CONCORD, N.H. (BRAIN) After a state lawmaker was inundated with comments against his legislation that would create a $50 bicycle user fee, he said he expects to amend or drop the bill, which he conceded has little chance of passage as written.
Republican Rep. Thomas Walsh of Hooksett said he still stands by his intent for the bill, which was to ask bicycle riders to pay a share of the states costs for bicycle infrastructure. But he said the $50 figure was a placeholder and said he never intended the user fee to apply to children.
Walsh spoke at a House Transportation Committee public hearing Tuesday in Concord.
I will start off by saying that if you're all expecting me to jump up and down and defend the way this bill as it is currently written, I'm sorry to disappoint all of you. But because of all the social media explosion, I see its necessary to introduce this bill basically in the form of a statement, Walsh said, adding that he considered the bill a first draft.
The bill was simply proposing a reasonable user fee for those that choose to use this new bicycle infrastructure that we are creating when there's state money involved, very similar to the way we deal with OHRVs and snowmobiles. For example, if you want to use the trail, you pay a registration fee. You put a decal on your vehicle and off you go. That's it. That's as simple as it was supposed to be just to help pay for the infrastructure that we're creating and it's a pretty costly one and it's expanding quite a bit, he said.
A fiscal note attached to Walsh's bill does not estimate potential revenue. It does estimate that it would cost the state Department of Safety between $225,000 and $500,000 to manage the fee collection, plus additional costs for the Department of Transportation, which would receive the funds to put toward infrastructure projects. The bill calls for a $100 fine for anyone riding on public ways without paying the fee.
Many municipalities around the country have bike registration fees. Hawaii is the only state with a statewide registration fee (a one-time $15 fee for bikes, $30 for e-bikes). Oregon also has a $15 excise tax on new bike sales, and the city of Colorado Springs, Colorado, charges a $4 tax on new bike sales. There appear to be no states or locales with bicycle user fees for use of public roads and paths.
New Hampshire, which does not have a general statewide sales tax or income tax, instead relying heavily on various user fees and property taxes to pay for state government. The state collects fees for use of boats on lakes and rivers, snowmobiles and powered vehicles on designated offroad trails, and of course cars and trucks on public roads. Walshs bill as introduced would require the fee to be paid for bicycle use on any public roads or public off-road paths.
Prior to the hearing, the public submitted more than 14,000 online comments about the bill, with 42 in support of the bill and the rest opposed.
PeopleForBikes sent action alerts to 160 retailers in New Hampshire to urge them to oppose the legislation, said the organizations director of communications, Ryan Birkicht.
After Walsh spoke, he was followed by over two hours of testimony by about 30 members of the public, lawmakers and officials, most in opposition to the bill.
Timothy Horrigan, a Democratic state representative from Strafford County, said he thought the bill would win the prize for the most unpopular bill to be introduced.
I think there's no support whatsoever for this proposal and even the sponsor backed off from it, he said. I personally I have zero interest in compromising on somehow finding a way to have user fees for bicyclists and pedestrians to pay for the pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure are we going to start having to have stickers on our walking shoes to use the rail trails? Like where does this end?
Others pointed out that a user fee would discourage cycling by residents and out of staters, which would contribute to a decline in public health and tourism revenue, among other problems.
The fee also would discourage bicycle use by low-income residents who rely on bikes for transportation and low-cost recreation, noted some.
Ultimately, a bicycle is our first taste of freedom. We live in the 'Live Free or Die' state and it's a freedom we should all be able to afford, one member of the public testified (BRAIN was unable to confirm the spelling of this persons name).
Not all the testimony was opposed to the bill. Concord-area farmer Don Ross has several hundred acres of his land in conservation easements that allow public access by foot but not bicycle or horses. He said mountain bikers regularly ride across his property and cause crop damage and he would like to see the legislation create resources for authorities to enforce the ban on bikes, including some kind of registration that allowed riders to be identified. He noted that parts of his property appear on Strava maps of mountain bike routes.
We have no way of identifying those people; they wont give us their names. There's no registration sticker on their helmet, on their bike or anything for me to just snap a picture of without confrontation. It puts the burden on the landowner and that is unfair. how do we protect the private land owners that are providing trails for the public? We need your help. It has been ongoing for years and years, he testified.
The bill is due out of committee on Feb. 12 and Walsh conceded its unlikely to be amended in time to pass, meaning it would die for this legislative session.
