CalBike
  • About
  • Advocacy
    • 2025 Legislative Watch
    • Restore $400M to the ATP
    • Support the Quick-Build Pilot
    • Keep Bike Highways Moving
    • Sign-On Letters
    • 2025 Bike Month
  • Resources
    • News
    • Report: Incomplete Streets
    • Bicycle Summit Virtual Sessions
    • California Bicycle Laws
    • E-Bike Resources
    • Map & Routes
    • Quick-Build Bikeway Design Guide
  • Support
    • Become a Member
    • Business Member
    • Shop
  • Bike Month
  • Search
  • Menu Menu
  • About
  • Advocacy
    • Legislative Watch
    • Invest/Divest
    • Sign-On Letters
    • Report: Incomplete Streets
    • Bike the Vote
  • Resources
    • News
    • California Bicycle Laws
    • E-Bike Resources
    • Map & Routes
    • Quick-Build Bikeway Design Guide
  • Support
    • Become a CalBike Member
    • Business Member
    • Shop

Talking Back to Bikelash

July 24, 2023/by Kevin Claxton

At CalBike, we hear it all: Bike riders get in the way of car drivers. We should get off the road. Why are we promoting dangerous behavior, like the Safety Stop? 

If only those crazy bicyclists wouldn’t…

We’re sure you hear variations of this, too, ranging from rude (uninformed comments from acquaintances) to downright scary (threats hurled from the window of a two-ton vehicle). As more people are using bikes for fun and transportation since the pandemic, particularly with the rise in popularity of e-bikes, bikelash (a backlash against the popularity of bike riding) has gotten noisier. 

We’ve been thinking about how to respond to some of the more common comments from people who are hostile to biking or simply misguided. Here are a few suggestions for talking back to bikelash. 

General principles: Bike riders and car drivers are not enemies

A while back, The War on Cars podcast had sex advice columnist Dan Savage on as a guest. In drawing parallels between the campaign for marriage equality and the movement for safe streets, Savage highlighted the importance of straight allies in winning gay marriage.

“Drivers are cyclists sometimes, and almost all cyclists are passengers sometimes. And we need to blur those lines just like we blurred the lines between queer people and straight people by convincing them that, like, we’re right there. We’re in your workplace, in your family, in your community, on your block, and maybe getting on with us is gonna be better, not just for us, but for you, too.”

Dan Savage on The War on Cars Podcast, November 15, 2022

Protected bike lanes have been shown to reduce fatalities for people in all modes of transportation, including people in cars. Everyone is a pedestrian for at least some space of time during the day, even if it’s just walking from their car to the door. We all want safe streets where we don’t have to live in fear that our children or grandparents might be struck by a car without warning. 

It’s easy to be angry at people in cars, especially if a careless or spiteful driver has menaced you (something that has happened to many of us at one time or another). But bike riders are in the minority, and our success in winning acceptance and support for the infrastructure we need to make biking safe relies on support from people who aren’t bike riders (yet). 

That sets the stage as we consider how to respond to people who complain about bike riders, on and off the road.

Responses to bike naysayers

Here are some of the more common negative things we hear about people on bikes and some responses to pivot to a more productive conversation (or at least respond constructively).

Bikes should get off the road. 

People driving cars get stuck behind lots of things, most commonly other cars in traffic jams, road construction, etc. However, driving behind a slower-moving bike seems to generate an extra level of frustration in some drivers.

How to respond:

  • To a driver who honks and yells, wave and smile! 
  • Don’t engage in a situation on the street that’s getting heated. You don’t want to be dead right.
  • When discussing with a friend after the fact, ask them to look at their clock when they get stuck behind a bike and look again when they are able to drive faster. The short duration of the slowdown may help put it in perspective. 

The War on Cars had a discussion on whether to confront drivers that offers more perspectives on this topic.

Bikes should get off the sidewalk. 

Bike riding on the sidewalk isn’t ideal, but on busy roadways with no bike lane, the sidewalk may be the only safe space where a bike can pass. Sidewalk riding can close gaps in bike networks and allow people to get to destinations that aren’t adjacent to bike facilities, like protected lanes or off-road trails free from traffic.

