Passes & Canyons Blog

So Rep. Ron Weinberg decided not to kill his bill calling for a study of lane-splitting in Colorado.

In a report on Local Today, Weinberg said “Motorcycling is a contentious issue . . . People are afraid there will be more fatalities. I certainly don’t want that, but all the more reason to study it.” He stated further that “There is no arrogance or selfishness here. If it really comes back and says it’s harming Coloradans’ lives, I’ll kill it myself.”

What exactly does the bill call for? Here’s the current text.

43-1-131. Motorcycle lane splitting study – report – repeal.
(1) THE DEPARTMENT, IN COLLABORATION WITH THE COLORADO STATE PATROL, SHALL STUDY THE FEASIBILITY OF PERMITTING MOTORCYCLES TO PASS OR OVERTAKE A MOTOR VEHICLE BY DRIVING ALONGSIDE THE MOTOR VEHICLE IN THE SAME LANE OR DRIVING BETWEEN ROWS OF STOPPED OR MOVING MOTOR VEHICLES, REFERRED TO IN THIS SECTION AS “LANE SPLITTING.” THE STUDY MUST, AT A MINIMUM:
(a) IDENTIFY AND ANALYZE THE BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS OF PERMITTING MOTORCYCLE LANE SPLITTING; AND
(b) IDENTIFY POTENTIAL SAFETY ISSUES RELATED TO PERMITTING MOTORCYCLE LANE SPLITTING.
(2) NO LATER THAN DECEMBER 31, 2023, THE DEPARTMENT SHALL SUBMIT A REPORT ON THE STUDY TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING, AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE AND THE SENATE TRANSPORTATION AND ENERGY COMMITTEE, OR THEIR SUCCESSOR COMMITTEES.
24-33.5-204. Departmental cooperation – repeal. (3) (a) THE COLORADO STATE PATROL SHALL COLLABORATE WITH THE DEPARTMENT HB23-1059-2-
OF TRANSPORTATION ON THE MOTORCYCLE LANE SPLITTING FEASIBILITY STUDY DESCRIBED IN SECTION 43-1-131.

A fiscal note has been produced, specifying how much the proposal would cost and where the funding would come from–a requirement for all bills. The study is expected to cost $75,000 and the money would come from the state highway fund. No special appropriation would be needed.

So that’s where it sits right now. Stay tuned for future twists and turns.

Biker Quote for Today

Riding a motorcycle is exactly like riding a bicycle except you have power between your legs.

OK, that didn’t go very far. The word from Stump, ABATE of Colorado‘s legislative liaison, is that Rep. Ron Weinberg is planning to kill his own bill that would have called for a study of lane filtering as a possibility for Colorado.

Here’s what Stump had to say:

HB23-1059 (Lane Splitting Study) is going to be PI’d or pulled by the sponsor of the bill. I met very briefly with Rep. Weinberg on Thursday. Prior to our meeting, he had been in contact with Tiffany Cipoletti, the On Highway Government Relations Manager for the AMA, who informed him that the AMA thinks HB1059 was “poorly written and wasn’t supported by CDOT and CSP.” She went on to say, “entering into a study with the DOT and CHP when you know they are opposed may be detrimental to any future efforts.” That seemed to be deciding point for Rep. Weinberg. He had also talked to Capt. Honn (CSP liaison to the Legislature) to confirm CSP’s stance on the bill. At our brief meeting (about 2 minutes), Rep. Weinberg said, “I heard from the AMA and I don’t want to do anything that would be detrimental to the relationship between the bikers and CSP, so I’m going to PI the bill. Meeting over.” But he also said maybe next year.

So OK, maybe next year. It’s taking time but this thing is slowly gaining momentum across the country, so maybe as more states try it, the ones that are reluctant will gain more confidence in the concept.

Biker Quote for Today

They say life is tough, but it’s a hell of a lot easier on a motorcycle.

A bill calling for the Colorado Department of Transportation, in collaboration with the Colorado State Patrol, to study the concept of allowing lane-splitting has been introduced in the Colorado House (HOUSE BILL 23-1059).

