|To keep it from happening here, |
don't let it happen there
From the BC site:
From the Court's documents, they will hear arguments of the following:
- Whether municipalities may ban bicycling on local streets absent a suitable nearby alternative bicycling route.
- Whether legislation is rationally related to a legitimate governmental interest, and thus a reasonable exercise of police power, when the evidence on which the legislation is based does not address that governmental interest.
- Whether banning bicycling on the only route connecting Central City to the Peak-to-Peak Highway is a reasonable exercise of Black Hawk's police power.
Once this Supreme Court decision is made, we can see how much damage control needs to be done. If this court overturns the ordinance, that is probably good news for cyclists in other states, who can cite it as precedent if needed, at least at an appellate level. Note that in the successful Selz vs. Trotwood appeal, the appellate court referenced a case not even having to do with bicycling: Lott v. Smith (1980), 156 Ga. App. 826 275 S.E. 720. (from the Selz appellate decision "...That court held that an operator of a corn combine could not be found to have violated the statute...")
And, of course, this once again reminds us to support our local, regional, and national cycling advocacy organizations, who often end up leading the fight in these kinds of cases. We can bicker all we want, but at times, we need to circle the wagons and make sure the guns are pointing out rather than in. I like how Warren Devon would put it: