Behold! The office building at 405 Colorado, Austin and its 13 stories of parking. Leed Certified — and was awarded a prestigious Austin Green Energy Build 2-star rating.

Technically, the helmet law is still on the books — but the police will no longer enforce it:

Interim Seattle Police Chief Adrian Diaz announced Friday that SPD will no longer stop people for four minor traffic infractions, including violations of the county’s mandatory bicycle helmet law.

In recent years, more than half of all cyclist citations were for helmet law violations, which typically involve a $100-$150 fine; according to Seattle Municipal Court data, 77 percent of those fines go unpaid. In addition to formal citations, a community stakeholder and bike advocate who contributed to the OIG’s discussions estimated that SPD officers may have stopped hundreds or thousands of bicyclists for not wearing helmets without issuing citations, sometimes as a justification to question the bicyclist about a different crime.

The Senate in France has once again debated a bill to mandate bike helmets, with violators receiving a fine of 135 Euros and possible impoundment of their bikes:

While the practice of cycling is exploding, a group of centrist senators led by François Bonneau proposes to make the helmet compulsory for “any driver of a vehicle with one or more wheels, whether motor or electric assistance, as well as ‘to any cycle driver’, under penalty of a fine of 135 euros. “Nearly two-thirds of fatally injured cyclists were 55 years and over in 2019” and “head trauma is the main cause of death among cyclists,” said the senator in his proposal.

“It seems that this is a false good idea,” reacted Françoise Rossignol, president of the Club of cycling towns and territories, Tuesday at a press conference. “So that there are more bikes, we must not put the brakes on practice”. “Safety is linked to the speed of other vehicles, to visibility (of the bikes), and to a number of essential arrangements for safety on the course”, underlined Françoise Rossignol. “Foreign studies which have looked at behavioral changes following the obligation to wear a helmet all conclude that the number of cyclists has decreased”, underlines the FUB, citing the examples of Canada, Australia and New Zealand. On the other hand, the number of injured is not decreasing as much as we expected.

“The French are fed up with having obligations imposed on them,” said Elisabeth Borne, then Minister of Transport. “We recommend wearing a helmet and everyone takes their responsibilities.” “Let’s stop pissing off the French,” Bruno Millienne, MoDem co-rapporteur, argued, believing that with a helmet one could falsely feel “safer”.

Thankfully, the proposal was rejected by the Senate Law Commission. However there is still the possibility of a helmet mandate for riders of electric scooters.


Above the Law

Why even bother having drunk-driving laws if they are not enforceable?

A judge told TV personality Katie Price she was lucky to avoid prison at her sentencing for a drink-driving crash. The former model flipped her car near Partridge Green, West Sussex, on her way to visit a friend on 28 September. District Judge Amanda Kelly, who handed Price a 16-week suspended jail term, said her “incredibly selfish” actions “could have easily killed somebody”.

District Judge Kelly, sentencing, told the 43-year-old, who has been banned from driving on five separate occasions, she had “one of the worst driving records I have seen“. “You appear to think that you are above the law,” she told Price.

If she can get banned from driving — on FIVE separate occassions — and still keep driving anyway, then yeah she is above the law.

Price was taken to hospital, where she told police: “I took drugs, I should not be driving, I admit it all.” The court heard a drugs wipe gave a positive reading for cocaine and a roadside breath test was positive for alcohol.

Joe Harrington, defending, said: “It’s a complicated driving history. Things tend to be quite complicated with this lady. “She does not deal with her problems, particularly with paperwork.”

$65 billion.

That is how much the telecom giants will get from the Infrastructure bill Biden just signed into law. Supposedly, this money was for expanding broadband service to rural areas. Past history predicts the telecoms will instead use the money in metropolitan areas, where they can earn higher ROI. The law has no restrictions on where the money is to be spent, leaving those decisions largely to the states.

This map shows where the California PUC will be using the funds to build out the Open Access Middle-Mile network. The Bay Area (which hardly lacks for service) will be well served — while many large rural areas will not see a dime.

King County has delayed a vote on repealing its draconian helmet law. That law is often used by police as a pretext to harass homeless and people of color. It also hasn’t done anything to make cycling safer:

The King County Board of Health held a public hearing Thursday about repealing the law, which requires all bicyclists to wear a helmet. According to the proposed resolution in support of repealing the law, data shows that cyclists of color receive tickets more frequently than white cyclists under the current helmet regulation, and that it is a common reason for law enforcement to engage with unhoused people. Ultimately, the board decided to delay a vote on the repeal until at least late November in order to get more information and allow for further discussion from relevant stakeholders.

Dr. Rivara, father of the bike helmet hysteria, is of course pushing King County to retain the law. He wrote an editorial which again repeats his claim that helmets “reduce the risk of brain injury by 88%.”

As most readers know, this statistic has been widely debunked. In 2013, the Feds were forced to withdraw the long-standing claim from their websites as other studies failed to replicate this result. Dr. Rivara also predicted a spike in head injuries from public bike share programs, when in fact bike share had the opposite effect of making streets overall safer for cyclists.

CA Governor Newsom vetoed AB-122, the bill which would have permitted cyclists to treat stop signs as yield. If that wasn’t infuriating enough, his veto message directly blames bicyclists for getting killed on the state’s roadways:

Veto message

Obviously, this is a gross misinterpretation of the SWITRS data. Here is what the CA Assembly legislative analyst reported:

Traffic collisions killed 455 cyclist in California between 2016 and 2018, the highest rate in any three-year period since the mid-1990s. According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 27% of cyclist fatalities occur at intersections. Failing to stop at a stop sign makes up a very small portion of the number of cyclists killed every year in California. Between 2015 and 2020, 25 cyclists have died as a result of failing to stop at a stop sign. CHP data places the fault with the cyclist in 22 of the 25 cases.

So the official figures show less than 5% of bike fatalities involve a moving violation at a stop sign (which in any case would still be illegal under AB-122). And that presumes the CHP correctly assigned fault, which is often not the case.

Texas (yes, Texas!) has passed a new pedestrian safety measure. It would actually penalize drivers who severely injure someone walking or biking:

A new safety law that is now in effect in Texas could see a driver go to jail if they hit someone walking or cycling. Senate Bill 1055 was signed into law by Governor Abbott in June, and drivers can now go to jail if they cause bodily harm to a pedestrian. The new law says drivers who cause bodily harm to pedestrians will face stiff consequences which include being charged with a class A misdemeanor and possible time behind bars.

Senate Bill 1055 was signed after a Houston mother was killed by a driver while crossing the street with her son; the driver in that accident walked away without any charges. 

“You can spend up to a year in jail. So now, we’re talking about jailtime, not a ticket where you go pay a fine. Although, there could be a fine up to $4,000,” said Sgt. Charlie Eipper of the Wichita Falls Police Department.

The real question is whether the new law will be enforced. Perhaps Texas can implement a bounty system…

The “E-BIKE” Act would have provided a refundable tax credit up to $1,500 on the purchase of a new e-bike. Authored by Congressmen Panetta (D-Calif) and Blumenauer (D-Ore), it would have paid up to 30% of the cost of a new e-bike.

But now the bill has gone into the Legislative buzzsaw of the House Ways and “Means-Testing” Committee, and has been significantly watered down — to the point of being largely useless. The e-Bike refundable tax credit is now just 15% of the purchase price, capped at $1,500 total. And the credit phases out starting at $75,000 of adjusted gross income.

For comparison, the same bill would provide a $12,000 subsidy for the purchase of a $74,000 F150 electric pickup truck to a family with $800,000 annual income.

(For details, see Sec. 136401/136407 here)