Minnesota Red Light Bike Law in effect!

A law passed this legislative session allows bikers, under some circumstances, to cross against red lights.

The biker needs to first come to a complete stop, then wait (an unspecified but reasonable amount of time, whatever that means), then yield to traffic.

It doesn't allow bikers to run red lights, according to the Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota, but provides an "affirmative defense" if the biker is stopped by police.

It's designed to deal with stoplights that are triggered only by car weight. But it's also one of the first examples of Minnesota lawmakers stepping up to treat bicycles distinctly from cars, because they are different and there's different safety issues involved in how we operate them on city streets.

Overall, it's a good move for bike commuters. My girlfriend got a ticket for this exact thing at 2 a.m. or so on abandoned Lake Street this fall (anecdotally, these sorts of tickets have become more common as the city of Minneapolis descended into its fiscal pit).

The law leaves a lot of uncertainty on the ground though. For instance; why should someone wait an "unreasonable" amount of time if they know it's a stoplight that's triggered only by cars?

My impression is that it will limit these sorts of tickets to circumstances where bikers showed extreme recklessness. That's fair, I think. Fanatical drivers will of course insist that it gives bikers special treatment, but it seems to me to be based on common sense of how bikes operate.

Maybe it signals that politicians are making a little more room for bikers in transportation policies instead of just taking credit for the fact that we routinely rank at the top of the heap for bike commuting, despite our crumby climate.

Minnesota Statutes - 169.06 SIGNS, SIGNALS, MARKINGS.
Subd. 9. Affirmative defense relating to unchanging traffic-control signal. (2010 changes underlined)
(a) A person operating a bicycle or motorcycle who violates subdivision 4 by entering or crossing an intersection controlled by a traffic-control signal against a red light has affirmative defense to that charge if the person establishes all of the following conditions:
(1) the bicycle or motorcycle has been brought to a complete stop;
(2) the traffic-control signal continues to show a red light for an unreasonable time;
(3) the traffic-control signal is apparently malfunctioning or, if programmed or engineered to change to a green light only after detecting the approach of a motor vehicle, the signal has apparently failed to detect the arrival of the bicycle or motorcycle; and
(4) no motor vehicle or person is approaching on the street or highway to be crossed or entered or is so far away from the intersection that it does not constitute an immediate hazard.
(b) The affirmative defense in this subdivision applies only to a violation for entering or crossing an intersection controlled by a traffic-control signal against a red light and does not provide a defense to any other civil or criminal action.
EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective the day following final enactment (April 16, 2010).

Common sense bike traffic one step less distant in MN

The Star Tribune reported yesterday that Phyllis Kahn's proposal to allow bikes to glide through red lights and stop signs won't be opposed by the city of Minneapolis. A resolution to oppose the legislation by the Minneapolis City Council barely failed, just 7-6.

Those who opposed it were Paul Ostrow, Diane Hofstede, Barb Johnson, Don Samuels, Colvin Roy and Betsy Hodges.

I wonder what their reasons would be? Do you think it's based on bikers' safety or something else? Here's the link to their contact info.

In support of the bikers, or at least not in opposition, was Cam Gordon, Gary Schiff, Robert Lilligren, Elizabeth Glidden, Ralph Remington, Scott Benson and Lisa Goodman.

I was reminded of the sense of this proposal just the other day. Usually I'll stop at stop signs and let those who have right of way have their right of way. However, getting to a stop sign first as a bike isn't the same as in a car. There's no guarantee that cars at a four way stop will see or respect your right of way, so if you run the stop sign before they get there, you're safe from being run over when they don't notice you. It just makes sense from a safety perspective.

In my opinion, it would behoove legislators to treat bikes as a different animal than cars. After all, under the law now, we should have an entire lane if we want. When do you ever see that? Instead we're relegated to icy curbs, used mostly for parking.

Common sense though, who expects it from ambitious politicians clamoring for an easy wedge issue?

The heterogeneous bike threat: Response to anti-bike blog at City Pages

When I read last week's Sunday New York Times article about an increase in conflicts between bikers and drivers (in the fashion section!), I thought, "Finally, someone documenting the ongoing harassment and danger that bikers experience."

That's not how City Pages' Bradley Campbell took it. He did the KSTP dance by arguing that Minneapolis has very few incidents of cyclist harassment (after an exhaustive search, no doubt), but that the ones we do have are the fault of cyclists, not motorists. All because he's seen some riders float through stop signs or ride the wrong way on one-ways downtown or around the University.

The obvious response is to argue about the dangerous conditions for bicyclists: aggressive and inattentive motorists, dangerous intersections, and stats that say most collisions are the fault of motorists.

However, I've gone over all that before. Instead, what really bothers me is Campbell's attitude that bikers are some homogeneous group.

As a longtime bicyclist, I also resent most bicyclists, probably more than he does. As soon as nice weather shows up, they start clogging the streets that I've come to think of as mine during the long winter. I can generalize better than most about all the idiots who ride non-motorized two-wheelers. As well as articulate, for the benefit of journalists like Campbell, the dangers these bikers pose to good citizens.

Lance Armstrongs
These are the people dressed in padded shorts and fluorescent helmets dotted with power-gel logos. Their favored habitats are paved bike trails and the clothing aisles of bike shops. Usually only seen between May and August, they see biking as less a form of transportation than a sport of dominance. Because of this, the main danger they pose is to other bicyclists as they imagine themselves to be engaged in a Tour de France-style competition that necessitates passing at high-speeds and a hairs-breadth, all in order to win an imagined race. Although they look harmless, their dependence on performance supplements, along with their entitled upper-class origins as lawyers and MBAs, can make them volatile and dangerous. They give bikers an undeserved reputation for wearing bright colors.



Students
This species of bicyclist can be found in the University districts of most cities between September and December. Their favored bike is their childhood mountain bike, usually called something like Toxic Charge, which they secure to the railings of staircases with a 3-digit combination cable lock, and which they often abandon after the first snow of the year. Often, these riders can be observed utilizing cell phones or I-pods while in transit between classes. Because this species hesitates to ride on streets, it poses the greatest threat to trees and lamp posts, with which, because of their inattentiveness, they often collide.

Bike Messengers
This species can best be recognized by their clipped toe shoes and odd little bike racing hat, like a baseball hat with a shorter bill, usually advertising a company that produces brake cables. Odds are they've affixed a weathered cards from a race a couple years back in between the spokes of their preferred ride, a fixed gear, which they are able to discuss at exhausting length. During daylight hours, they can be found on the streets of downtown, while at night they congregate in Northeast Minneapolis, as well as gathering in masochistic rituals called Alley-Cats. Overwhelmingly male, their topics of conversation usually revolve exclusively around bicycles, bicycle accessories, and bicycle tattoos. Typically, they follow common sense traffic rules, but won't hesitate to run a stoplight if there's no oncoming traffic. A dominant sub-genre of the species, "Bike Nerd," they feel entitled to their space on the road, and won't hesitate to misuse a U-lock by smashing a tail light. They pose the greatest threat to taxi drivers.

Hipsters
The hipster can be found in Uptown Minneapolis between the months of June and August. Typically, the females of the species can be recognized by their colorful vintage coaster bikes, weighing sometimes up to 100 pounds, and sometimes ornamented with front handlebar baskets. The males can be distinguished by comparing them to the most recent Urban Outfitters ad. At the smallest sight of inclement weather, they retreat to vintage station wagons and Volkswagens, often ornamented with "One Less Car" stickers. They gather sporadically at events like Movies in the Park.



Activists
This genre of bikers can be distinguished by messenger-bag patch (ex. "This Bike is a Pipe Bomb") and Carhart pants with attached Nalgene bottle. They ride a variety of bikes, usually low-end and badly maintained lest they transcend the activist sub-genre into the messenger genre. They do, however, put great emphasis on the freight capacity of their vehicles, often attaching a rickety cart in which they transport crates of half-rotted, dumpstered green onions. Another sub-genre of "Bike Nerd," they pose the greatest threat to aggressive drivers because of their excitement to find someone who wants to finally discuss Car Culture. They gather in monthly theater performances opposite the Minneapolis police called Critical Mass.

