The car in question looks like this. The license plate is 6EGY041

Streetsblog received the following email from LAPD Sgt. David Krumer:

The victim of a hit and run (car vs bicycle) on December 13, 2011 (case #110 718 955) as riding southbound on Curson crossing Pico with a fully green light. He was hit by a car traveling westbound on Pico at 40 to 50 miles an hour. He was thrown across the intersection and suffered broken bones in the hand and wrist as well as a fractured tibia and a torn PCL in the knee. The driver never braked or turned away. The injuries sustained are life changing and have confined the victim to a wheelchair for at least a few more months.

SUSPECT VEHICLE: 2007 Mercedes CL 550, 2Dr, CP
LICENSE PLATE: 6EGY041
SUSPECT: Male Black, Short Black Hair, late 20′s

Anyone having information about the driver of suspect vehicle, or was a witness to the accident is asked to contact the Los Angeles Police Department West Traffic Division, Investigator Fischer at:
4849 W. Venice Blvd. LA 90019, Phone number (213) 473-0229 or
West Traffic Division Watch Commander, Phone No. (213) 473-0222

You’re probably wondering how the LAPD can have the license plate and not have the owner already in custody. Streetsblog has been assured that there are a lot of possible reasons, but that revealing which one could hamper the investigation.

Devin Petelski

Petelski’s death enraged communities in Venice, where she lived and worked, and Brentwood, where she grew up.  Residents marched on the Venice District Headquarters and distributed news and rumors via social media.  The LAPD has consistently caused the crash an “accident” and Elridge has faced no public discipline despite a $5 million settlement reached between the LAPD and Petelski’s family.

Why such a large settlement if Eldridge did nothing worthy of even a disciplinary action by the LAPD, then why the large settlement?  Times writer Joel Rubin, who sounds painfully even handed in his review of the case, gives two reasons.

1) Two witnesses who were behind Eldridge’s car claim he was going between 60-80 miles  per hour when the BMW pulled in front of the squad car.  The LAPD reports claim that the two gave different testimony at the crash site, clouding the LAPD’s crash report.

2) Every LAPD car has a “black box” that shows LAPD vehicle speeds in the 25 seconds before collisions.  LAPD claimed that they couldn’t get the black box to work after the crash.  But an independent contractor was able to get the box to work.  Unsurprisingly, it showed that Eldridge’s driving wasn’t quite what the LAPD was claiming.

According to the numbers retrieved from the on-board computer, Eldridge slowed nearly to a stop and then rapidly accelerated about 17 seconds before colliding with Petelski. With the gas pedal pressed to the floor and the engine throttle fully open, his speed climbed from 30 to 50 to 75 mph in a span of 10 seconds. About three seconds before impact — and a fraction of a second before Eldridge hit the brake — the car’s speed topped out at 78 mph.

The entire story tells a tale of a police agency that is sticking to its guns and defending one of its own. The entire story is worth a read, and a hat tip to Rubin and the Times for telling the tale.

Ridazz Down. Photo: Magnus Sheen Nihilus/Facebook

(For more on the new charges filed against Christine Dahab, visit Culver City Patch (who broke the story), LAist and Biking In L.A.)

In the early morning hours of June 15, a group of Midnight Ridazz were waiting in the parking lane or slowly moving through and away from the intersection of Jefferson and Hetzler near the Baldwin Hills Scenic Overlook when a driver plowed into the group at 45 miles per hour.  The LAPD arrived on the scene and went to work covering up for the driver and lecturing the bicyclists about safe cycling as ambulances carted away victims.  Many went to the hospital, a handful required surgery, at least one was in a coma.

The LAPD can't figure out if this car was speeding when it crashed into a group of cyclists, some of whom are undergoing surgery and one of whom is in a coma.

Thank goodness the crash occured just inside Culver City limits so a police officer who had more on his mind than “these cyclists deserve this” was in charge of the investigation.  Yesterday, the District Attorney of Los Angeles County announced that Christine Dahab is charged with felony DUI for her actions causing sever physical and emotional distress due to negligent driving.  Dahab will faces those charges at a December 22 hearing at the Los Angeles Airport Courthouse.

Culver City Patch reports:

Dahab was formally charged by the Los Angeles District Attorney last month with “violating California Vehicle Code Section 23153 (A) [Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol causing injury], and California Vehicle Code Section 23153 (B) [Driving while Intoxicated above a .08 blood alcohol content, causing injury].”

Because of the initial reports and the length of time between the crash and the D.A.’s decision, many cyclists were worried that Dahab was going to walk away from the crash without facing charges of any kind.  That the D.A. filed more-serious felony charges instead of misdemeanor charges was something of a surprise.

The horrific nature of the crash and the Keystone Kops response by the LAPD.  Even as bodies were being loaded into the ambulance, the officer on the scene was saying that he couldn’t tell if Dahab was speeding at the time of the crash, that her blood alcohol level was below legal limits, that there was a blind turn she was going around, and that the Ridazz must have been at fault because there were condoms and beer bottles at the top of a nearby scenic overlook.  These claims were demolished and enraged a bicycle advocacy community that was already emotional as first-hand witnesses of the crash were posting their stories on websites such Bikeside, Midnight Ridazz, Streetsblog and YouTube.

