Bicycle Violation Video Instead of Fines

Summary#

S-10723 would amend New York’s Vehicle and Traffic Law by adding a new section called the “Bicycle Traffic Safety Education Alternative act.” Its stated goal is to let some people charged with noncriminal bicycle traffic violations take an education video instead of paying a fine. The bill is at the introduced stage and is not law.

  • A person charged with a noncriminal traffic violation arising from riding a bicycle or a bicycle with electric assist could choose the video option, unless the violation involved physical injury to another person or reckless conduct.
  • The option would be unavailable to someone who had a violation dismissed under this section in the previous 12 months.
  • To have the violation dismissed and avoid the fine, the person would have to complete the video within a time set by the commissioner and have completion verified.
  • The commissioner would approve a video covering bicycle traffic laws, pedestrian safety and the consequences of unsafe cycling, and must make rules for verifying completion and dismissing violations.
  • The video could be available through the issuing officer at the time of the infraction, or later in person at a location designated by the commissioner or an authorized local authority.

What it means for you#

  • People charged with a qualifying bicycle violation: You could choose to view the approved video instead of paying a fine. The violation would be dismissed only after verified completion within the deadline set by the commissioner.
  • People whose violation involved physical injury or reckless conduct: The video alternative would not apply. The bill does not define “reckless conduct.”
  • People who used the option recently: You could not use it if a violation was dismissed under this section in the preceding 12 months.
  • Local authorities and law enforcement: The bill allows an authorized local authority to designate a place for later, in-person viewing. It does not require every local authority to do so.
  • Current law: The supplied materials do not include the existing Vehicle and Traffic Law, so it is not possible to verify current bicycle-violation fines or dismissal procedures, or how this option would interact with them.
  • If enacted, the bill would take effect 180 days after becoming law. It would authorize the commissioner to make implementation rules before then.

Money#

No cost estimate is included in the available material.

  • A person who completes the option would owe no fine for the dismissed violation; the amount of any fine otherwise payable is not supplied.
  • The bill requires rules for implementation and provides for an approved video, but gives no estimate for staff, video production, verification or other costs.

What is unclear#

  • The bill does not say who would produce or pay for the video, where it would be available, or how many viewing locations there would be.
  • The commissioner would set the completion deadline and rules, but the bill gives no specific deadline, verification method, or procedure for resolving disputes.
  • The bill does not say whether a person could appeal a decision that they did not complete the video or were not eligible.
  • “Reckless conduct” is not defined in the bill.
  • It is unclear how the new option would fit with existing fines and procedures, which could not be checked from the supplied material.

Case for#

  • The bill appears intended to give eligible riders an educational alternative to a fine while still requiring completion of a safety video.
  • A video covering bicycle laws, pedestrian safety and unsafe cycling could give riders information directly related to the conduct at issue.
  • Dismissing the violation after verified completion gives the option a clear condition, rather than waiving the fine without any required step.

Case against#

  • The bill does not set the deadline, verification method or appeal process. Those details would be left to later rules.
  • The video option would not apply to violations involving physical injury or reckless conduct, but “reckless conduct” is undefined.
  • A person who completed the option within the previous year would be excluded, even if charged with a different qualifying violation.
  • The bill does not estimate the cost of providing and verifying the video option or explain how it would affect fine revenue.