In what has become an annual ritual, a certain cadre of Republican state legislators bring forth numerous bills designed to limit / curtail / eliminate photo enforcement. This posting covers the 52nd Legislature, 1st Regular session’s activities, that is the Spring of 2015. Continue reading “Legislation to ban Photo Enforcement”
Senate OKs bill to allow sawed-off shotguns, silencers
Arizona’s Senate gave preliminary approval Monday to a bill that would end the state’s ban on sawed-off shotguns and silencers on weapons… The proposal, contained in a surprise amendment to Senate Bill 1460, passed with Republican support and Democratic opposition… The amendment, introduced by Sen. Kelli Ward, R-Lake Havasu City, was tacked onto her bill to restore gun rights to those with felony convictions after certain waiting periods or after the convictions are legally set aside. Ward said her amendment was “constituent driven” and about “making certain things legal that are illegal,” a vague description that drew hushed snickers from some in the Senate.
“My own view,” Ward said during a break in the session, “is we have the right to keep and bear arms, and really, that right shouldn’t be infringed. The government putting any kind of regulations on that is wrong.” — azcentral.com
Meanwhile, the full senate voted down Rep. Ward’s bill to end all photo-enforcement anywhere in Arizona:
Senate slams brakes on photo-enforcement ban
The gov’t is watching you Kelli Ward’s privacy nightmare?
Mind your speed: Photo enforcement will continue to be a tool local governments can use to control traffic, as the state Senate on Monday rejected a bill that would have banned red-light cameras and other technologies.
The issue drew bipartisan opposition, despite the argument from Sen. Kelli Ward, R-Lake Havasu City, that photo enforcement is unconstitutional and infringes on individual privacy… Safety, and an acknowledgment that local government is better able to gauge its traffic needs, prevailed as four GOP senators joined with the Democrats to kill Senate Bill 1167. Cities and towns lobbied against Ward’s bill, pointing to statistics that they say show the cameras, especially when used for red-light enforcement, cut accidents. … Ward, however, disputed many of the statistics and said the greater issue is what she perceives as the unconstitutionality of photo enforcement in the first place. Such devices, she said, collect information without the consent of the driver that can be stored by private companies and governments for later use, and they infringe on privacy rights. “You have no right to face your accuser,” when photo enforcement is used, she said. — azcentral.com
The new legislative session, 52nd / 1st Regular, is going full bore. State Senator Kavanagh is making panhandling his signature issue. Sen Kavanagh sits on the Public Safety committee.
SB1063: obstructing a highway; public thoroughfare
[this will be a catch-all for issues relating to legal requirement to use bike lanes (BLs). This was moved from the article explaining When must I ride my bicycle on the shoulder?, because it was muddying that issue unnecessarily; after all BLs are not shoulders and shoulders are not BLs. For all the details about shoulders, see that article; the short answer is their use is almost never required, that conclusion stems from the fact that shoulders are not part of the roadway.] Continue reading “Arizona does NOT have a mandatory Bike Lane Law”
The tourdetavern.com has been operating in Scottsdale since 2012.
[UPDATE — this bill was passed, i believe in exactly the same form as was vetoed last year, we have a new governor. HB2211 in 52 1st regular session, 2015. The bill also included autocycles ]
[VETO — gov. Brewer vetoed this bill… “Brewer in her veto said the bill could pose a public-safety risk, primarily if passengers are drinking alcohol.” ]
Somewhere out of the blue; House trans committee chairperson Rep Karen Fann introduced an amendment that makes definitions and regulations for commercial multiple-person, pedaled, motor-assisted quadricycles. Often offered as a “party bus” where the riders drink and pedal around (presumably the driver remains sober). This is an amendment to SB1201 a striker bill that defined Autocycle as essentially an enclosed 3-wheeled motorcycle. Continue reading “Arizona Legislature considers defining motorized quadricycles”
Sample “excessively wide” road in Sun City, AZ. This is Boswell Blvd, somewhere south of Bell Rd. You can clearly see the golf cart “tracks” in the shoulder.
There is an interesting bill floating around in the state legislature, HB2027 (see bill-tracker to follow this and other bills of interest)
Direct link to HB2027 — golf carts allowed to use shoulder. For much more about shoulder usage, see shoulder-use.
The first odd thing is the bill is written so it only applies to age restricted communities in unincorporated areas of counties more than 3 million population.(phew! Translation: Sun City, Sun City West, etc. It also, come to think of it, applies to Sun Lakes.). Continue reading “More about shoulders; this time golf carts.”
This legislative session is now over; each bill’s disposition is noted below…
SB1170 bicycle equipment (helmet requirement for < 18 y.o.)
