VIA FACSIMILE AND FIRST CLASS MAIL

Captain R.J. Hall
California Highway Patrol
455-8th Street
San Francisco, CA 94103

RE: CHP Respect of Bicycle Rights to Travel on Freeways Including Bridges

Dear Captain Hall:

I am writing on behalf of my client, the Bike the Bridge! Coalition. The Coalition is comprised of bicyclists who support bicyclists’ right to travel and who advocate a cleaner and safer environment through reduced reliance on motorized travel.

A serious obstacle faced by the Coalition has been the persistent failure of the California Highway Patrol to recognize the rights of bicyclists on California freeways and bridges.

In particular, CHP officers have cited bicyclists repeatedly in the San Francisco Bay Area for traveling on freeways and bridges even when such travel is legal. The CHP has issued these citations in cases where, by law, the CHP must not block or otherwise interfere with said bicycle travel. Such interferences constitute a CHP "Critical Mass" of blocking traffic illegally.

Additionally, members of the Coalition have reported numerous instances in which CHP officers have committed the following questionable or illegal acts during traffic stops and detentions:

1. Refused to identify themselves upon proper demand;
2. Seized cameras and shut them off, thus preventing a record being made of their actions;
3. Issued false orders banning particular cyclists from riding on any freeway in the state even though riding on the freeway is not everywhere illegal;
4. Demanding that cyclists produce a driver’s license, vehicle registration and roof of insurance.

The CHP has created bureaucratic obstructions for bicyclists who have attempted to subpeona records and have been told to take their subpoenas to Vallejo. When the CHP has made arrests, bicycles have been confiscated and retained even long after court proceedings from the arrest have been concluded.

These acts underscore an unwarranted hostility to bicyclists, or a profound ignorance of their rights, or both.

Bicyclists are permitted upon freeways unless specifically prohibited under CVC 21960(b), and "such prohibitory regulation shall be effective when appropriate signs giving notice thereof are erected upon any freeway and the approaches thereto".

Unfortunately, an apparently conflicting statute, Section 23330(b), applicable only to vehicular crossings, states that neither bicycles nor motorized bicycles "shall be permitted on any vehicular crossing", unless the department by signs indicates that they are permitted upon all or any portion of the vehicular crossing.

In general, vehicular crossings occur on freeways. Therefore, the effect of the conflicting statutes is to engender confusion about where bicycles are permitted. This is true where lack of signage or incomplete signage at entrances to Bay Area freeways signifies that bicycles are permitted on the freeway.

CVC Section 23300 requires the Department of Transportation to "erect appropriate signs at each entrance to a vehicular crossing to notify traffic that it is entering upon a vehicular crossing." In many places in the Bay Area, there are no signs posted in compliance with Section 23300 at toll bridge approaches to indicate that they are vehicular crossings on which bicyclists are prohibited. In such cases, it is far from clear that bicyclists should be cited for violating CVC sections 21461(a) and 23330(b).

Even when CalTrans has decided to prohibit bicycles from traveling at properly marked vehicular crossings, its’ choice to prohibit them ignores the fact that bicyclists are safer on freeways than on city streets and on other types of roadways. Most crashes involving bicyclists occur on city streets at intersections. On freeways, crashes are most likely to occur at on-and off-ramps. In only 6% of bicycle-involved crashes on freeways was the bicyclist traveling with traffic on the shoulder. Of these crashes, only three were fatal. Therefore, bicycle travel on bridges is far safer than such travel on city streets, for example. These statistics are based on 2,739 freeway crashes involving bicycles statewide over the past ten years.

Although the CHP has a duty under CVC Section 23251(a) to cooperate with CalTrans to implement its regulations to the extent that they promote efficiency of travel, it follows that the CHP has the prerogative not to cooperate with CalTrans when its policies impede that efficiency.

It is a matter of scientific fact that bicycles are more efficient than automobiles. Bicycles are the most energy-efficient land-based vehicle in existence. They are substantially more space-efficient than automobiles both on and off the road. Above all, the fact that bicycles can be operated on freeways including vehicular crossings without interfering with motor traffic indicates that bridges where bicycles are permitted, operate more efficiently than without bicycles simply because additional traffic is being accommodated at the same time.

Therefore, the CHP has the right to refuse to cite bicyclists for traveling on freeways and bridges even when CalTrans has complied with posting requirements. Moreover, it is elementary that any peace officer may exercise discretion not to cite every person observed to be in violation of a penal statute. When CalTrans has not complied with such requirements, the duty of CHP officers is to refrain from citing bicyclists.

On behalf of the Coalition, I request that you re-evaluate CHP policies with respect to enforcement of purported regulations which ban bicyclists from certain portions of freeways and from vehicular crossings. In addition, the abuses to which I alluded at the beginning of this letter need immediate correction. Perhaps you could issue directives to your officers that they must conform their conduct to the laws of this state and treat bicyclists with respect.

Yours truly,

DAVID J. BEAUVAIS

DJB:gw

cc: Commissioner D.O. Helmick, Jr.