Mr. Sparks,I have noted your concern about the presentation and authorship of the bill on our forum site. I was actually done with this conversation, but as I see we have added a larger group to the cc list I will respond because they have missed much of our conversation. Largely you have heard these arguments, so you can ignore the rest of this if you wish, but for those of you just joining the conversation...First I don't consider posting a current draft version of a ordinance on a forum site and asking for discussion "fear mongering". I think presenting an ordinance to the community that will be primarily affected by an ordinance before it comes up to vote is important. I don't know how widely the authors consulted the cycling community before drafting this but i am glad we are having the discussion now. Second. I am not against any event ordinance, and I understand that there are real issues out there, but I would argue that the primary ones that people are complaining about are NOT addressed by this bill, and there are some of the best things about cycling in our community that are damaged by the bill.
The ridiculous thing is that I am going to go through this whole argument and all I am asking for is specific clarifications on a few definitions and more precise language in the bill so we can make the bill do what it originally claims to do.
There are really two issues here. The one this bill attempts to address and the underlying issue which is causing most of the complaints that led to the bill. There are also a number of types of riders on the road and this bill addresses each of them differently. My point here is that this bill is most harmful to those who are in general the most courteous and least disruptive to traffic, and generally leaves alone those who are most likely to be causing the problems and generating complaints.
First the Riders: There are 4 main types of rides on our roads (more depending on how many hairs you want to split, but I will divide into 4 groups.)
Group 1: Races- These are riders on relatively short highly Marshaled courses who are in a competition. As such they expect the right of way under all circumstances and courses are usually either blocked off, or contain only right hand turns. Racers generally pay an entry fee. Organizers typically carry event insurance. Organizers fully expect to have to file permits and generally lean on local officials to lead them through this process.
Group 2: What a cyclist would call Event rides, but as this ordinance defines "Event" differently I will call them Charity and organized tours. Typically these are typically large rides with over 100 starting but they tend to break into groups of 15 or less within the first mile or to and often feature a rolling start where people just sort of start when they please. Course are often marked with signs or paint on the tar. Riders are considered normal vehicles on the road and are expected to obey the rules of the road. Usually these are run by or to benefit non-profit, and riders are either required to raise a certain amount for the charity or pay an entry fee. Organizers typically carry event insurance
Club Rides: Usually 5-60 riders. Most are well below the 50 rider mark, but because there is only a sign in, and no registration actual head count is not generally known until the ride starts. Courses are not marked, but riders are generally provided directions. Riders are expected to obey the rules of the road. Rides are typically swept which means there is an experienced ride captain near the back to help out less experienced riders while stronger riders go off ahead. Rides typically thin to groups of 3 to 10 within the first mile or two. This is where young riders typically learn how to navigate the roads safely on their bicycles as well as how to ride in close proximity to other riders. Rides are covered by the clubs insurance, and rides are subject to termination or modification if the club finds the ride to be dangerous or otherwise disruptive, or if the ride captain is found to be wanting in some way. These tend to be some of the safest rides because riders are no only accountable to the law but also to the club and the stigmas that are attached to breaking the rules of the road or riding recklessly.
Non-Organized rides: This is probably most of the riders you see out on the streets. They are riders who either meet up with friends and teammates, and go for a ride, or simply go out alone and see who they meet. Groups are typically between 1 and 10 and they tend to all stay very close together as there is often not a determined route. Many of the racers tend to fall into this group on non race days because they are doing specific workouts that don't lend themselves to club rides.
Now the issues. There are really two issues here, the one we are talking about and the one we are dealing with but pretending like we are not. This was crystallized for me by two examples that Mr. Sparks sent me in a prior e-mail, and I think it makes sense to use his examples so you know I am not just making stuff up.
Excerpt 1 :
" I HAVE VIDEO I took one day of a club running the sign in Pewee valley. I think I can send to you if the file isn’t too big. Don’t play with me and pretend these guys don’t run signs all day long. I am being honest with you and I don’t think you are returning the respect. If these guys weren’t breaking the road rules all the time people wouldn’t be calling us. I wager I can go this weekend and catch them doing it, if the weather is nice. In fact I almost side swipped a guy the other night because he was riding on the wrong side of the road and I didn’t see him until he raced up on me… It scared the crap out of me. He was in one of your fancy outfits with all the club names and sponsors on it.. I am not stupid. "
This is the underlying issue that we are talking about here, but are saying that we are not. It is also an issue that members of the club as well a sponsors of teams have been harping on more and more. Teams are getting pressure from above, because organized cycling realizes that we are held to a higher standard than other vehicles on the road. For this reason the kind of this mentioned above is seen much less on club rides than in non-organized rides. The problem is that the general public can't tell the difference.