Meanwhile, ABC7 earned the enmity of bicyclists the world-around by mindlessly repeating these claims without a shred of analysis.  The network tried to make up for this horrendous “reporting” by sending a different reporter to a press conference hosted by cyclists on the event, but that didn’t stop Roadblock from confronting the reporter, Elex Michaelson at Occupy L.A. last month. Of course, that there were condom and empty drink containers somewhere near the crash site is completely irrelevent.

The crash and the LAPD’s attempted cover-up spawned a peaceful, grassroots, advocacy campaign.  A team of bicyclists organized a press event on the steps of City Hall to bring attention to the crash.  Critical Mass, escorted by the LAPD, visited the hospitals where the victims still lay 10 days after the crash.  Roadblock  and other Ridazz proved that the there is now way a driver paying even a scintilla of attention to the road could have missed the pack of Ridazz.  Independent media such as Bike Talks TV, Bikeside and Streetsblog unearthed more stories on the crash, including that Dahab blew a .07 blood alcohol level at the crash site, that Culver City was aware of how dangerous the crash intersection is, and that crash witnesses were telling a very different story and that crash witnesses were telling a very different story than the police.

Streetsblog will report on the hearing on the 22nd

Some folks see that empty real estate and, in spite of the fact that they lack a bicycle, they figure “Why not? I’ll just use if for a few minutes, nobody will mind!”

All pictures by Stephen Box unless noted otherwise. This Picture by Barleye

Sunset Blvd. is home to a 5’ Bike Lane that is next to a 7’ parking stall, just enough room for these two LAPD officers who needed to go shopping at the Surplus Store in Silver Lake.

They might be forgiven the CVC 22502 violation (park within 18 inches of the right-hand curb) and the CVC 22514 violation (don’t block fire hydrants) and even the poorly written CVC 21211 which forbids Bikeway parking that impedes cyclists, but only if they can convince their supervisors that investigating a sale on Dickies qualifies as official business.

Hello, is this the Governor's Office? Photo: Jeff Jacobberger

The American Automobile Association has been around since 1902 and they are highly regarded for their roadside service and their courteous drivers.

The AAA driver parked in the Bike Lane above is probably making a quick call to Sacramento, thanking Governor Brown for vetoing SB 910, the legislation which would mandate a minimum three foot distance for motorists passing cyclists when the speed is greater than 15 MPH.

At least it's well lit...

L.A.’s Department of Water & Power has a bit of a reputation for operating according to their own “We are the Roman Army!” interpretation of the law but in this case, the law is on their side. The CVC 21211 prohibition on blocking bikeways facilities “does not apply to drivers or owners of utility or public utility vehicles, as provided in Section 22512.”

Well, almost. These DWP employees failed to put out the required warning devices so that late night cyclists heading west on Sunset wouldn’t come around the curve to find this truck blocking the Bike Lane. They also weren’t parked at a work site, as required by CVC 22512, instead simply impeding traffic while contributing to the local economy by consuming donuts at the adjacent 7-Eleven store.

Big trucks have a hard time fitting into the traditional 8’ parking stalls that are common in Los Angeles and they have an even tougher time on Sunset Blvd where the parking stalls are only 7’ wide.

The operators of these trucks have parked their trucks in violation of CVC 21211 which prohibits impeding cyclists in a bikeway but they are also demonstrating a violation of the rarely invoked LAMC 88.03 which specifies that vehicles must fit “completely within the confines or limits” of the parking space.

Even if the operator of a commercial vehicle were to find a street with parking wide enough to accommodate it, LAMC 80.69.1 prohibits trailer or semitrailer from parking in public place otherwise ordinarily used for vehicular parking. That 8’6” wide trailer simply does not belong!

The proper way to park these large trucks while they are “working” is to engage in “lane closure” and to use warning devices and traffic control to ensure that cyclists, motorists and pedestrians are all accommodated safely.

In some cases, a truck driver’s business will only take a minute or two, but that’s all it takes on a busy street such as Sunset to cause a conflict that can result in a collision. Yet the work needs to get done.

One would think that a city that has been around for more than a couple of centuries would have figured out how to accommodate the delivery of packages and the collection of trash without putting cyclists at risk.

But that would be a mistake.

Even on a big wide street such as Venice Blvd., the City of Los Angeles can’t figure out how to accommodate trash cans and cyclists at the same time, so it resorts to the strategy that has worked for so many decades, it ignores the cyclists.

Over the years, the LADOT has rejected requests to address the situation, arguing that the LADOT can’t cite the owners of the trash cans, after all they have no Vehicle Identification Number! Street Services could respond but they take 24 hours to respond and if they confiscate the trash can, the resident simply requests a new one from Sanitation and they are rewarded with a new can to replace the old can.

