Is Road Riding Worth the Risk?

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 190009 wrote:

The question is when do we finish this first step?

We do both at the same time. We add infra, and even with only around 2% bike commute share in ArlCo and Alex, we push for institutional change. With more infra, AND with SOME institutional improvement, we get more riders. That gives us more supporters, more activists, and more sympathizers in the community – which enables BOTH more institutional improvement AND more infra.

But you can’t get there from here without blood sweat and tears, and you can’t do it if you don’t do the steps that actually get more people riding (and, BTW, more people walking and taking transit)

[dasgeh]

@sjclaeys 190005 wrote:

ACPD continues to run stop sign sting operations targeting cyclists and put up large electronic signs that actively perpetuate drivers’ stereotypes that cyclists are scofflaws that do not belong on the streets. At the same time, ACPD continues to not devote resources to improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians at intersections like Lynn & Lee Highway. I’m sorry, but how can one objectively see any improvement in this regard?

ACPD runs fewer stop sign stings targeting cyclists. I believe they only target cyclists in East Falls Church, which is improvement — not enough, but improvement.

ACPD was at Lynn & Lee this morning. They should be there more, but they are there sometimes, when they used to be there never. Again, not enough, but an improvement.

ACPD now reviews every crash involving someone walking, biking scooting. They compile a report and present to the BAC and PAC. Improvements over the past.

ACPD developed training for officers, and consulted with the BAC when drafting it. Improvement.

[dasgeh]

@sjclaeys 190010 wrote:

Well the Arlington County Bicycle Advisory Committee is charted by Arlington County so, as required by their charter, they at least are required to listen to the “peanut gallery” of the great unwashed masses.

I’m happy to listen to everyone. In fact, I check this forum and other social media regularly and build time for public comment into every meeting agenda. But the charter does not require it.

[rcannon100]

@lordofthemark 190007 wrote:

Alexandria BPAC is a private non profit.

Nope.

The “About Us” page of ABPAC does not state that it is a non profit. It says ABPAC has a “Charter.” Non profits dont have “charters” – they have by laws. The Charter does not state that ABPAC is a non profit.

ACT for Alexandria is a non profit. The ACT webpage where it discusses current grants does not mention ABPAC. It does mention the Walking and Biking Fund as a field of interest fund.

The Walking and Biking Fund donation page, where it talks about where the money goes to, talks about Alexandria schools – but not ABPAC. Donations are collected through a third party site “Mighty Cause.”

The normal is that an “advisory committee” is a creation of the government, who convenes a committee who are able to answer and provide advice on a questions from the government to the advisory committee (See the Federal Advisory Committee Act). The committee derives its authority and its existence from the government host.

On a side note, non profits, that is 501 (c)(3)s, volunteers are protected from liability under the federal Volunteer Protection Act. One of the reasons its helpful to establish a 501c3. On the other hand, 501c3 are generally not supposed to engage in advocacy.

In this case, I dont see anything readily apparent that indicates that ABPAC has a legal existence.

[rcannon100]

@dasgeh 190021 wrote:

Improvement.

Making something “less bad” isnt the same as an improvement. Its just “less bad.”

Its like reducing the trash you throw away by 10% and thinking you are saving the planet. Ah, no, you’re still skrewing the planet…. just maybe a little slower.

If ACPD sucks less then yesterday, good for them. But ACPD of today has no resemblance to the ACPD of 20 years ago where if you violated traffic law, you WOULD get a ticket. Maybe the demise is a little slower, but its still demise.

[Emm]

@rcannon100 190026 wrote:

Nope.

The “About Us” page of ABPAC does not state that it is a non profit. It says ABPAC has a “Charter.” Non profits dont have “charters” – they have by laws. The Charter does not state that ABPAC is a non profit.

ACT for Alexandria is a non profit. The ACT webpage where it discusses current grants does not mention ABPAC. It does mention the Walking and Biking Fund as a field of interest fund.

The Walking and Biking Fund donation page, where it talks about where the money goes to, talks about Alexandria schools – but not ABPAC. Donations are collected through a third party site “Mighty Cause.”