Side note on jerseys. The club issues precious few jerseys, the ones you see are largely purchased, mostly logoed with manufacture logos, random images, or logos of pro teams. The ones that do tell you who the rider is, are largely racing teams which is why the teams are coming down to hard on their riders, because they are identifiable by their clothing if you know what you are looking for.
Incidents like the ones above, as well as a general feeling that because cyclists tend to slow down traffic and that they shouldn't be on the road is what generate hard feelings towards cyclists in general. These hard feelings lead to complaints. I am guessing that most of the complaints about the larger events are not as much about the events, which really only occur 2 or 3 days a year in our county, but those events are sort of the icing on the cake. In other words a person who is generally ticked off at cyclists is more likely to call in a complaint about Ironman.
All this is tangential, because the riders above most likely fell into Group 4 and as such are not affected by the ordinance.
Excerpt 2:
"And simply put… the issue isn’t individual riders or even groups… it is EVENTS. Last year I was driving down the road on my way to take my kids to school. It was Friday and this guy was out hanging signs on every street corner stop sign. I asked him what he was doing and he said, “we are having a ride here tomorrow and I am laying out the course”. I said, “No you are not, I haven’t been informed of any such event”. He said he had every permission to do so. (apparently he had called state and they didn’t care if he did it on their public roads) I called the chief of police right there in his presence and asked him. The Chief confirmed (not a quote) that he didn’t know anything about it. This was an event they planned to have some 250 or more riders all day LONG. And they were setting up in parking lots for refreshments and the such (with out permissions I am told)…. This was a LOUISVILLE “charity”. They said they do it every year. NO ONE… NO ONE in our local govt had been contacted, nothing had been approved. Etc etc. And this guy on the side of the road had NO intention of listening to me until I had to call the Chief of police.
Well, this is your problem… and this isn’t the only case. It is just one perfectly glaring example of what you guys want to pretend isn’t happening. "
Now we are to the real issue and what the ordinance tries to and does address, the problem is we need to clarify our words to make sure it doesn't hit all the wrong things.
I agree that the county government should have known about an event this large if it is on county roads. But it sounds to me like the organizer did jump through all the hoops he was supposed to there was just a communication breakdown in the system that we have for notification of our government officials. This is why my initial suggestion was that permitting be handled by the largest government body involved with rights of refusals to smaller bodies. So for an event such as this that may pass through 3 or 4 counties and many more cities, it is unreasonable for an organizer to be expected to file a $50 permit fee along with separate paperwork for each city and county that it passes through. He should be able to contact the state (as he did) and get one permission that any of the smaller bodies could reject based on the larger application to the state.
Similarly, an event contained on only county and city roads could file one application with the county and the county official could get the okay from involved cities.
If it is all in one city, the permit goes through the city.
What we are talking about here is simply administrative streamlining which makes it easier for all involved to bring events our state, county and cities, and for all involved to know what is going on.
So we are done right? Unfortunately we struck with too wide a hammer and there are a lot of unintended consequences. The biggest is that under current definitions club rides, which are open to the public, will not know if they are an "Event" or not until about 5 minutes before the ride, so they will have to do some crazy work around if too many people show up and risk heavy fines for themselves and their riders.
Alternatively these unpaid volunteers who typically host two or three rides a month could shell out a few hundred in permit fees and risk being told they need officers at every corner for what turns out to be series of 10 rider rides.
The more likely result is that ride leaders will simply pull their rides out of Oldham County. And yes I have already talked to ride captains who have said they will do this, but I have not heard any official response as to what the Louiville Bycyle Club will do. This is not to say that there will not be cyclist here, but that we will have eliminated the rides which are organized,insured, and routed along the safest roads possible. In their stead will be a series of uninsured, loosely organized rides, which will make it difficult for our rookie riders to learn how to ride safely on our roads unless they take their cars, their bikes and their dollars into Louisville.
For this reason my suggestion is that we limit the ordinance to commercial events. With commercial being defined as "Any ride or race that can reasonable expect 25 or more participants where the participants are required to pay and entry fee or raise money in order to participate -or- any event that will request or require road closures or traffic redirection"
I also ask that it is specified that the event must have aspects on county roads or property to require a permit from the county. And that if a mixture of state and county roads are used that State level permissions should override county leaving the county with a right of refusal based on the information provided to the state but sparing the event coordinator from having to pay separate permit fees in every county and city that decides to pass an ordinance such as the one we are discussing.
Finally if this seems too complicated to only target the big events I suggest that we revert to the status quo where we simply accept that bicycles are part of traffic and are subject to the same rules and regulations as any other vehicle, and leave it at that.
Again this is just my opinion and since I am already being called out as a fear monger I am going to share it with my friends as well, thanks for your time. - Jon Kindig