Rep. Ron Weinberg, of Fort Collins, is the bill’s sponsor. The summary of the bill reads as follows:

Under current law, the driver of a motorcycle is prohibited from overtaking or passing a motor vehicle by driving in the same lane as the motor vehicle or between rows of motor vehicles, a practice known as “lane splitting.”
The bill requires the Colorado department of transportation, in collaboration with the Colorado state patrol, to conduct a feasibility study
of permitting motorcycle lane splitting and report the results of the study to the transportation committees of the house of representatives and the senate by December 31, 2023.

As yet there are no co-sponsors in the House and no one in the Senate has signed on to back it. It may go absolutely nowhere.

I don’t know about other motorcyclists and other motorcyclist organizations, but the thinking within ABATE of Colorado is decidedly mixed. ABATE’s legislative liaison, Stump, sent an email alerting us all to this bill and asking for our thoughts. I immediately replied that I back it strongly.

Running through responses that were sent “Reply All” we first had Larry saying “I do not like at all.”

Next, from Jim, was “This is a huge step toward eventually getting a bill to allow some form of lane filtering/splitting on Interstate highways in Colorado. Big thanks should go to Rep. Weinberg!!!”

Then, kind of in the middle but leaning against, was Mike: “I see nothing but bad PR for motorcyclist with the general driving population, because of the motorcyclist who abuse the privilege by not following the guide lines that allow them to perform lane splitting or filtering in a safe way. All motorcyclist represent all of us that ride, that is what has created profiling, because the general public lump us all together by the way we dress, the colors and patches we wear and the way we ride? I would love the opportunity to use lane splitting and or filtering, I just would not like the negative attitude toward motorcyclist that would be created by the abuse of the privilege.”

Dave entered the conversation pointing out that, “it’s a Study – no more than that at this point in time. This was going to come up in Colorado eventually and has been mentioned often over some years now; several other states have adopted lane splitting/filtering and more are likely considering it – it’s the trend. I suggest that ABATE not offer a formal position – pro or con – except to agree in principle to the study, state this organization’s concern for rider safety in the traffic patterns (keeping with our mission statement), and review/input on the study upon its’ completion. The State Patrol is likely to solicit ABATE’s point-of-view on the matter along the way, and should.”

There was more but you get the picture. But, as Dave said, it’s a study. So I agree, let’s at least have the study conducted. Then, as far as I’m concerned, I would be in favor of allowing lane-splitting or filtering. Riders who consider it too dangerous just don’t have to do it. But let those of us who are more comfortable with it do it. In ABATE especially we talk a lot about freedom to choose, in relation to wearing or not wearing a helmet. Well, how is this any different?

I don’t know about you but I’ve been in several countries in Europe where lane-splitting is absolutely the norm and you know what? It’s not mass slaughter on the roads. People do it all the time and everyone gets along fine. Sure there would be a period of adjustment while everyone in cars and on bikes gets familiar with it but then, just like so many other places in the world, it would become normal.

Biker Quote for Today

You will never suffer a punctured tire on the road until you leave the repair kit at home.

I’ve come to appreciate the lame duck sessions of Congress because sometimes it seems like that is one of the only times when things get done. All sessions long the members work to sabotage efforts from the other party, who cares what would actually be good for the country. Finally, in the lame duck session, when members who are not returning finally feel free to vote their conscience rather than the party line, they do just that.

Now, I’m not sure this piece of legislation is one of those, but it did manage to squeak through before the end of the session. I’ll let the Motorcycle Riders Federation tell it:

Hello all motorcycle riders, I hope you all had an excellent Christmas. Bikers received an early Christmas present from our Congressional people. The motorcycle profiling bill that we have worked on hard since 2016, has scored a major victory. The Senate passed their version of the profiling bill back in 2018. We have not been able to get the House of Representatives to bring their version to the floor for a vote. BUTTTTT! Through the efforts of all of you who filled out the Motorcycle Profiling Project Survey and supported the hard dedicated work of the MRF, and our friendlies and supporters and co-signers in Congress, House Resolution 366 was brought to the House floor last Friday, Dec.23. In one of the last actions by the 117th Congress, H.R.366, the Motorcycle Profiling Resolution, was PASSED! We are awaiting President Biden’s signature. I hope this news puts a bit of icing on your Christmas cake. Keep supporting the MRF and the work we do– for all bikers. See ya on down the road, Bear CO MRF REP

Another thing I’m not totally clear on is whether this is even legislation. As a resolution, is it a law? Or just a suggestion that Congress is saying “We’d very much like you to do this, but we’re not going to give you an order.” I think maybe the latter. Here’s the text of the resolution; decide for yourself.

