« Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Act passes without Idaho Stop | Main | Rep. Blumenauer introduces amendment to study CaBi stations on Capital Grounds »

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

is it possible to FOIA the council? would be curious about why the changes were made

Does anyone remember better if the provisions that made up the original bill were the ones that came through the working group with consensus or those that came through unanimously?

It was one or the other, I just can't recall. In any event, there were other beneficial recommendations that were developed but failed to reach the threshold for inclusion.

The AAA was part of the working group, of course, so anything they openly opposed didn't even make it that far. It was frustrating to watch them use the 2015 hearing to reopen the issues they "didn't like" after all the effort that went into crafting the bill in the first place. Obviously they continued to exert pressure to weaken or remove the agreed-upon proposed laws, and were very successful.

(Yeah, some of the additions are great in a broad sense. They arose from DC's Vision Zero planning, and will help protect everybody and everything in the District from dangerous drivers. On balance it will be good to have this bill passed, but in the interests of simple language this is no longer the "Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Amendment Act" and would be better known as "The AAA's Impediment to Safety and Alternative Transportation Act".)

I don't know, aren't legislative bodies immune to FOIA? Because it would make it too hard for them to negotiate bills?

DaveS, it was unanamity - or more like every group had a veto. Townsend would sometimes say he didn't like something but wouldn't oppose it. Or with the Idaho Stop, he first said OK, then changed his mind but said he wouldn't take back his agreement. But then it seems like he continued to fight the parts he didn't like.

It seems that on a Federal level, only executive branch can be FOIA'd. For DC, it appears the council does respond to FOIA requests (unless I am misreading this: http://dccouncil.us/pages/freedom-of-information-act)

I've never made a request before, but I may put one together to get more info.

How disappointing, I think the repeat offender provision would have made a big difference. Think about the $15m per year FedEx pays in DC tickets would have gone way up and they might have changed behavior to save money. But no, the council got cold feet even though less than of DC residents drive to work.

"But no, the council got cold feet even though less than of DC residents drive to work."

Ward 9 always has its voice...

the exemptions:

http://dccode.org/simple/sections/2-534.html

Pulling back the repeat offender increase in blocking makes no sense - why would you be scared of FedEx? They can't choose where their business is. An as Zack states it might even have changed behavior - the thing we are trying to accomplish with the law in the first place.

They're may not be scared of FedEX from an immediate business standpoint, but from a their lobbyists regarding reelection campaign contributions, perks, career opportunities after elected office, etc.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009

Categories

 Subscribe in a reader