The normal is that an “advisory committee” is a creation of the government, who convenes a committee who are able to answer and provide advice on a questions from the government to the advisory committee (See the Federal Advisory Committee Act). The committee derives its authority and its existence from the government host.

On a side note, non profits, that is 501 (c)(3)s, volunteers are protected from liability under the federal Volunteer Protection Act. One of the reasons its helpful to establish a 501c3. On the other hand, 501c3 are generally not supposed to engage in advocacy.

In this case, I dont see anything readily apparent that indicates that ABPAC has a legal existence.

As the treasurer of Alexandria BPAC, I can help clarify this.

BPAC is incorporated (as of a week or two ago!), and in the process of becoming a non profit. I expect this to be done within the next month or two, depending on processing times. The walking and biking fund is controlled by BPAC, and will fold into BPAC’s “general fund” once BPAC becomes a non profit. At the moment, the walking and biking fund is used ““to promote walking and biking, primarily in Alexandria, VA”. Primiarily it is used to help support the biking in schools program BPAC runs. ACT for Alexandria administers the fund for BPAC.

Also, you need to clarify what you mean by “advocacy”. Nonprofits can educate lawmakers, and promote activities, which many would consider advocacy. But they are not allowed to use a “substantial” % of their budget on “lobbying” (influencing legislation). (https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/lobbying)

[sjclaeys]

@dasgeh 190022 wrote:

I’m happy to listen to everyone. In fact, I check this forum and other social media regularly and build time for public comment into every meeting agenda. But the charter does not require it.

Here is what the charter says:

Public Involvement
The BAC is expected to convene a public meeting at least every other month, but might choose to meet more often. A full calendar year of meetings should be set up in advance and posted to a publicly accessible forum or forums. To help engage those not naturally inclined to attend public meetings, the BAC should develop an online presence using Google Groups, BikeArlington.com or other social media tools appropriate to their mission.

I guess that one could take the most narrow reading of this language and say the BAC isn’t required to listen to the public. Is that the BAC’s official position? Also note that the charter requires the BAC to provide summaries of meetings to the public within two weeks, which I do not believe it does. No meeting notes has been posted on its website since May 2017.

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 190046 wrote:

Here is what the charter says:

Public Involvement
The BAC is expected to convene a public meeting at least every other month, but might choose to meet more often. A full calendar year of meetings should be set up in advance and posted to a publicly accessible forum or forums. To help engage those not naturally inclined to attend public meetings, the BAC should develop an online presence using Google Groups, BikeArlington.com or other social media tools appropriate to their mission.

I guess that one could take the most narrow reading of this language and say the BAC isn’t required to listen to the public. Is that the BAC’s official position? Also note that the charter requires the BAC to provide summaries of meetings to the public within two weeks, which I do not believe it does. No meeting notes has been posted on its website since May 2017.

I am glad you are volunteering to be the secretary.

I promise not to post anything about biking and walking conditions in the Eden of Westover (and other North Arlington paradises), if folks will refrain from complaining about others not doing sufficient volunteer work for organizations they do not volunteer with.

[lordofthemark]

@Emm 190045 wrote:

As the treasurer of Alexandria BPAC, I can help clarify this.

BPAC is incorporated (as of a week or two ago!), and in the process of becoming a non profit. I expect this to be done within the next month or two, depending on processing times. The walking and biking fund is controlled by BPAC, and will fold into BPAC’s “general fund” once BPAC becomes a non profit. At the moment, the walking and biking fund is used ““to promote walking and biking, primarily in Alexandria, VA”. Primiarily it is used to help support the biking in schools program BPAC runs. ACT for Alexandria administers the fund for BPAC.

Also, you need to clarify what you mean by “advocacy”. Nonprofits can educate lawmakers, and promote activities, which many would consider advocacy. But they are not allowed to use a “substantial” % of their budget on “lobbying” (influencing legislation). (https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/lobbying)

Thanks to you, Komorebi and others who have worked hard to achieve this change.

And to clarify, Alexandria BPAC before this was simply an unincorporated group. We were never a government body, despite the name. In fact at one time, IIUC, we lost our right to meet at the Durant Center because someone decided only govt bodies could use their meeting rooms (although that policy has since been changed).

