Sec. 551.101. RIGHTS AND DUTIES.
(a) A person operating a bicycle has the rights and duties applicable to a driver operating a vehicle under this subtitle, unless:
(1) a provision of this chapter alters a right or duty; or
(2) a right or duty applicable to a driver operating a vehicle cannot by its nature apply to a person operating a bicycle.
REED’s COMMENT: Cyclists have the duty to obey all traffic control devices. Consider right turn only lanes as an example: A cyclist may not operate in such lanes if they intend to proceed straight through the intersection.
Sec. 551.103. OPERATION ON ROADWAY.
(a) Except as provided by Subsection (b), a person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, unless:
(1) the person is passing another vehicle moving in the same direction;
(2) the person is preparing to turn left at an intersection or onto a private road or driveway;
(3) a condition on or of the roadway, including a fixed or moving object, parked or moving vehicle, pedestrian, animal, or surface hazard prevents the person from safely riding next to the right curb or edge of the roadway; or
(4) the person is operating a bicycle in an outside lane that is:
(A) less than 14 feet in width and does not have a designated bicycle lane adjacent to that lane; or
(B) too narrow for a bicycle and a motor vehicle to safely travel side by side.
(b) A person operating a bicycle on a one-way roadway with two or more marked traffic lanes may ride as near as practicable to the left curb or edge of the roadway.
REED’s COMMENT: This law regulates where on the public roadway a bicycle may operate laterally (near the edge) when in the presence of faster traffic. If an exception to this law is present, then the restriction of having to drive near the edge of the roadway is removed EVEN IF THERE IS FASTER TRAFFIC PRESENT. Therefore, if a cyclist impedes faster traffic under such circumstances, it is lawful impedance, just as impeding traffic while waiting for oncoming traffic to clear when preparing to make a
left turn is lawful.
Surely our legislators were not ignorant of the normal speed of bicycles when this law was amended in 1995. This law clearly expresses a legislative intent to make bicycle use on the public roadway lawful, even in the presence of faster traffic.
Sec. 545.051. DRIVING ON RIGHT SIDE OF ROADWAY.
(b) An operator of a vehicle on a roadway moving more slowly than the normal speed of other vehicles at the time and place under the existing conditions shall drive in the right-hand lane available for vehicles, or as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, unless the operator is:
(1) passing another vehicle; or
(2) preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.
REED’s COMMENT: Toby Mash said in open court that if you cause any other vehicle to either slow or change lanes to avoid you, that puts you in violation Sec. 545.363. The above law is regulating where a slow vehicle must operate on a highway: In the right travel lane. This is in is in direct conflict with Mr. Mash’s interpretation. This statute indicates that slow vehicles are not prohibited, but instead anticipated, expected and allowed to operate on the public roadway by our lawmakers. Slow vehicles do not have the expectation in the law that they must abandon the public roadway if faster traffic comes along.
Sec. 545.054. PASSING TO THE LEFT: SAFE DISTANCE.
(a) An operator may not drive on the left side of the center of the roadway in passing another vehicle unless:
(1) driving on the left side of the center of the roadway is authorized by this subtitle; and
(2) the left side is clearly visible and free of approaching traffic for a distance sufficient to permit passing without interfering with the operation of the passed vehicle or a vehicle approaching from the opposite direction.
(b) An operator passing another vehicle shall return to an authorized lane of travel:
(1) before coming within 200 feet of an approaching vehicle, if a lane authorized for vehicles approaching from the opposite direction is used in passing; or otherwise as soon as practicable.
Sec. 545.060. DRIVING ON ROADWAY LANED FOR TRAFFIC.
(a) An operator on a roadway divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic:
(1) shall drive as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane; and
(2) may not move from the lane unless that movement can be made safely.
REED’s COMMENT: Laws regulating passing movements have no purpose if all forms of traffic are expected to travel at uniform speeds. Likewise, why would we need highways with more than one lane in each direction if that were so?
Sec. 545.351. MAXIMUM SPEED REQUIREMENT.
(a) An operator may not drive at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the circumstances then existing.
(b) An operator:
(1) may not drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard for actual and potential hazards then existing; and
(2) shall control the speed of the vehicle as necessary to avoid colliding with another person or vehicle that is on or entering the highway in compliance with law and the duty of each person to use due care.