Bill Status: Assigned to Trans and PS (Public Safety) but not on agenda to be heard. [Final status: never heard]
azbikelaw says: mandatory helmet use laws tend to have the unintended consequence of reducing cycling. The safety benefits of bicyclist helmet use tend to overstated.
[Update as of 2/23/2013, The McComish novice cell ban, SB1241, is moving forward. The Farley full text ban SB1218 is dead. See below ]
[Update as of 4/4/2013 McComish bill appears stalled, it is being prevented from coming to a vote in full senate. In other news, Farley tried again, via amendment, to get a texting ban; see notes below on SB2378]
It’s the start of a new legislative season in Arizona, the 51st Regular session, for those keeping track. (find other bills of interest with the legislation tag)
[Update as of 2/23/2013, neither bill mentioned below has been assigned to any committee which I imagine means it is dead]
It’s the start of a new legislative season in Arizona, the 51st Regular session, for those keeping track. (find other bills of interest with the legislation tag)
There are two bills that would modify §28-735, Arizona’s 3-foot passing rule. The first is only a technical correction, however the second seeks to modify the onerous “section C”. By far the best and most simple correction would be to simply eliminate section C altogether. In any event, the present proposal seeks add specific reasons (excuses?) why a bicyclist might not be in an otherwise passable bike lane; e.g. preparing to turn, passing another cyclist…
Section C was added by Senator Bee as a “floor amendment” (ie. last minute) and is widely viewed as anti-cyclist. More background on the law here, called HB2625 from the year 2000. Although I don’t know of any time section C has ever actually kicked in; it has caused confusion causing some to either mendaciously or ignorantly claim that 3-foot passing minimum does not apply to overtaking bicyclists traveling in a bike lane (including more than one Flagstaff police officer).
[Update as of 2/23/2012, HB2528 it is not assigned to any committee which I imagine means it is dead]
It’s the start of a new legislative season in Arizona, the 51st Regular session, for those keeping track. (find other bills of interest with the legislation tag)
HB2528 makes it explicitly illegal to harass a pedestrian or bicyclist.
Numerous people have pointed out that the language of the bill is odd in that to be in violation of it, the victim must fall. I’m not sure why it was written that way.
[Updating this is cumbersome and I am probably missing some… This page at ncsl.org says it’s updated to the end of 2015]
As of the 2015 legislative season, by my count, 22 US states have added three-or-more-foot passing provisions (not counting NY, Missouri or SC, which both relatively recently added “safe passing” laws without specifying a distance):
*NY, SC and MO: requires “safe operating” — not specific distance. I also need to look up NC; i seem to remember they have a 2-foot specification for passing. Continue reading “Three Foot Passing Laws”
50th 2nd regular session (2012) HB2221. This is (i think) an exact copy of the bill from last year; which was a tweak to the original try in 2009.
HEARING SCHEDULED 1/26/2012 at 9AM by the House Transportation committee. All video is archived, in case you miss it live, you can also view the 3/4/2009 hearing at the archive — it’s kind of interesting.
BILL PASSES out of the Transportation Committee 1/26/2012, on an 8-2 vote. It was passed “DP” (do pass. i.e. passed without any amendment). If you didn’t see it live, you can catch it on archived, but it looks like there is a day or two delay… (bill ultimately dies). Continue reading “Bicyclist stop sign law changes re-introduced”
Legislation prior to around 1997 is not available online, so below is the full chaptered version of a major bicycle legislation from 1986 (the 37th legislature). Here is the scanned image — thanks to Justin for providing it — and let me know if you spot any discrepancies. See here for a chronology of bicycle legislative changes.
Some of the changes were merely symbolic, e.g. removing references to play vehicle in conjunction with bicycles in the Article title. While others were important and substantial, and in addition allowed for greater conformance to UVC.
Particularly significant, this legislation gives us our modern §28-815A — our “stay to the right law”, along with its many and significant exceptions, along with the alternate hand signal (§28-756) — these were done expressly to conform to UVC, as was the arm signals (I think. It also strikes me as odd that motorcyclists can’t use the right arm signal; and also vehicles with right-hand drive are out-of-luck as they may not give arm signals at all!). It also added the two-lane highway impeding clause to n §28-704 .
“S.B. 1218 makes two changes in order to conform with the uniform vehicle code (UVC). The first change allows a person operating a bicycle to give a right turn signal by extending the right hand and arm horizontally to the right. Second, it allows an operator of a bicycle to depart from the most extreme right position of the road in four specific situations…” — Revised Senate Fact sheet for S.B. 1218 (that document can be found within this bundle of pages)