Whereas motorcycle ridership has continued to increase over time with registrations growing from 3,826,373 in 1997 to 13,158,100 in 2018;
Whereas, as of December 31, 2020, the ongoing National Motorcycle Profiling Survey (2015–2020), conducted by the Motorcycle Profiling Project, found that approximately 1/2 of the motorcyclists surveyed felt they had been profiled by law enforcement at least once, and approximately 90 percent of survey participants urge their State and Federal elected officials to legislatively address the issue of motorcyclist profiling;
Whereas motorcyclist profiling means the illegal use of the fact that a person rides a motorcycle or wears motorcycle-related apparel as a factor in deciding to stop and question, take enforcement action, arrest, or search a person or vehicle with or without legal basis under the Constitution of the United States;
Whereas complaints surrounding motorcyclist profiling have been cited in all 50 States;
Whereas nationwide demonstrations to raise awareness and combat motorcyclist profiling have been held in multiple States;
Whereas, in 2011, the State of Washington signed into law legislation stating that the criminal justice training commission shall ensure that issues related to motorcyclist profiling are addressed in basic law enforcement training and offered to in-service law enforcement officers in conjunction with existing training regarding profiling;
Whereas reported incidents of motorcyclist profiling have dropped approximately 90 percent in the State of Washington since the 2011 legislation was signed into law; and
Whereas, as of 2020, Maryland, Louisiana, and Idaho passed laws addressing the issue of motorcyclist profiling: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
(1) promotes increased public awareness on the issue of motorcyclist profiling;
(2) encourages collaboration and communication with the motorcyclist community and law enforcement to engage in efforts to end motorcyclist profiling; and
(3) urges State law enforcement officials to include statements condemning motorcyclist profiling in written policies and training materials.

Either way, it’s good to see some success after all this time.

Biker Quote for Today

You are one ride away from a good mood.

Stump, the legislative liaison for ABATE of Colorado, continues sending updates on legislation at the capitol and he has sent out an alert about the pending distracted driving bill. This bill would make it illegal to use a cellphone while driving except in hands-off mode. It has been brought up repeatedly over the past few years and each year it gets further in the process.

Here’s the latest:

SB22-175 is scheduled to be presented to the House Transportation & Local Gov’t Committee next Tues or Wed (April 26/27). Committee member info is below. Please reach out to these legislators to request their support. Thank you for your continuing support on trying to make Colorado roads safer for everyone.

Tony Exum, Committee Chair
tony.exum.house@state.co.us
303-866-3069

Meg Froelich, Committee Vice Chair
meg.froelich.house@state.co.us
303-866-2921

Andrew Boesenecker
andrew.boesenecker.house@state.co.us
303-866-2917

Marc Catlin
marc.catlin.house@state.co.us
303-866-2955

Matt Gray
matt@matthewgray.us
303-866-4667

Edie Hooton
edie.hooton.house@state.co.us
303-866-2915

Mandy Lindsay
mandy.lindsay.house@state.co.us
303-866-3911

Andres Pico
andres.pico.house@state.co.us
303-866-2937

Janice Rich
janice.rich.house@state.co.us
303-866-3068

Tom Sullivan
tom.sullivan.house@state.co.us
303-866-5510

Donald Valdez
donald.valdez.house@state.co.us
303-866-2916

Tonya Van Beber
Tonya.Van.Beber.house@state.co.us
303-866-2943

Kevin Van Winkle
kevin.vanwinkle.house@state.co.us
303-866-2936

In an earlier update Stump also noted that “Senate Minority Leader, Sen. Holbert, gave a very ‘persuasive’ argument in support of the bill at 2nd reading, citing how his personal distracted driving experiences have changed his view to supporting a bill which he had opposed in the past.”