(c) An operator shall, consistent with Subsections (a) and (b), drive at an appropriate reduced speed if:
(1) the operator is approaching and crossing an intersection or railroad grade crossing;
(2) the operator is approaching and going around a curve;
(3) the operator is approaching a hill crest;
(4) the operator is traveling on a narrow or winding roadway; and
(5) a special hazard exists with regard to traffic, including pedestrians, or weather or highway conditions.
REED’s COMMENT: This statute also indicates that slow vehicles are not prohibited from using the public roadway, but instead anticipated, and expected. This law is an explicit provision for the safe operation of traffic around slow vehicles. If you crash into a vehicle in front of you that is proceeding in your lane at a slower speed than you are, but traveling as fast as that vehicle reasonably can, are both operators adjudicated as being at fault?
Sec. 545.361. SPECIAL SPEED LIMITATIONS.
(b) An operator of a vehicle equipped with solid rubber or cushion tires may not drive at a speed of more than 10 miles per hour.
(d) An operator of self-propelled machinery designed or adapted for applying plant food materials or agricultural chemicals and not designed or adapted for the sole purpose of transporting the materials or chemicals may not drive at a speed of more than 30 miles per hour unless the machinery is registered under Chapter 502.
REED’s COMMENT: How can you argue that our lawmakers do not intend slow vehicles to operate on the public roadway when some vehicles are mandated to go slower than typical city speed limits.
Sec. 541.201. (2) ”Bicycle” means a device that a person may ride and that is propelled by human power and has two tandem wheels at least one of which is more than 14 inches in diameter.
Sec. 541.201. (23) ”Vehicle” means a device that can be used to transport or draw persons or property on a highway.
Sec. 541.302. (11) ”Roadway” means the portion of a highway, other than the berm or shoulder, that is improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel.
Sec. 541.302. (15) ”Shoulder” means the portion of a highway that is:
(A) adjacent to the roadway;
(B) designed or ordinarily used for parking;
(C) distinguished from the roadway by different design, construction, or marking; and
(D) not intended for normal vehicular travel.
Sec. 541.301. TRAFFIC. In this subtitle “traffic” means pedestrians, ridden or herded animals, and conveyances, including vehicles and streetcars, singly or together while using a highway for the purposes of travel.
Sec. 545.363. MINIMUM SPEED REGULATIONS.
(a) An operator may not drive so slowly as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.
(b) When the Texas Transportation Commission, the Texas Turnpike Authority, the commissioners court of a county, or the governing body of a municipality, within the jurisdiction of each, as applicable, as specified in Sections 545.353 to 545.357, determines from the results of an engineering and traffic investigation that slow speeds on a part of a highway consistently impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, the commission, authority, county commissioners court, or governing body may determine and declare a minimum speed limit on the highway.
(c) If appropriate signs are erected giving notice of a minimum speed limit adopted under this section, an operator may not drive a vehicle more slowly than that limit except as necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.
REED’s COMMENT: Because legislators clearly intend bicycles to operate on the roadway in the presence of faster traffic, and they have made provisions for slow vehicles in anticipation of that, a bicycle in the travel lane is operating lawfully. Any impedance caused by such normal, legal and reasonable behavior is therefore a lawful impedance. Just as automobiles often impede traffic behind them when slowing to turn into a driveway, it is a legal impedance because turning off the roadway at a higher speed would be unsafe. They could not go faster.
The definition of traffic includes many modes of travel that cannot reasonably be expected to keep up with automobiles. Neither pedestrians, animals, nor bicycles are likely to travel near the typical speed limits found in the City of Ennis, or any other town in Texas.
In order to be consistent with laws that regulate passing, penalties for hitting slower traffic, mandates for particular vehicles to travel slowly, the explicit permission of bicycles to operate on the roadway with faster traffic, and the very definition of traffic itself, Sec. 545.363 should not be interpreted in such a way that will exclude from the roadway a slower mechanism of travel, unless a minimum speed limit is posted.
Sec. 545.363 can be understood in a harmonious way with all the other laws exhibited on this page. The law simply requires slow traffic that is impeding others to travel faster, if they can do so. If they cannot reasonably be expected to be able keep up, they are legally impeding other traffic. (What other meaning could “except when reduced speed is … in compliance with law” mean?)
