UPDATE: The Active Transportation Board tabled their recommendation today saying they didn’t know enough about E2s to make a decision. Which is good.
As I have mentioned before, there is an Active Transportation Board meeting Wednesday morning at 8:30 AM in City Hall in the old commission chambers, 1st Floor, and at 4 PM a Parks Board meeting with a recommendation.
I ENCOURAGE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO RIDE THEIR E2 ON THE SHARED USE REC TRAIL TO ATTEND AND TELL THE BOARD WHY YOU WANT THIS CHANGE!
The board will be taking action on the E2 recommendation from Councilor Greg Neitzert with some clarity with rec trail speeds and ADA mobility devices.
As I have mentioned in the past there is a lot of misinformation out there about E2s.
The Micro Mobility Device industry is one of the fastest growing in the world, most users in Sioux Falls are over 60 years of age and finding an E1 bike has become increasingly difficult and will probably be non-existent in 5 years. Police Chief Thum has told councilors that he supports the change and doesn’t see any issues with it, just more concerns about speed, which is addressed. The Parks Director (and probably the board) support the change also telling us at a recent meeting their hasn’t been any major accidents involving E2s on the trail in the past 5 years. I have heard about 2 major accidents, but didn’t get a lot of details.
Besides the health and mobility advantages for seniors, I like my E2 for commuting and can easily switch from the trail, to a sidewalk to a street, riding safe speeds on all (I can lock in certain speeds depending on level, essentially a cruise control).
The opposition is coming from the fact that E2’s can be throttled (I have suggested a no throttling rule on the trail) which is a shallow argument since most users only throttle when starting out or going up a hill. There is also the ‘what about the kids’ group, and I get it, I want kids to safely play along the bike trail, but when I am riding my bike ON THE TRAIL my main focus is my safety and the safety of riders and walkers around me. If your child suddenly decides to break free in a public park and jumps in front of my bike on the trail, that’s on the parent or caregiver. I have never had a close call with kids. WHY? Because parents ARE responsible and ARE watching their kids when in the parks. I have almost got into serious accidents when dogs off leash decide to run in front of my bike, maybe that is the rule that needs to be enforced?
Your attendance is crucial form informing the board about your experiences with your E2.
If you cannot attend, please call or email your councilors HERE telling them you support the change.
I’d comment, but then Greg would know my “strategery”. 😉 See you all in court, I mean board meeting(s). 🙁
( and Woodstock adds: “Come to think of it, VSG was for E-bikes before he was against them…. You know, kinda like that Council member who was against the City Center before he was for it”….. 🙂 )
The state law argument that I have heard ten million times? The definition of a motorcycle according to state law applies to E2s. I plan to talk to a legislator about changing this. THEY ARE NOT THE SAME! You go for it. I have argued that the 14th Amendment may apply to my right to ride my E2 on the bike trail. Until the bike trail is privately funded and you have to pay an entry fee to ride on it, the city real has no legal authority to limit the use of the rec trail except thru civil administrative penalties which don’t mean crap. It’s illegal to smoke in a city park, but has anyone ever gotten a ticket?
Alito claims that the 14th Amendment only applies to rights which were known at the time of its passage, which would be 1868. So, according to Alito, only horseback riding, covered wagons, steam locomotives, and striker bikes (non pedal coasters) could potentially be protected by the 14th, when it comes to the bike trail. But, since they didn’t have asphalt back then, I’m not sure if the Feds would have jurisdiction over the bike trail if you accept the “1868” argument. Keep in mind, too, that according to Alito’s logic, then only the printed press would be protected by the 1st Amendment and not digital, which means Noem could conceivably shut SouthDacola down if she wanted to. So, don’t be making any prank calls as a blog/journalist. If you catch my drift. 😉
But on a more serious note, since anyone could conceivably buy/own a E2 bike, then the alleged 14th Amendment discrimination is all encompassing, meaning there is no protected class or excluded class, so we are all treated equal, thus no discrimination or proper application of the 14th Amendment.
But my “strategery” argument has to do with using your opponent’s capability against them, so that their intent or legislation logically eats at itself. It’s what I call cannibal and not canon law.
( and Woodstock adds: “Wait a minute, VSG admires Alito? …. (…. “WTF?”….. ))