Eighty percent of success is just showing up.
— Woody Allen
Sometimes, it seems like the other 20% involves just sticking around long enough. At least, that’s how it seemed last night, at the meeting of the city’s Bike Advisory Committee.
Other than the council members themselves, there was only a small turnout — most of whom were there to discuss the many failings of the Bicycle Master Plan. And most of whom left — some in anger and frustration — once the committee turned to more mundane matters.
It wasn’t like I didn’t have anything to say on that subject. But after hearing all the other comments on the subject — and the DOT’s representative swearing she didn’t know anything about it — I didn’t think they really needed my two cents.
Besides, considering the state of the economy these days, that may be my retirement fund.
I was actually more interested in one of the last items on the agenda — a motion from the council that had been submitted in the aftermath of the recent Hummer incident, and eventually signed by six of the 18 council members:
Numerous incidents have been reported relative to bicycle and vehicle collisions and aggressive motorists (sic) attitudes to law-abiding people riding bicycles. Complaints have also been raised regarding the treatment of bicyclists by the Los Angeles Police Department. It is critical that the City respond to these situations and respond appropriately.
I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council direct the Los Angeles Police Department to report on recent bicycle incidents and conflicts between bicyclists and motorists, as well as efforts to increase police officer training related to bicycling activities and applicable regulations and laws.
It was the last part in particular that interested me. Especially since LAPD had already found itself blameless in the Hummer incident.
When the time came, I spoke in support of the resolution, pointing out that it wasn’t just a problem here in L.A. Cyclists nationwide have complained about police officers who are unfamiliar with the laws regarding bicycling and the rights of cyclists, as well as institutional bias against cyclists — or in favor of motorists, depending on your perspective.
Then I pointed out that Massachusetts recently became the first state to require that police officers receive specialized training in bike law, as part of their new Bike Safety Law. And asked why that curriculum couldn’t be adapted for use in training officers at our own police academy.
Evidently, the committee members agreed. They voted unanimously to endorse the resolution, and to put the MassBike program on the agenda for the next committee meeting in July.
Afterwards, I emailed a link to the MassBike site to 4th Council District representative Larry Hoffman, who forwarded it to the rest of the BAC, as well as the mayor.
So, a small victory. But a victory none the less.
And one worth sticking around for.
If you’re missing a bike on the Westside, the police may have found it in a Venice Garage. Alex Thompson joins the chorus condemning Santa Monica’s bronze award from the League of American Bicyclists. Matt joins in on the other chorus, complaining about the failure of the new Bike Master Plan. Stephen Box questions why LADOT’s redundant bike map business stimulates the economies of Portland and Seattle, while Timur examines the maps that currently exist — and there are more than you might think (good to see you back!). Bike Girl wonders where you keep your bike(s). A writer for the Times rides the L.A. River bike path, evidently holding his nose the whole way. Even Iowa cyclists get sharrows; maybe LADOT can ask them what kind of paint they use so we can get some here. Bicycling’s biking lawyer examines whether cycling is a privilege or a right. And finally, just wait until Rush Limbaugh hears about this — Bike Portland outs the new SCOTUS nominee as a closet cyclist.