That is why this bill keeps gaining support. Maybe this year we can get it passed.

Biker Quote for Today

What do you get when you mix a motorcycle with a joke? A Yamahaha.

Arizona has joined the ranks of the few states where lane-splitting is legal–sort of.

The state legislature has passed, and the governor has signed, a bill legalizing lane-splitting under very specific conditions. The new law will go into effect in three months.

What the law allows is actually more along the lines of what is referred to as filtering. In full-on lane-splitting, such as in California, motorcycles can pass between cars while traffic is moving. Filtering generally refers to bikes moving to the front of the pack when traffic is stopped at a traffic light.

That’s actually what Arizona will allow. Traffic has to be at a dead stop at a red light. And bikes can only move between them to get to the front at a speed of less than 15 mph.

The key here is that statistics have shown that one of the most dangerous places a bike can be is between cars at a stop. If someone slams into the bike from behind, or into a car further back, setting in motion a chain reaction, the biker can be caught between the cars in front and in back of him/her, to catastrophic effect.

Filtering ahead gets you out of the trap. Someone could still run into the car two vehicles back but there would not be a car in front of you to get crushed against. (Though you could get shoved out into the intersection, into the cross traffic. I’d be willing to take that chance.)

I had the chance to do some filtering in California a few years ago and it worked really well. Out there the drivers are used to it so many of them deliberately leave space ahead of them at a light. A couple other riders and I were behind the first car at the light and there was room in front so after a couple hand signals to suggest we do it we nodded in agreement and pulled around. Others followed us. The light turned green and we sped off, with acceleration much greater than the typical car. We didn’t slow them down and we were quickly out in front with no traffic to be any kind of threat.

This seems like the sensible, safe sort of practice that even bikers who consider lane-splitting to be crazy can get behind. Kudos to Arizona for being sensible.

Biker Quote for Today

Now is the time to be contacting your legislators about the bill to classify auto-cycles as separate and different than motorcycles. Here’s a note from Stump, the ABATE of Colorado legislative liaison.

Just found out HB22-1043 (Definition of a Motorcycle) has been assigned to the S-T&E Committee. Now would be the time to urge the committee members to pass this bill. Below is their email contact information. Sen. Hisey is on the S-T&E committee also, but since he is the Senate Sponsor, you don’t have to email him.

Faith Winter faith.winter.senate@state.co.us (Chairwoman)
Brittany Petterson brittany.pettersen.senate@state.co.us (Vice-Chair)
Don Coram don.coram.senate@state.co.us
Kerry Donovan kerry.donovan.senate@state.co.us
Ray Scott ray.scott.senate@state.co.us
Rachel Zenzinger senatorrachelz@gmail.com

The email can be as simple as, “I urge you to pass HB22-1043” or you can elaborate as to why this should be passed (true and accurate crash data with autocycles having their own classification).

Ukraine
Going a bit farther afield than I normally do, there was an item out of Ukraine that caught my eye. Considering the propaganda that all sides in war put out I take this with a grain of salt but here it is.

“Russian invaders, facing the total resistance of Ukrainian defenders, surrender themselves to captivity. Under Chernihiv, a whole intelligence unit of 74 motorcycle rifle brigade surrendered,” the CinC AF stated, adding that the Russian soldiers “thought they would return home” and that they were “collecting information” instead of fighting.

During a press briefing, Ukraine Ambassador Markarova also told reporters that a platoon of the Russian 74th Motorized Rifle Brigade surrendered to Ukrainian forces.

“Just before I came here, we got information from our chief commander that one of the platoons of the 74th motorized brigade…surrendered, also noting that they didn’t know that they were brought to Ukraine to kill Ukrainians. That they thought they were doing something else there,” she explained.

So if it’s really true, hooray for the Russian motorcycle platoon. I will note a discrepancy you may also have noticed. First that report refers to “a whole intelligence unit of 74 motorcycle rifle brigade” and later they say “a platoon of the Russian 74th Motorized Rifle Brigade.” So I suspect it wasn’t 74 soldiers, but that their unit was designated the 74th. But there hasn’t been any more mention that I’ve seen of the situation so who knows what the facts are. Just for the record I want to say Go Ukrainians, kick some Russian butt.