It’s not unreasonable, or even uncommon, for a vehicle’s driver to reduce speed in consideration of another vehicle until such time that the slow vehicle can be passed in a safe manner. Nor can changing lanes be seriously considered either a unreasonable or uncommon movement of traffic. Whether or not someone causes such movements to be performed by other operators is not the proper compliance test for Sec.545.363. If it were, could any of us avoid being in violation of it whenever we drive in traffic?
No, the proper test is whether or not the slow vehicle is capable of traveling at a higher speed in the current conditions, consistent with safe operation and in compliance with law. If the slow vehicle cannot go faster, he cannot be faulted for impeding faster traffic. This is the only way to harmonize Sec.545.363 with the clear legislative intent as expressed in Sec. 551.101, Sec. 551.103, Sec. 545.051, Sec. 545.054, Sec. 545.351, Sec. 545.361 and Sec. 541.301.
In the case where no minimum speed limit is in place, agents of the State should not prefer one form of transportation over another. Imposing on citizens ad-hoc and un-codified minimum speed limits by local law enforcement violates established conventions and the due process of law.
The lawful method of imposing a minimum speed limit on any public highway is specified in Sec.545.363 (b). This method allows for public input, consensus among interested factions and accountability by elected officials. Only after that process is completed, and the erection of signs along the highway that alert travelers of the minimum speed limits, can they be enforced.
While considering the laws, it’s important to avoid confusion because of the strawman “safety” argument so often repeated by police officers. (Officers who are unfamiliar with the “best practices” for operating a bicycle in traffic.) There is only one truly relevant issue: Whether or not Mr. Bates’ actions are lawful.
If there is a statute requiring safe behavior, then an officer should cite people for it. However, Mr. Bates was not cited for a “safety violation,” and cannot be found responsible for such. Due process does not entitle agents of the State to impose their own standards of perceived safety, but rather requires enforcement of a well defined and agreed-upon code of rules.
Occupation of the center of a lane is “cyclist body language,” alerting faster traffic to his presence from the greatest distance (thus reducing any disruption of traffic flow) and discouraging motorists from passing unsafely. The cyclist’s particular lateral lane position is not inherently unsafe. Any degree to which the cyclist is in danger by riding away from the edge of the roadway isn’t caused by the cyclist himself, but by an impatient or incompetent automobile operator. As a mechanism for enhancing the cyclist’s safety, agents of the State should enforce established and vetted-for rules such as Sec.545.060 (a)(1), Sec. 545.062 and Sec.545.053 (a)(1) and (2).
Sec. 545.058. DRIVING ON IMPROVED SHOULDER.
(a) An operator may drive on an improved shoulder to the right of the main traveled portion of a roadway if that operation is necessary and may be done safely, but only:
(1) to stop, stand, or park;
(2) to accelerate before entering the main traveled lane of traffic;
(3) to decelerate before making a right turn;
(4) to pass another vehicle that is slowing or stopped on the main traveled portion of the highway, disabled, or preparing to make a left turn;
(5) to allow another vehicle traveling faster to pass;
(6) as permitted or required by an official traffic-control device; or
(7) to avoid a collision.
(b) An operator may drive on an improved shoulder to the left of the main traveled portion of a divided or limited-access or controlled-access highway if that operation may be done safely, but only:
(1) to slow or stop when the vehicle is disabled and traffic or other circumstances prohibit the safe movement of the vehicle to the shoulder to the right of the main traveled portion of the roadway;
(2) as permitted or required by an official traffic-control device; or
(3) to avoid a collision.
(c) A limitation in this section on driving on an improved shoulder does not apply to:
(1) an authorized emergency vehicle responding to a call;
(2) a police patrol; or
(3) a bicycle.
REED’s COMMENT: By selecting the word “may” instead of shall or will, the legislative intent for this law is to make driving on the shoulder optional. Therefore, how can a decision to decline to drive on it be unlawful? Doesn’t opting for “not driving on the shoulder” imply that driving on the public roadway is permitted?
By definition, the shoulder is not designed to be traveled on by vehicles. I prefer to drive on the portion of the roadway that is designed and maintained for regular vehicle travel. No second-rate leftovers for me!
