ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Riding > Regional forums > West – California, the desert southwest and whatever is left
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 02-25-2013, 11:57 AM   #61
K. L. Rocket
Big bouncy make big happy
 
K. L. Rocket's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: North SF Bay, California
Oddometer: 848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt. Ron View Post
I hate to say it, but I called it back at Post #21.

Fuck.

I hear ya, Post #11. Looking forward to SFH's follow up...
Quote:
Originally Posted by K. L. Rocket View Post
Since "law" has been mentioned, and the survey appears to have led to guidelines, does anyone know if conducting a study is the next step toward changing the law? If not, what is the purpose of the study?

Also, has there ever been a public awareness campaign to inform California drivers, and those visiting from out of state, that lane splitting is legal here? The survey indicates that obstructionist driver behavior stems from disapproval based on ignorance of the law.
__________________


K. L. Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 06:26 PM   #62
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by K. L. Rocket View Post
I hear ya, Post #11. Looking forward to SFH's follow up...
I haven't received the promised callback, and am still waiting on further analysis from my connections, other than "bad law."

Gabe from CityBike was able to wrangle some information from someone at Beall's office:

"...from what I could gather, SB350 as it is now is a "spot bill," a kind of legislative place holder that allows them to schedule hearings on the issues. I guess they had to slap something together to hold a place in the calendar, which is why it has so much vague language in it. Expect to not see much movement on this for the next year--the CA legislature has 2-year sessions."

He has a call in to Beall's press secretary as well - hope he has better luck with the callback than I have.
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 07:41 PM   #63
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Fontana, CA
Oddometer: 150
Just got what is written below from ABATE. It reinforces what SF Hooligan is saying about this being a spot bill. I don't know what ABATE's "requirements" for the bill will be yet. Some of the concerns of their membership that are coming up are the same that have been posted here.


"Senator Beall IS motorcycle-friendly.

Senator Beall is NOT anti-motorcycle. Also important to note that as matter of fact, the Senator’s staff person handling SB350 is an avid motorcyclist.

It’s imperative to note that the bill that has been drafted is NOT the bill that will be heard in the Senate Transportation & Housing Committee.
Senator Beall is very willing to amend the bill as ideas to improve the language are submitted and reviewed. It’s important to note that due to Senate rules, it will be several weeks before ANY amendments can be made.
Passing a lane-sharing law that is friendly to motorcyclists will help establish a statue that could very possibly remain on the books for a long time.
Jim Lombardo, ABATE’s lobbyist and Steve Guderian, ABATE’s Safety Officer will work closely in conjunction with the Senator’s office to ensure the final draft addresses the concerns that have been articulated, ultimately reflecting a bill that meets the safety and rights of all of California’s motorcyclists.
Here’s the bottom line – our goal is to ultimately submit a bill that addresses the concerns of the motorcycle community; a bill that can be supported and endorsed by the ABATE membership.
If the final bill doesn't meet ABATE’s requirements, ABATE will vigorously oppose the bill and try to kill it.

But as of this writing, the Senator and his staff are very willing and open to meeting to discuss our proposed changes and to improve OUR lane sharing. "
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 09:08 PM   #64
Andrew
Optimus Primer
 
Andrew's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Eastbania
Oddometer: 14,562
Does it help or hurt our cause to have ABATE involved?
__________________
Splitting lanes, and splitting hairs.
Andrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 09:17 PM   #65
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Fontana, CA
Oddometer: 150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew View Post
Does it help or hurt our cause to have ABATE involved?
Well, they do have a paid lobbyist up in Sacramento.

Has anyone heard any AMA feedback yet on this bill?
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2013, 09:43 PM   #66
666
Agnostic and Orange
 
666's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Oddometer: 1,301
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew View Post
"would" "well-written" "than"

I am quite content with ambiguities and grey areas in the law. As stated by others, "not in CVC or PC" = "not illegal" = "legal." Better to focus attention on driver and rider education, and training, than to legislate something that needs no legislation.
Totally agree. Current state is perfect - no enforcement of any kind, at least during rush hours. I split safely, as far as I know in my own judgement, but I dont check speedometer when I do it.
__________________
2006 KTM 950 ADV; 2006 KTM 525EXC; 2013 Tiger 800 street
Moab Ride Report http://www.advrider.com/forums/showthread.php?t=629423
Dusy Ershim Ride Report http://www.southbayriders.com/forums...ad.php?t=99109
666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 07:20 AM   #67
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by francisthepig View Post
Well, they do have a paid lobbyist up in Sacramento.