How to respond:

  • A common walking speed is about 3 mph. Bike riders commonly travel at around 10 mph. If the Sidewalk Riding Bill (AB 825), which CalBike supports, passes, bikes will be limited to no more than 10 mph on sidewalks and required to defer to pedestrians. The danger to pedestrians from bikes on sidewalks is much smaller than the danger to bike riders from potential collisions with speeding cars.
  • We need more protected bike lanes and bike paths and lower speed limits. Then there would be little or no need for bikes to share the sidewalk. Until then, sidewalk riding is essential to bike safety.
  • There may be a few people who ride unsafely on the sidewalk, which is understandably scary. Sidewalks are safe spaces from car traffic. Imagine having to walk along the edge of a street full of speeding motorists without the protection of a curb — that’s what we ask bike riders to do when we don’t allow sidewalk riding in areas without bike facilities.

Bikes are a menace on shared-use paths.

There will always be a minority of rude or careless people using any mode of transportation. Most of us have seen car drivers blow through red lights or stop signs, fail to stop for pedestrians in crosswalks, menace other drivers or vulnerable road users with their vehicles, and so on. That doesn’t excuse bike riders who ride too fast or too close to walkers on shared paths, but we suspect that happens way less frequently than close encounters with cars. 

How to respond:

  • Let the person know that you always ride carefully around pedestrians and that you don’t hold them personally responsible for poor path-sharing etiquette you witnessed from someone else.
  • If paths are too crowded, that community probably needs more recreational paths, including bike-only paths where people who want to ride faster can have the space to do so. In the meantime, we should all watch out for each other.

Conventional bikes are okay, but e-bikes are a menace. 

As e-bikes have become more popular, an e-bike panic has begun to circulate. Much of the anti-bike rhetoric from past years now focuses on e-bikes (while non-electric bikes are suddenly just fine). This has led to measures that will deter new riders and a broader adoption of bicycling, such as a recently introduced bill (AB 530) that would require e-bike riders to get licenses. 

How to respond:

  • E-bikes are bikes. Repeat: e-bikes are bikes. They aren’t scooters or mopeds or motorcycles. They handle pretty much just like any other bicycle but with an electric assist to supplement the rider’s energy with battery power.
  • Most e-bikes (Class 1 and 2) don’t engage faster than 20 mph. Road bikes can easily go that fast without motors, and most e-bike riders don’t operate their bikes at top speed all the time. So e-bikes aren’t significantly faster than classic bikes.
  • The average e-bike is heavier than a standard bike. Because of this, most e-bikes have beefy brakes so they can stop quickly. But an e-bike is much lighter than a moped or motorcycle. E-bikes are still bikes.
  • Bicycle safety classes are terrific. We hope they will become more available and more riders of all kinds of bikes will take them. But no safety class or e-bike license can save a bike rider’s life if they’re hit by a speeding or careless car or truck driver. The best thing to protect people on bikes from being hit is better infrastructure, such as protected bike lanes, protected intersections, and traffic calming measures to prevent speeding. Infrastructure changes take time, but they can happen much more quickly than they currently do in California. If we made a commitment and allocated the funding to back that commitment, we could have roads that reduced deaths for all users in less than a decade. Let’s work toward that future!

Bike riders are at fault in at least half of bike/car collisions. 

Accident statistics from police investigations of collisions between bikes and cars reinforce the trope of “those crazy bicyclists!”

How to respond:

  • People in cars often say, “The bike came out of nowhere” when they hit someone. That doesn’t necessarily mean the bike rider was irresponsible; it might mean the driver of a vehicle that weighs thousands of pounds wasn’t turning their head, scanning the roadway, or accounting for their blind spots.
  • Police have a “windshield perspective” because most patrol officers spend their days behind the wheel of a car. Bias toward motor vehicles and a lack of awareness of what constitutes safe cycling can skew collision reports. The determination of fault in car/bike crashes is unreliable at best and biased at worst.
  • We need better driver education to share the road safely with people walking and biking. 

Nobody bikes anyway. Why should we build bike lanes? 

