Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Neo

Bike registration every two years in Oregon?

Would you support a bicycle registration fee?   14 members have voted

  1. 1. Choose yes if you support it, no if you don't.

    • Yes
      4
    • No
      10

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

17 posts in this topic

There is a proposed bill in Oregon that would require a $54 registration fee for having a bike and riding it on streets and bike paths. Obviously this is a way to get money back from those who either switched to bicycle commutes or reduced the days they drive by riding a bike.

Do you agree or disagree with a registration fee for using a bike in this manner? Currently we're all getting a free ride and using public roads and paths to ride our bikes. Obviously bikes don't do damage to roads like cars/trucks do and I would imagine they don't do any damage in the grand scheme of things.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/09reg/measures/...3008.intro.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I would only support something like this if the person does NOT own a vehicle. Even then its a bit of a stretch. What do the Netherlands do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would only support something like this if the person does NOT own a vehicle. Even then its a bit of a stretch. What do the Netherlands do?

I'm not sure what the requirements are in the Netherlands, but I agree with you that if you are already paying for the roads (i.e. you have a vehicle) then you shouldn't be required to pay a fee to ride your bicycle on public roads and pathways. Of course, you must pay for each vehicle you have so I'm not sure that they would see a bicycle or multiple bicycles any differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as the funds are increasing bike paths and cyclist safety on public roads, I don't see an issue with it..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most ridiculous thing I've heard of. it is a blatant money grab by the politicos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most ridiculous thing I've heard of. it is a blatant money grab by the politicos.

I agree, this is absolutely ridiculous. What's next, forcing people to buy a permit to walk on city sidewalks? We should be encouraging people to ride bikes, not finding stupid ways to keep them from cycling.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's a means of upgrading technology to recover stolen bikes, then I agree with it. But $54 seems ridiculous. I think I paid $5 for my registration in Ann Arbor, and it's still valid for the past few years. My friend's bikes have been recovered by the police when they were stolen because they were registered. But even if they were to use the money to build more bike paths, it still doesn't make sense when the gas tax is already paying for this. I think in many cities, registration is mandatory, but never enforced. It's there for the previous reason I mentioned as well as assessing demand for bike lanes, bike parking and storage, or mounting units on buses. Almost all of these amenities are funded through other means....not the registration itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For a damn bicycle? Who in their right minds would want that. Thats propostorous

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


Bicycles don't cause the wear and tear to infrastructure that cars and trucks do (in the 20 years that I have been commuting, my bike has never created a pothole), so there is no need for an extra tax on them. The small amount of gas tax that we pay in the US goes toward road maintenance projects, but that tax certainly doesn't completely pay for the road system that we all use. We pay for roads and bridges through income and property tax as well. So even if you ignore the fact that most commuting cyclists also own a car, it can still be argued that they pay more than their fair share of the roads they use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's next, forcing people to buy a permit to walk on city sidewalks?

Shhhh! Don't give them any ideas.....

I could support an upfront fee, like a license, but let's be reasonable, maybe $10-$20.00 - one time for each new bicycle at point of sale. It's cheaper for me to register my old car in California! Not sure what auto-reg is like in Oregon, but a fee that high would not seem to work in favor of convincing people to ride. Some would happily pay it, but for others in a cash-strapped economy, it could be a lot of bucks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a very bad idea. creating a disincentive and a financial hurdle for folks that adopt a healthy and low impact mode of transportation. implicitly, it encourages more sloth and resource consumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many years ago, Greensboro, North Carolina required bicycle registration. As kids we would register our bicycles at school and bring home stickers to place on our bikes. The registration helped in the recovery of stolen bicycles as most are abandoned when the theif gets to his or her destination. Sadly, the city stopped requiring registrations and most stolen bicycles are no longer recovered.

I would support bicycle registration but $54.oo seems a bit over the top.

But to imply that a $54 fee "encourages more sloth and resource consumption" is, in my opinion, mistaken as even a $54 fee is far less than the cost of owning an automobile.

Keep the registration-- drop the fee. A lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The price seems a bit expensive, but I know licensing and registration is just around the corner. People will happily pay it if they can have confidence there will be oversight of the funds and they'll see immediate returns.

The cost of bicycle infrastructure has become incredibly costly in Illinois. As an everyday bicycle commuter (even winter) The new cycle tracks have become important to me in Chicago. The city is about to build a 3000' bicycle "express" flyover bridge that is intended to eliminate street level intersections and alleviate bicycle traffic jams and pedestrian conflicts. Since the project was critical to life safety, it got pushed through with flying colors. Now the next project....$100 million. It's only a matter of time before local bicycle projects in big cities hit the billion dollar mark and someone is going to point it out.

Maybe fees in every state would feasibly be able to construct bicycle interstates. Here in the midwest, Michigan has a very extensive system. I've also been able to bike on a continuous trail all the way from Chicago to Milwaukee.

Edited by wolverine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with it at all. Why should you pay to register your bike? CSU Chico made you do it for $10/yr, citing the tracking of stolen bicycles. I declined, since I had bought mine there for $7 lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


I don't support this at all.

1. It's too expensive.

2. It's not enforceable. The responsible citizens who pay up would be far outnumbered by the people who never would. I would venture to say that most bikes on the road aren't even worth $54 and would therefore be discarded before the user would pay. Those of us who cherish out bikes would carry the burden of an even larger black market of bikes.

3. It's disproportionate to the ownership cost of a bike vs. car. It's also disproportionate to the road wear of a bike vs. car.

4. Much of the bicycle infrastructure going up around the country is in the form of Multi-Use paths (greenways). Are we going to tax the joggers and dog walkers too?

5. Are we going to tell little Johnny "sorry buddy, your parents are too poor to let you ride your bike"?

6. Are we going to nit-pick the use of all public taxes? I don't have kids. Therefore, I shouldn't have to pay for public schools. I'm not handicapped. I guess those people in wheelchairs should have to pay for all of the ADA ramps.

7. Bicycling is a public health interest.

It's ludicrous.

If there is a desperate need for such a tax, I would say the only fair way to do it is a one time, point of sale tax, on a new bike. That will really encourage people to get off the couch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't support this at all.

1. It's too expensive.

2. It's not enforceable. The responsible citizens who pay up would be far outnumbered by the people who never would. I would venture to say that most bikes on the road aren't even worth $54 and would therefore be discarded before the user would pay. Those of us who cherish out bikes would carry the burden of an even larger black market of bikes.

3. It's disproportionate to the ownership cost of a bike vs. car. It's also disproportionate to the road wear of a bike vs. car.

4. Much of the bicycle infrastructure going up around the country is in the form of Multi-Use paths (greenways). Are we going to tax the joggers and dog walkers too?

5. Are we going to tell little Johnny "sorry buddy, your parents are too poor to let you ride your bike"?

6. Are we going to nit-pick the use of all public taxes? I don't have kids. Therefore, I shouldn't have to pay for public schools. I'm not handicapped. I guess those people in wheelchairs should have to pay for all of the ADA ramps.

7. Bicycling is a public health interest.

It's ludicrous.

If there is a desperate need for such a tax, I would say the only fair way to do it is a one time, point of sale tax, on a new bike. That will really encourage people to get off the couch.

 

While I'll completely agree, I'm just worried where bicycle infrastructure is becoming extremely costly.  Especially here in Chicago where cycle tracks costs hundreds of thousands of dollars to build just to go a dozen or so blocks.  Or grade separated "bicycle expressways".....our first which will clock in at $45 million per mile.  That's like the cost of building a streetcar system.  

 

Since I bicycle every day of my life, I try not to take for granted all that the city has given us.  I do not own a car, so I do not pay for the roads I ride on, just the services that run beneath them.  We're at the point where 'greenways' and standard bike lanes aren't good enough for us......that the rest of the country is just starting to build.  When cyclists demand cycle tracks, flyover ramps, robotic parking facilities and grade separated express routes with entrance and exit ramps all  at taxpayer expense you can see why some people's call for bicyclists to pay their share isn't unfounded.  Especially when some streets in Chicago get nearly 1/5 share of ridership from bicycles.  What happens when that reaches 51%?  This isn't a silly question in large urban places where investment in bicycle infrastructure could reach well over $1 Billion in public funding.  I welcome it, but I'm waiting for the day when I'll be asked to pay.  And keep in mind, the federal government pays you to ride your bicycle to work.  With lionshare funding coming from the feds, it's only a matter of time before they stop writing $250 annual checks and instead hand that money over to city hall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.