fine path, it is
not a path dedicated to the use of bicycles.  Many different users can be
found enjoying the Tramway Recreation Trail.  Due to the variety of users,
many cyclists, myself included, prefer to ride on the shoulder of Tramway
Boulevard.  This choice allows groups of cyclists to ride together, and
more importantly, avoids conflict with the walkers, runners, children,
dogs, rollerbladers, and slower cyclists who choose the Tramway Recreation
Trail.  Riding the shoulder makes this route much more expedient if you are
a bicycle commuter too.  The amendment to HB192 puts this *choice* in
jeopardy, taking it out of the hands of cyclists and leaving it up to the
discretion of law enforcement and judges.  It is also likely to add to
motorist/cyclist conflict.

I was very disappointed that Senator Wirth and Representative Rubio allowed
the bill to advance to the Senate Floor with this amendment.  Please do not
let this bill become law.  The benefit of the 5 feet to pass component is
not worth the difficulties that the amendment creates.  Cyclists already
face many barriers.  I urge you to veto this bill so that another barrier
is not added.

I had the pleasure of meeting you twice when you were our US
Representative.  I traveled to Washington D. C. during the League of
American Bicyclists annual Washington lobbying week.  It was great to meet
you and I appreciated your support for transportation bills that supported
cycling.  I am also one of the people from Duke City Wheelmen who places
ghost bikes for cyclists who die while cycling.

My objection to this amendment comes from years of advocacy work for safer
cycling.  I would welcome the opportunity to speak with someone in your
office about this matter, and to delve deeper into how New Mexico can be
made a better place for cyclists as well as other forms of alternative
transportation.  Cycling in New Mexico really should be supported as a form
of recreation and as a health promoting activity too.

Although this HB192 might look good at first glance, I do not believe it
supports or promotes safer conditions for bicyclists in New Mexico.  Thank
you for considering this opinion.  Please contact me if you have any
questions.

With highest regards,
Jennifer Buntz

On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 9:06 AM Neil McCasland via Bike-racers <
bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com> wrote:

> Right!   Very bad implications
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Mar 16, 2019, at 7:41 AM, John Vance <adogapanicinapagoda at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> And now if they hit you, you'll be presumed at fault because you by law
> shouldn't have been on that road.
>
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 8:35 AM Neil McCasland <neilmcc79 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I fear strengthening bad, aggressive, behavior by some drivers if they
>> believe now a law says a cyclist shouldn’t be on “their” road
>>
>> Neil McC
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Mar 16, 2019, at 7:23 AM, dogunter <dogunter at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > The amended bill has already passed the house and will be sent along to
>> the governor for signing. The discussion is moot at this point.
>> > David Gunter
>> > Santa Fe, NM
>> >
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Bike-racers mailing list
> Bike-racers at mailman.swcp.com
> https://mailman.swcp.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/bike-racers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.swcp.com/pipermail/bike-racers/attachments/20190316/20d98191/attachment.html>