A common pushback to building bike infrastructure is that bike lanes serve too few people, so bikes don’t deserve to have precious road space allocated to them.

How to respond:

  • Just as motor vehicles rarely drive on roads that aren’t built yet, people can’t ride in bike lanes that don’t exist. In cities like Amsterdam and Copenhagen, more than 50% of trips are made by bike because those cities have made biking convenient and safe.
  • Bike lanes make all road users safer. Studies have shown that, on streets with protected bike lanes, fatalities go down for people biking, walking, and traveling by car. A bike lane could save your life!
  • Nobody will be forced to stop driving, but creating infrastructure that makes it safer and more convenient to bike, walk, and take transit gives people more options, allowing those who don’t want to or can’t drive to get around more easily. That means more space on the streets for those who need or choose to drive.

People don’t want to ride bikes.

When bike advocates offer biking as one part of the solution to climate change, some people scoff at the idea that enough people would want to get around by bike to make a difference.

How to respond:

  • Many people enjoy swimming, but they probably wouldn’t be enthusiastic about swimming in shark-infested waters. Our unsafe streets are a deterrent to trying biking. There are many people who fall into the “interested but concerned” category: They don’t ride now because of safety but would try it if they felt they could ride without risk. 
  • When was the last time you were on a bike? It’s fun! Come on a ride with me!

For more on how to respond to bike naysayers, see Momentum Magazine’s bikelash tips.

How do you talk back to people who don’t see the value of biking? Share your tips with us on Twitter, Facebook, or Instagram.

https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Bikingiwthoutalane-scaled.jpg 2560 1704 Kevin Claxton https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.png Kevin Claxton2023-07-24 09:28:002023-07-22 13:39:58Talking Back to Bikelash

California Falls Behind on Complete Streets

July 18, 2023/by Jared Sanchez

In Smart Growth America’s list of The Best Complete Streets Policies for 2023, only one California city made the top 10 (Sacramento, at number 10). California was bested by cities in Maryland, Missouri, Texas, Arizona, Illinois, Florida, and Louisiana. Most of those aren’t states you think of when you think about forward-thinking active transportation policies.

Kudos to El Paso, Joplin, New Orleans, and Riverside (Missouri, not California), among others, for developing policies that help create safe spaces on the street for all transportation modes. But we have to ask: Why is California falling so far behind?

What are Complete Streets?

Complete Streets are streets where people can walk, bike, and take public transportation safely and comfortably, as well as drive a car. They include features such as protected bike lanes, bulb-outs to shorten crosswalks, signal timing that doesn’t penalize walking, narrow lanes to slow vehicular traffic, and bus-only lanes to help transit move people quickly. 

Smart Growth America outlines 10 elements Complete Streets policies need to be successful, including prioritizing underserved communities, having commitment and vision, and creating a plan for implementation. In choosing the best Complete Streets policies for 2023, it scored each jurisdiction on the 10 elements and ranked them in order of their total score.

California cities 

The report evaluated the Complete Streets policies of three California cities (Sacramento, Fresno, and San Jose) and two agencies (Caltrans and the Bay Area’s Metropolitan Transportation Commission). Sacramento scored 78 out of 100, placing it in the top 10. Fresno was close behind, with a score of 77. The MTC got 67, Caltrans 61, and San Jose just 39. Other California cities weren’t included, we assume, because they don’t have Complete Streets policies. (San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley would be included in the MTC policy). 

In 2019, CalBike supported a bill to require Caltrans to include Complete Streets elements in every repaving project, where feasible, since the cheapest time to add these improvements is during paving. The measure passed the legislature, but Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed it, citing the fact that Caltrans had its own Complete Streets policy. 

Unfortunately, Caltrans didn’t follow its stated policies around Complete Streets. Since that time, the agency has upgraded its policies and added Complete Streets elements to some projects. Still, local advocates often have to fight for every mile of bike lane and every protected intersection in projects to repave state-controlled roadways that double as local streets.

Perhaps it’s not surprising that California doesn’t have comprehensive Complete Streets policies, since so many of our communities have been built (or rebuilt) to be car-centric. But, during a July that saw the hottest day ever recorded on Earth and a heat wave baking many parts of our state, perhaps it’s time to take Complete Streets more seriously.