Has anyone heard any AMA feedback yet on this bill?
Exactly. I hang out with someone in the org every couple weeks, and from what he tells me they're fiery committed to making sure that if there's going to be a law, it's a sensible one that keeps splitting intact - or if not, no law at all. Their position thus far on SB 350 is exactly that. BTW, ABATE of CA has a Facebook group where you can stay on top of this stuff, or sign up for their legislative alerts here. I'll be reporting back all solid info I get in the lane splitting news section of LaneSplittingIsLegal.com.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 666 View Post
Totally agree. Current state is perfect - no enforcement of any kind, at least during rush hours. I split safely, as far as I know in my own judgement, but I dont check speedometer when I do it.
I agree with this, but if we're going to be facing attempts to ban a lot of folks believe that getting a decent law on the books will do a lot to protect splitting. Right now, I think this makes sense. This law - as written - is definitely not it, but ABATE says they're trying to fix that, and that Beall is willing to listen and work with them.
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 09:06 AM   #68
K. L. Rocket
Big bouncy make big happy
 
K. L. Rocket's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Location: North SF Bay, California
Oddometer: 848
Quote:
Originally Posted by SF_Hooligan View Post
I'll be reporting back all solid info I get in the lane splitting news section of LaneSplittingIsLegal.com.
Please continue to keep us informed here as well, if only via headline/blurb and link. Thanks.
__________________


K. L. Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 10:31 AM   #69
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by K. L. Rocket View Post
Please continue to keep us informed here as well, if only via headline/blurb and link. Thanks.
Of course!
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 10:56 AM   #70
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Fontana, CA
Oddometer: 150
SF Hooligan
Did you mean Lane Splitting IN the news? Just want to clairfy.

Thanks for your website, it has good info on it.
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 03:00 PM   #71
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by francisthepig View Post
SF Hooligan
Did you mean Lane Splitting IN the news? Just want to clairfy.

Thanks for your website, it has good info on it.
Yeah, sorry - the news/in the news section at http://lanesplittingislegal.com/lane-splitting-news

And thanks! More good stuff to come.
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 03:34 PM   #72
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 159
AMA is reporting SB 350 is being withdrawn - pending the results of the University of California-Berkeley safety study expected later this year.

AMA press release here.
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 03:50 PM   #73
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Fontana, CA
Oddometer: 150
Not mentioned on Leginfo

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/...1_history.html

Nothing has been updated on the Leginfo site to reflect the AMA's statement yet.
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2013, 04:10 PM   #74
SF_Hooligan
Deadwood Original
 
SF_Hooligan's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2012
Location: Oakland, CA
Oddometer: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by francisthepig View Post
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/...1_history.html

Nothing has been updated on the Leginfo site to reflect the AMA's statement yet.
Yeah. The AMA statement says they have an email stating it will be withdrawn. Hopefully it'll be official soon. Of course, given their speed on updating the legislative info site to look like something out of this century, I'm not holding my breath for too long.

EDIT:

I may have spoken to soon. ABATE says on the CA ABATE Facebook group the bill isn't actually being withdrawn, but rather:

Quote:
Contrary to the AMA's announcement, SB350 has not been withdrawn, rather it's now a 2-year bill. This means that while it may be possible that the bill is heard in April (April is the deadline for submission to the Senate Trans Cmt for all policy making bills); the likelihood is that it won't be heard by Committee until next January 2014. Good news for us, gives us plenty of time to work with our constituents to make certain the bill that is finally submitted will be a GOOD bill!
Just got email confirmation of this as well. Damn. Now I gotta go edit my post from this afternoon.

SF_Hooligan screwed with this post 02-26-2013 at 07:13 PM
SF_Hooligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2013, 04:58 PM   #75
francisthepig
Dances with Lurkers
 
francisthepig's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Fontana, CA
Oddometer: 150
http://www.ots.ca.gov/Media_and_Rese...ing_Survey.pdf

on page 36, shows why I feel we need a good law rather than wait for legislators to outlaw it. We don't have many supporters.

Table 58. Q14. How would rate your approval or disapproval of lane splitting
Q14 Frequency Percent
Strongly approve 60 8.3%
Somewhat approve 204 28.3%
Somewhat disapprove 188 26.1%
Strongly disapprove 268 37.2%

Total 733 100.0


There was a little bit of info about this back in May in the news. It is kind of a lengthy report, but somewhat interesting.
francisthepig is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 11:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014