PIMS
Plus, it appears the Progressive IMS Outdoors motorcycle show will be coming to Colorado this year after all. It is now scheduled for June 17-19 in Loveland at the Ranch events center east of the highway there. I’m definitely going to be going.

Biker Quote for Today

You might be a Yuppie biker if if you don’t ride your bike to work because it scuffs your penny loafers.

I’ve gotten a couple legislative updates recently from Stump, ABATE of Colorado’s legislative liaison. He says it is possible that there may be movement this year on lane-splitting and also on the long-delayed distracted driving bill.

Forbidding the use of cell phones, except in hands-off mode, is an idea that has gained in support over the years, and it looked like the time was at hand just before Covid hit and the work of the Colorado Legislature got pared back to the bare essentials. Two years ago the Senate Transportation and Energy committee moved the bill ahead unanimously but then things went haywire.

According to Stump, General Motors has now decided to put its weight behind such measures:

Lastly, I received the following from Susan Dane, the person spearheading the distracted driving bill the past few years:

It appears General Motors is interested in supporting distracted driving legislation in Colorado. I’ve learned that they have provided support in other states related to this type of legislation. I’m working to set up an initial conversation with their people to see what this may look like. Don’t know where this may go, but it’s hopeful to hear that a major player like GM could get involved. I’ll let you know how things go.

She couldn’t get a sponsor for a bill last year but it looks like something might happen this year.

So we’ll see what comes of this.

As for lane-splitting, here is Stump’s bullet-point list of the status:

Hooked up with professional lobbyist – Sundari Kraft with Ascent Strategies LLC. Signed contract (required by law) for help PRO BONO!
Advantages: good connections with Legislators; more knowledgeable about bill process; great advocate but still considers ABATE to be subject matter expert.
Might “piggyback” on highway safety bills being submitted by Reps. Garnett or Larson.
Met with her to give basic “parameters” about a possible bill and ABATE’s concerns. Gave my personal guidelines (Similar to Oregon’s proposal, which I think has a chance of passing):
Permitted on multi-laned highways with speed limit of 55 or higher
Traffic stopped or moving in the same direction at 10 mph or less
Travel up to 10 mph faster than traffic
NOTE: I don’t think lane filtering would have a chance of passing and these parameters might work, which would allow motorcyclists to lane-split on the interstates when it’s 100 degrees out and traffic is backed up. But remember, it’s not mandatory.

As for creating a separate definition and category for autocycles, Stump noted that the bill is scheduled for committee hearing on February 1.

The big news is that bills are being scheduled in committees and HB22-1043 (Motorcycle and Autocycle Definitions) is scheduled for Tuesday, 2/1 at 1:30 pm, in LSB-A. That’s the building across 14th street from the Capitol (SE corner of 14th & Sherman). If you haven’t emailed the 12 members of the H-T&LG Committee yet, please do so in the next week. Here’s the list of members for your convenience:

Tony Exum Sr. (Chair) — tony.exum.house@state.co.us
Matt Gray (Vice-chair) — matt@matthewgray.us
Andrew Boesenecker — andrew.boesenecker.house@state.co.us
Marc Catlin — marc.catlin.house@state.co.us
Meg Froelich — meg.froelich.house@state.co.us
Edie Hooton — edie.hooton.house@state.co.us
Andres Pico — andres.pico.house@state.co.us
Janice Rich — janice.rich.house@state.co.us
Tom Sullivan — tom.sullivan.house@state.co.us
Donald Valdez — donald.valdez.house@state.co.us
Tonya Van Berber — Tonya.Van.Beber.house@state.co.us
Kevin Van Winkle — kevin.vanwinkle.house@state.co.us

It’s really important that you contact them, so they know this is important to Colorado motorcyclists and we’re really concerned that autocycles have their own category for the purpose of maintaining accurate accident and fatality data. Thanking you in advance.

That’s it for now. Updates to come.

Biker Quote for Today

You might be a Yuppie biker if you drink cappuccino instead of beer.