CalBike is working on a project to assess Caltrans’ progress in implementing its Complete Streets policies. Look for more information and a way you can help soon.

Webinar from Smart Growth America

https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/bus-bike-and-car-lanes.jpg 800 1600 Jared Sanchez https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.png Jared Sanchez2023-07-18 09:43:352023-07-18 09:43:37California Falls Behind on Complete Streets

Active Transportation Slate in Senate

July 10, 2023/by Brian Smith

For Immediate Release: 7/7/23

Contact: Jared Sanchez, policy director, (714) 262-0921, Jared@CalBike.org

CalBike’s “Active Transportation Slate” faces Senate Committee, Tues 7/11 

Sacramento – On July 11, 2023, the California Senate Transportation Committee will consider a slate of active transportation bills supported by the California Bicycle Coalition (CalBike). 

“Taken together, these five bills will improve safety and access for every person who bikes, walks, or takes public transportation in California,” explained Jared Sanchez, policy director at CalBike. “The more California supports active transportation, the closer we get to meeting our ambitious climate goals.”

Cal Bike’s Active Transportation Slate consists of these five bills:

Bicycle Safety Stop (AB 73, Boerner): The Safety Stop, already legal in several other states, allows people on bikes to treat stop signs as yields when the right of way is clear, which has proven the safest rule for clearing intersections of bicyclists, where most of the deadly accidents happen.

Daylighting to Save Lives (AB 413, Lee): This bill prohibits stopping, standing, or parking a vehicle within 20 feet of any unmarked or marked crosswalk to increase visibility and reduce potentially lethal collisions.

Climate-First Transportation Planning (AB 7, Friedman) This bill requires state transportation agencies to incorporate the principles of the Climate Action Plan for Transportation Infrastructure (CAPTI) and the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in the project selection and implementation process.

Safe Sidewalk Riding (AB 825, Bryan): Part of CalBike’s Biking Is Not a Crime slate, this measure allows bicycle riding on a sidewalk adjacent to a street that does not include a Class I, Class II, or Class IV bikeway. It protects pedestrians by requiring people on bikes to share the space responsibly and imposing a 10 mph speed limit on bikes. 

Free Transit for Youth Pilot (AB 610, Holden): The concept of giving free transit passes to young people is gaining momentum and it’s a great way to give young people low-carbon mobility, support our transit agencies, and help young people build the habit of taking transit. A similar measure passed the legislature in 2022 but was vetoed by the governor.

https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/evanbdudley-1.jpg 784 1440 Brian Smith https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.png Brian Smith2023-07-10 10:34:012023-07-10 10:34:21Active Transportation Slate in Senate

Budget Deal Restores ATP Funding

July 5, 2023/by Jared Sanchez

California’s Active Transportation Program (ATP) provides dedicated funding for biking and walking improvements across the state. CalBike championed the creation of the ATP and has continued to advocate for additional funding. We applaud the legislature and the governor for restoring planned funding to the ATP in the 2023-24 state budget. With the budget deal, the ATP will continue to operate with its historic billion dollar one-time expansion and provide critical infrastructure, as we saw in the final list of Cycle 6 projects.

ATP budget in flux

In 2022, with a historic budget surplus, we asked for $2 billion for bikes in the state budget. We didn’t get the full $2 billion, but we got $1.1 billion allocated to the ATP, more than tripling previous annual funding. But, as this year’s budget deficit began to come into focus, Governor Gavin Newsom’s initial budget clawed back $500 million from the ATP. The governor promised to find $300 million of that from other sources, but that still left the program $200 million short. 

The final budget deal restored full funding. The California Transportation Commission (CTC), which oversees the ATP and scores projects submitted for funding on a scale of 1 to 100. It  approved an additional 134 projects in June, on top of projects previously approved. As Streetsblog reported, the additional funding allowed the CTC to fund projects that scored 92 and above in Cycle 5; an extra $1 billion allowed the commission to extend funding to those with scores of 89 and above in Cycle 6. 