[dasgeh]

@sjclaeys 190046 wrote:

Here is what the charter says:

Public Involvement
The BAC is expected to convene a public meeting at least every other month, but might choose to meet more often. A full calendar year of meetings should be set up in advance and posted to a publicly accessible forum or forums. To help engage those not naturally inclined to attend public meetings, the BAC should develop an online presence using Google Groups, BikeArlington.com or other social media tools appropriate to their mission.

I guess that one could take the most narrow reading of this language and say the BAC isn’t required to listen to the public. Is that the BAC’s official position? Also note that the charter requires the BAC to provide summaries of meetings to the public within two weeks, which I do not believe it does. No meeting notes has been posted on its website since May 2017.

The charter is outward facing — we are supposed to do our work in a way the public can see. Is it a good idea to listen to others? Yes. And I do it. It’s just not in the charter.

And yes, the meetings notes issue is a problem. County staff controls the website. They get regular emails from me about the minutes being missing. But I spend most of my time on other things. Maybe I should spend less time on this forum and more time getting the minutes posted.

[dplasters]

I haven’t posted in a while.

Let me say, this forum never lets me down on moving off topic. God bless you all and thank you for the advocacy work you do.

I will continue my long standing rule of not reading about crashes as it increases the perceived rate of cyclists v motor vehicle interactions, which are too common, but not nearly as common as the news/world would make you believe.

[ginacico]

@Emm 189984 wrote:

Side note–I think when it comes to WABA issues, you need to trust Judd, who holds a position on their Board and therefor has a good amount of insider knowledge. Not sure any of us can really claim to more more than him about WABA’s current activities… (unless you too are also as involved as he is with the organization)

Not a side note at all. The frustration may stem from misunderstanding that, despite its misleading name and logos at the top, this is in no way an official forum for DC bike advocacy. Exceptions are Bike Arlington who hosts and monitors the forum and chimes in with news, and both dasgeh and lordofthemark who do their best to engage about what’s happening in their respective advisory groups (much appreciated). People may alert you about potholes and detours.

But if you want to know specifically what WABA is up to in DC, or what input you can offer with your membership dollars, you’re barking up the wrong tree. This is a minefield of dumb games and social cliques badly disguised as a forum for DC bike advocacy. WABA is not listening here. I confirmed that years ago while riding with a (then) staff member. If you have the stomach for true social media hell you can follow #bikeDC on Twitter, but you won’t get many clues about WABA strategy there either.

My most effective tactics for any kind of dialog with WABA have been to show up at their events and corner one of them, or write emails. Judd gets mega kudos (and should never have to buy coffee or beer again) for volunteering a lot of time and agitating until they put him on the Board.

Equity issues, indeed. I don’t even know where to start.

[kwarkentien]

The Forum never disappoints when it gets on to issues such as these: the hard issues of biking safety, infrastructure, enforcement, equity, participation, advocacy. Lots of opinions here, and some raw, sometimes harsh, criticisms and descriptions of “how it is” and “how it should be.”

I think we all want the same basic thing—safety for all road users—it’s the “what” and “how” that we don’t always align on and sometimes vehemently disagree with. But we can’t lose sight of the fact that all of us are those vulnerable road users and we are better served when we try to unite on the items we can agree on rather than trying to tear each other asunder. We need to channel the great emotion we have into action. Not an easy task, I know, and I fail miserably at that myself.

Sadly I don’t have the time to make the commitment that is required to advocate on behalf of a BPAC or WABA or other organization that espouses bike safety as a priority. And while I don’t always agree with the folks who do the advocating (and sometimes I really disagree), I nevertheless am thankful for their service. Perhaps a time will come when I do have the time to be more active in one or more of these organizations but until then, I’m relying on the BPACs and WABA to put these issues out there and propose solutions. And if I really have a gripe or complaint with the direction of these organizations, then it’s my responsibility to step up and make my voice heard.

Just my two cents.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[ShawnoftheDread]

“A minefield of dumb games and social cliques” NEEDS to be on the masthead.

[rcannon100]

@ginacico 190152 wrote:

This is a minefield of dumb games and social cliques badly disguised as a forum for DC bike advocacy.

HEY Hey hey!

Calvinball maybe be badly disguised as a minefield, but it is NOT barking up true social media hell!

[Author]

Posts