Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by globalguy on October 27, 2011 at 8:51am

Ethan, thanks for the "correction" to your ExecDir and related info on this! Over at Streetsblog there's this (from 2008):

Here's the facts.  The California Vehicle Code allows municipalities to take part in a bike licensing program by either creating a voluntary program for cyclists or requiring every bike to have a registration picture as seen above.  Locally, at least the City of Los Angeles, Santa Monica and Long Beach all take place in the program by requiring bikes to be licensed.  If you're not sure whether your municipality requires licenses, call the municipal building and ask.

As for the rest of you who have been stating that the impracticalities alone will prevent licensing, Streetsblog also mentions that (again back in 2008), bikers were experiencing an uptick in tickets for unlicensed bikes. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mike Zumwalt on October 27, 2011 at 8:56am

And it would take a loooong time for bikes to put wear and tear on roads as opposed to cars and trucks.

Dan Korn said:

notoriousDUG said:

Or it could be argued that bikes should contribute something towards the infrastructure that they use...

 

It's not an illogical point.

 

It would seem logical, but for the fact that cyclists already pay taxes which subsidize the infrastructure they use, namely streets.  Placing restrictions and use fees on cyclists is an excellent way to discourage cycling and put more cars on those streets, increasing the costs of maintenance.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Active Transportation Alliance on October 27, 2011 at 8:57am

You are welcome, of course Garth, thanks for the good info! Can you please post the link to the Streetsblog post? We'd appreciate it.

 

Thanks,

Ethan, Active Trans

 

da' Square Wheelman (aka garth) said:

Ethan, thanks for the "correction" to your ExecDir and related info on this! Over at Streetsblog there's this (from 2008):

Here's the facts.  The California Vehicle Code allows municipalities to take part in a bike licensing program by either creating a voluntary program for cyclists or requiring every bike to have a registration picture as seen above.  Locally, at least the City of Los Angeles, Santa Monica and Long Beach all take place in the program by requiring bikes to be licensed.  If you're not sure whether your municipality requires licenses, call the municipal building and ask.

As for the rest of you who have been stating that the impracticalities alone will prevent licensing, Streetsblog also mentions that (again back in 2008), bikers were experiencing an uptick in tickets for unlicensed bikes. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thunder Snow on October 27, 2011 at 9:13am

Mike, you're assuming that governmental licensing is about anything other than revenue collection.  My dog needs to be licensed, though its paws do no harm to the sidewalk. A home based web design business still needs a business license to operate, though there is zero infrastructure damage caused by it.  Bicycle licensing would just be about closing budget gaps. 

Mike Zumwalt said:

And it would take a loooong time for bikes to put wear and tear on roads as opposed to cars and trucks.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Fran Kondorf on October 27, 2011 at 10:45am

Truth.

 -f

Christopher Warland said:

Hmm, reduced congestion, less pollution, reduced wear and tear on infrastructure, lower public health and insurance costs...seems as if cyclists should be subsidized, not taxed. 

   

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Justin B Newman on October 27, 2011 at 10:47am

They even offer online registration!

Thunder Snow said:

All bikes in Chicago are, by law, ALREADY registered/licensed with the authorities:

"9-120-020- Registration - Permalink

It is hereby made the duty of the owner of every bicycle, before operating or permitting the operation of the same upon any public way within the city, to register said vehicle with the commissioner of police on a form provided for such purpose. Registration may be accomplished by filing the registration record or form, duly filled out, in the office of the commander of the police district in which the bicycle owner resides, or by mailing said form, duly filled out, postage prepaid, to the commissioner of police.

Prior Registration code § 29.1-2; Amend Coun. J. 7-12-90, p. 18634"

We have a similar statute in my town of Evanston, and I'd bet many other towns in the area have the same laws.  I even paid a fifty cent per bike license fee to Evanston, which seems like a reasonable cost.

Since most bikes in the area are ALREADY LICENSED by the local authorities, Alderman Mell, you can STFU.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by David P. on October 27, 2011 at 12:51pm

Ethan,

 

A few years or so ago Detroit attempted to reintroduce a licensing or registration scheme. It may formally still exist, but if so it is more theoretical than anything else. My memory is a little fuzzy, as this was a few years ago when I still lived there. If it's something you want to look into, Todd Scott is probably the first person that comes to mind that would know where that initiative went.

 

David

Active Transportation Alliance said:

 

 

Also, in response to Garth, we aren't aware of any current bike licensing going on in major U.S. cities.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bernard Joseph Hannigan on October 27, 2011 at 1:16pm

“I wonder if it’s possible. I guess you can’t do it. But, have ’em licensed. Have a bike license. Put a little tag on it. Pay a couple bucks. But if not that, at least say, ‘Here’s what we’re doing for you. How ’bout doing something for us? How ’bout adhering to the traffic signs?’” Mell said.

 

Mell...What a myopic moron...Do something for you Mell?...You have sucked off the taxpayers teat your whole life...How could his ward keep re-electing this jag?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by alvin mitchell on October 27, 2011 at 6:41pm

Thats stupid um not paying jack to ride my bike its haRMLESS

da' Square Wheelman (aka garth) said:

Ethan, thanks for the "correction" to your ExecDir and related info on this! Over at Streetsblog there's this (from 2008):

Here's the facts.  The California Vehicle Code allows municipalities to take part in a bike licensing program by either creating a voluntary program for cyclists or requiring every bike to have a registration picture as seen above.  Locally, at least the City of Los Angeles, Santa Monica and Long Beach all take place in the program by requiring bikes to be licensed.  If you're not sure whether your municipality requires licenses, call the municipal building and ask.

As for the rest of you who have been stating that the impracticalities alone will prevent licensing, Streetsblog also mentions that (again back in 2008), bikers were experiencing an uptick in tickets for unlicensed bikes. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by globalguy on October 28, 2011 at 4:05am

Active Transportation Alliance said:

You are welcome, of course Garth, thanks for the good info! Can you please post the link to the Streetsblog post? We'd appreciate it.

Here you go Ethan - Streetsblog!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael J Blane on October 28, 2011 at 5:29am

I understand the need for the city to increase revenue.

I also understand the impracticality of licensing bikes and enforcing that licensing.

What about a "bike tax" on new bikes either flat fee or something like 1% of the retail price? It wouldn't be popular but would be equitable and not a nagging fee.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Michael J Blane on October 28, 2011 at 7:17am

Yes, in addition to the already exorbitant sales taxes that we pay in Chicago.

 

(thanks for defining it, I could have been more clear as to what I meant)

M.A.R.K. said:

I think he meant on top of sales tax, like they now do for bottled water.

h' said:

There's no tax on new bikes?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page