Bike Punks
This species of bicyclist can be distinguished from other sub-genres of hipster bikers by the bulge of large amounts of canned beer in their bags, accompanied by a slightly garlic and sweat smell. They typically surround their residences with piles of broken bikes and worn out tires. While favoring road bikes, or in some cases, two bike frames piled on top of one another, they usually deign to wear helmets or safety gear, instead muting their clothing-- often the very same clothing the above hipsters purchased at Urban Outfitters, if a couple generations into the secondhand cycle-- to distinguish themselves from those who might be accused of giving too much of a fuck. Typically riding on the street and with the flow of traffic, they commonly disregard what they see as redundant traffic signals. Concentrated largely in the strip of Minneapolis between the West Bank and Powderhorn, they can be found on the street year round, usually between the hours of 9 pm and the 3 am. Because they are often inebriated when biking their dog along the street, they pose the greatest threat to cats.

Lumpenproleteriat
The final major species of Minneapolis bicyclist contains grown men with DWIs riding their daughters' bikes, recent immigrants, and generally people who can't afford any other type of transportation. Usually riding on sidewalks, they don't care about bike lanes, bike racks on buses, or Car Culture. They really just want to get the fuck out of work and home as quickly as possible.

God Forbid that we would base Laws on Common Sense: Part 2: Bike Traffic

The second case certainly isn't as dramatic. It's a law proposed by Minnesota House Rep. Phyllis Kahn to create different rules for bicyclists than cars. Immediately, it invoked outraged comments on the Star Tribune website. No doubt, bike-hating Katherine Kersten is putting aside her fear of madrasahs in Coon Rapids to once again sharpen her anti-bike knives.

A recent "expose" by KSTP's Bob McCaney about bikers breaking traffic laws ran during sweeps week. It featured, essentially, McCaney doing his best impression of a journalist by setting up a camera at a three way stop and filming bikers skidding past the stop sign when no cars were coming.
Afterwards, local bikers reported a surge of tickets for the bike equivalent of jaywalking. It was an easy target for some hysterical reactions from motorists who felt slighted. They got a little flack from the Minnesota Monitor, but most comments tapped in driver's hysterical fear that bikers be held to a different standard than cars even though the situation on the road is different.

Kahn's legislation, in my opinion as a year-round biker, is a great step towards common sense laws. There are parts of the current law we rarely use, for instance, bikers rarely take up a whole lane to themselves like the law allows. The fact is, as one bike-friendly commenter pointed out in the now-erased comments at the ST, safety is the first priority. Sometimes, it's better to run a stop sign than wait for the car, which may or may not stop, to approach. I've always said that biking is an insurrectionist act because you're trying to navigate a system designed for, and dominated by, cars. Bikers are extremely susceptible to the two-ton monstrosities on the road, it's common sense that they should be given leeway for their safety. It's common sense.

Kahn's proposal makes sense, and it makes sense to end minimum mandatories, but that might be too much to expect from the politicians and Kerstens of the world, hungry for an alienating issue to bang away at people who don't have the political clout to defend themselves.

Two Responses to that Hack Katherine Kersten

The Star and Tribune employs a right-wing hack named Katherine Kersten to write columns under the pretext of providing "balance" to their oh-so-far-left views.

Kersten has made Critical Mass, the monthly bike protest, one of her favorite punching bags, trying to whip up hysteria so that police will crack down on it. The Star Tribune has happily participated in this debacle, even posting an "informal poll" on their website asking if CM should be "cracked down on"!

So far, I've sent three letters presenting the bicyclists' perspective, instead they publish letters from loudmouths in Edina who threaten bikers and make stupid comments about bikers' self-righteousness (how can some idiot who feels justified to drive a big dumb truck like it's a weapon even begin to talk about being self-righteous?). Anyway, here's her latest installment.

1)
I'd like to thank Katherine Kersten for pointing out that people who participate in Critical Mass have psychological problems. There's so many people who are sick and need our help! I propose that we "crack down" (to use the Star Tribune's own words) on those obviously very ill pedestrians on Nicollet Mall. And then on those children that illegally ride their bikes on sidewalks. Then on people who don't put their grocery carts back. To misquote Eugene Debs: while there is a soul not in prison, I am not free.

2)
Far-right ideologues like Kersten like to give lip-service to less government at the same time as they justify any and all governmental oppression. People like her, who are so quick to whip up hysteria about dissenters of any stripe, are to blame for our slow slip to authoritarianism in the United States under the Bush administration. The fact that her unrelentingly prejudiced attacks have not received any response from other columnists shows the danger her authoritarian ideas pose to free expression and dialog in a democratic society.