AB 51 - Time to support it!!

budman

General Menace
Staff member
Yup... If you have been following the other thread in Riders Rights BARF is supporting the revised bill. Here it is

Too lazy to click...? :laughing

Here you go:

An act to add Section 21658.1 to the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST

AB 51, as amended, Quirk. Vehicles: motorcycles: lane splitting.

(1)Existing

Existing law requires, whenever a roadway has been divided into 2 or more clearly marked lanes for traffic in one direction, that a vehicle be driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and not be moved from the lane until the movement can be made with reasonable safety. A violation of the Vehicle Code is a crime.

This bill would define “lane splitting” as driving a motorcycle, that has 2 wheels in contact with the ground, between rows of stopped or moving vehicles in the same lane, as specified. The bill would authorize the Department of the California Highway Patrol to develop educational guidelines relating to lane splitting in a manner that would ensure the safety of the motorcyclist, drivers, and passengers, as specified. The bill would require the department, in developing these guidelines, to consult with specified agencies and organizations with an interest in road safety and motorcyclist behavior.

Bill Text

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. Section 21658.1 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read:

21658.1. (a) For the purposes of this section, “lane splitting” means driving a motorcycle, as defined in Section 400, that has two wheels in contact with the ground, between rows of stopped or moving vehicles in the same lane, including on both divided and undivided streets, roads, or highways.

(b) The Department of the California Highway Patrol may develop educational guidelines relating to lane splitting in a manner that would ensure the safety of the motorcyclist and the drivers and passengers of the surrounding vehicles.

(c) In developing guidelines pursuant to this section, the department shall consult with agencies and organizations with an interest in road safety and motorcyclist behavior, including, but not limited to, all of the following:

(1) The Department of Motor Vehicles.

(2) The Department of Transportation.

(3) The Office of Traffic Safety.

(4) A motorcycle organization focused on motorcyclist safety.

*****************************************

The good fight last year in my eyes was a success as the guidelines will be put back. There will be more studies on the practice. There will be a codified law that other States can point too so they can push for the same with more power.

The Bill is being supported by Barf, AMA, CITY BIKE and Lanesplitting is Legal, and ABATE for sure.

So NOW WE ARE ASKING YOU TO DO YOUR PART!!!

Take two minutes to send your State Senator a note saying YOU support the Bill. One week from today is will be in the Senate Transportation Committee and then on to a full vote. YES is what we want.

Thanks to the AMA you can to that super easy by going HERE

Thanks for your support. :thumbup
 

Attachments

  • AB 51 Support letter June 4th 2016 small.pdf
    97.9 KB · Views: 75

Cyclesuzy

Proud Pissant Squid
I submitted a request for a yes vote to my senator and I also took a moment to thank my assemblymember who voted yes on AB 51 as revised. If you have a moment to do that as well, it is greatly appreciated and hopefully will be remembered on the next vote/issue.

Assemblymembers who voted yes are:
Alejo
Allen
Atkins
Baker
Bigelow
Bonilla
Bonta
Brown
Burke
Calderon
Campos
Chang
Chávez
Chiu
Chu
Cooley
Cooper
Dodd
Eggman
Gaines
Cristina Garcia
Eduardo Garcia
Gipson
Gomez
Gonzalez
Gordon
Hadley
Harper
Hernández
Holden
Irwin
Jones
Jones-Sawyer
Kim
Lackey
Levine
Lopez
Low
Maienschein
McCarty
Medina
Melendez
Mullin
O'Donnell
Patterson
Perea
Quirk
Rendon
Ridley-Thomas
Rodriguez
Santiago
Steinorth
Thurmond
Ting
Wagner
Weber
Williams
Wood

Sorry for the long post but I felt it was important to acknowledge those who helped get the bill out of the Assembly and on to the Senate.

Additional info on assemblymembers can be obtained here: http://assembly.ca.gov/assemblymembers
 
I submitted a request for a yes vote to my senator and I also took a moment to thank my assemblymember who voted yes on AB 51 as revised. If you have a moment to do that as well, it is greatly appreciated and hopefully will be remembered on the next vote/issue.

Assemblymembers who voted yes are:
Alejo
Allen
Atkins
Baker
Bigelow
Bonilla
Bonta
Brown
Burke
Calderon
Campos
Chang
Chávez
Chiu
Chu
Cooley
Cooper
Dodd
Eggman
Gaines
Cristina Garcia
Eduardo Garcia
Gipson
Gomez
Gonzalez
Gordon
Hadley
Harper
Hernández
Holden
Irwin
Jones
Jones-Sawyer
Kim
Lackey
Levine
Lopez
Low
Maienschein
McCarty
Medina
Melendez
Mullin
O'Donnell
Patterson
Perea
Quirk
Rendon
Ridley-Thomas
Rodriguez
Santiago
Steinorth
Thurmond
Ting
Wagner
Weber
Williams
Wood

Sorry for the long post but I felt it was important to acknowledge those who helped get the bill out of the Assembly and on to the Senate.

Additional info on assemblymembers can be obtained here: http://assembly.ca.gov/assemblymembers

Good idea
 

NoTraffic

Well-known member
Thanks for sharing this. Just to play devil's advocate, are there reasons why other organizations (especially those affiliated with supporting motorcyclists) would be opposed to this?

The only thing I can think of is enabling the CHP as the controlling agency versus any other.
 

budman

General Menace
Staff member
There are only a couple out there that have not stepped up and officially endorsed this. Today is D day for "for or against" and if no notification they remain mute as far as the Senate Transportation committee is concerned.

And honestly they could have without us knowing as we depend on communications back from Mr. Quirks chief of staff for "official" notification, because the groups do not seem to want to communicate with us. :dunno why.. except perhaps they were not happy that we were quickly in support without asking them.

From what I have been told that Facebook banter includes "We don't need any more damn laws..." and that sort of stuff.
I do see a restriction being tried in the future... not sure when.. 5 years... 10?? After all our government wants to save us from ourselves. I understand that and we will be poised to react when/if that happens.

BTW: The guidelines are always going to come from the CHP. That is an established protocol for Trucking and other uses of California highways.
 

gixxerjeff

Dogs best friend
I have always appreciated what you (and Surj and others) are doing on our behalf but seeing the story in print (April City Bike) merely fostered a higher level of respect and gratitude in me.
The heavy lifting has been done by a select and silent few. It's nice to see some recognition for your efforts.
:thumbup
 

packnrat

Well-known member
why a law saying what is already legal?

and if this passes and gets signed. now they can regulate/add/take away/change it, to there wants.

not for the good of all.


.
 

budman

General Menace
Staff member
I am happy to say this one more time. :teeth (likely not the last :laughing)

There was a movement to make it illegal. We fought back and got the guidelines put in place instead. Many of our elected officials do not like it.

My feelings are that it scares them and their constituents and they think it is dangerous and if they think by banning it they can save lives they can make a name for themselves.

If we get this specifically codified then we stand strong and other States can follow suit.
It is not in the vehicle code now.

I know not all have followed this journey and that is well accepted. This is a good thing.
 

Cyclesuzy

Proud Pissant Squid
why a law saying what is already legal?

and if this passes and gets signed. now they can regulate/add/take away/change it, to there wants.

not for the good of all.


.

Ca is a codified state. No law against doesn't mean legal.
 
Top