Funding for the ATP has increased but not enough to meet demand as California communities scramble to add safe biking and walking infrastructure to streets designed to move cars at deadly speeds. Even with extra one-time funds, many worthy projects don’t make the cut. That means bike lanes and pedestrian improvements delayed or scrapped. This is why CalBike is advocating for $10 billion for bikes, or half of California’s transportation dollars to reverse the historic deficit in building active transportation infrastructure.

How does the ATP work?

If you’re wondering what Cycle 5 and Cycle 6 mean, the explanation requires a deep dive into planning timelines. Let’s start with a history of the ATP.

Created by the state legislature in 2013 to consolidate the efforts of several disparate funding sources, the ATP serves as a central hub for bike and pedestrian projects. The State Senate bill that created the ATP specifically calls for the program to “increase the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and walking” and “increase safety and mobility for nonmotorized users.”Since its inception, the ATP has funded over 800 active transportation projects across the state, benefiting both urban and rural areas. Half of the funded projects have been Safe Routes to Schools.

SB 1 (Beall, 2017), also known as the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, significantly augmented ATP’s funding, directing an extra $100 million a year to the ATP and doubling its funding.

Although the funding comes in annually, the CTC accepts applications for another cycle of ATP grants every two years. Cycle 5 was in 2021 and Cycle 6 was this year. Just to make the math more confusing, the grants are distributed over five years, since it can take time to complete the projects.

In 2021, the ATP approved grants for 49 projects in Cycle 5, barely 10% of the applications received. Funded projects included:

  • $30 million for Connecting Canoga Park – beautifully detailed with maps and renderings here.
  • $10 million for Safe Routes to School in Koreatown, Los Angeles – with extensive detail on crosswalk and safety features here.
  • $1440 for the Pollock Pines Pony Express Trail Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements – outlined here.

$10 billion for bikes

The one-time boost in ATP funding allowed CTC to greenlight three times as many projects in Cycle 6 as in Cycle 5 (15 Bay Area projects, plus rural grants, and the 134 projects approved in June, for a total of more than 150). That still left many excellent biking and walking infrastructure projects without state funding. 

The ATP isn’t the only funding source for active transportation infrastructure. Local and regional monies pay for projects as well. And there are billions more in the state transportation budget that should shift. With the threat of climate crisis looming ever larger, we need to create space for low- and no-carbon transportation fast, and that requires much more support at the state level. 

CalBike is asking our elected officials to spend less on building climate-killing freeways and more on Complete Streets and people-centered transportation infrastructure. Look for our new Complete Streets Campaign, coming later this year. And, of course, we’ll continue to push for $10 billion for bikes.

https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/CalBike-Insider-Image4.png 720 1280 Jared Sanchez https://www.calbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/calbike-logo.png Jared Sanchez2023-07-05 17:38:262023-07-05 17:47:39Budget Deal Restores ATP Funding

Latest News

  • California State Capitol
    California’s Transportation Spending Has the Wrong PrioritiesMay 14, 2025 - 2:26 pm
  • CalBike Webinar: Improving our Communities with Slow StreetsMay 13, 2025 - 12:12 pm
  • e-bike
    E-Bike Purchase Incentives FAQsMay 9, 2025 - 3:12 pm
Follow a manual added link

Get Email Updates

Follow a manual added link

Join Calbike

  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to X
  • Link to LinkedIn
  • Link to Mail
  • Link to Instagram

About Us

Board
Careers
Contact Us
Financials & Governance
Local Partners
Privacy Policy
Staff
State & National Allies
Volunteer

Advocacy

California Bicycle Summit
E-Bike
Legislative Watch
Past and Present Projects
Report: Incomplete Streets
Sign On Letters

Resources

Maps & Routes
Crash Help and Legal Resources
Quick-Build Bikeway Design Guide
Report: Complete Streets
All Resources

Support

Ways to give
Become a Member
Donor Advised Funds
Donate a Car
Business Member

News

Blog
CalBike in the News
Press Releases

© California Bicycle Coalition 2025

1017 L Street #288
Sacramento, CA 95814
© California Bicycle Coalition 2025

Scroll to top