The bureaucratic pontificating by the LADOT, Street Services, Sanitation, the LAPD and anyone else with a piece of the street has failed to improve the situation in the least. Their collective incompetence has failed to even result in reflective markings on the dark cans so that cyclists are less likely to hit them in the dark.

Through it all, the Mayor promises 40 miles of Bikeway improvements each year for the next 5 years, a promise that means nothing if it isn’t complemented by a Mayoral Directive to the LAPD, the DWP, the LADOT, Street Services, Sanitation, and anyone else from the City Family that operates vehicles on the streets, instructing them to stay out of the Bike Lanes unless they’re on a bike.

It's not exact, but here's a rough copy of the route from Friday's Critical Mass. A cool 36.3 miles.

Critical Mass avoided controversy on Friday night, rolling to the Westside to UCLA Medical Center (where the last hospitalized victim from the Culver City Crash a couple of weeks ago is still recovering) to the traditional stop at Western and Sunset.  Tickets were kept to a minimum, I could count on one hand the number of times I saw officers pulling over cyclists, and I heard more discussion of New York’s decision to allow gay marriage than I did complaints about the LAPD’s handling of the aforementioned crash. The LAPD estimated that at its peak, there were 1,300 riders taking part in the ride.

Which is not to say that the riders, or the crash, or Christine Dahab were forgotten. I was asked seven times to sign a petition I helped write in my first ten minutes at the Wilshire/Western start point before the ride headed out demanding safer streets and better enforcement of traffic laws against aggressive drivers spurred by the Christine Dahab/Koreatown Ridazz crash. Talking with other massers along the route, I was surprised at how many people were familiar with the crash and how almost no rider blamed the big blue escort with the flawed police report that blamed the riders for this month’s horrific crash.

Lost in all the discussion of what was and wasn’t reported on June 15th, is that this was the one year anniversary of the LAPD ride-alongs with Critical Mass.  LAPD bike riders and Midnight Ridazz seem to have found a way to get along.

After the jump are three YouTube videos.  The first video shows the size of the ride about two miles after it started at Wilshire/Western. The second is with LAPD Sargent Helper who has ridden the past thirteen Critical Mass rides representing the LAPD about his experience with Critical Mass.  From a veteran to a pair of rookies, the last video is of two journalists from Santa Cruz that are taking part in a journalism fellowship with me.  Both of them have traveled around Los Angeles before, but never like this.

One year ago, the LAPD sent a small army to “escort” Los Angeles Critical Mass after an ugly incident where an LAPD officer was caught on tape kicking at a cyclists’ tires and then assaulting the man operating the camera at the May 2010 Critical Mass. The escort has stayed with the ride, changing the nature of Critical Mass for both the good (there are less crashes reported despite the ride swelling from 400 riders to well over 1,000 monthly) and bad (many long-time riders claim the LAPD are taking too large a roll controlling what is supposed to be a ride that highlights the specific challenges cyclists face.)

That new relationship could be challenged tonight because of the initial report filed by the LAPD in the “Christine Dahab v Koreatown Riders” crash in Culver City last week. However, many riders believe the relationships formed between the LAPD bike police who ride the mass and the Ridazz is strong enough to withstand one poorly written crash report, and the LAPD officers that accompany the ride also expect relatively peaceful evening.

“To my knowledge nothing special is planned,” said Sgt. David Krumer of the LAPD, “There was talk of possibly riding by the crash site and UCLA from ride organizers, but nothing is certain.”

Cyclists don’t see tonight’s Critical Mass to be any different than the other 12 they’ve already ridden with the Ridazz.

“One of the reasons Critical Mass even exists is to show that cyclists have a place on the road; that we are traffic. That message is even more important now in light of last week’s events in Culver City. Tonight’s Critical Mass ride should not be seen as a protest, but rather, a celebration of cycling and an affirmation of our right to ride in peace and to return home safety,” writes Alexis Lantz of the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition.

In fact, Midnight Ridazz “Roadblock” sees an opportunity in tonight’s ride and people’s reactions to last week’s crash, “My hope is that in some way we can direct a lot of the anger and emotion resulting from the incident towards changing the political climate in a city that gives drinkers little choice other than to drive to and from the bar.”

Mark Didia, who is leading an effort for cyclists to respond to the Dahab Crash took a different tact, and didn’t even mention the police presence when I asked him about what he expects tonight from Critical Mass. “The questions I ask myself after the recent collision are: can the new generation take this badass bike culture to the next level? Will more kids rise up? Will their direct connection to an environment that is hostile against them, trigger the will to stand up? If thousands attend, as I imagine will, I see it as a testament to this generations unwillingness to give into fear nor the inaction of our leaders who have direct power to initiate systemic change. LACM is call to: RIDE ON!”

If you want to ride with Critical Mass, it leaves from the Wilshire/Western Subway stop at 7:00 P.M. tonight.

However, at least two members in the room were clearly in opposition.  Councilman Paul Koretz and Councilman Bill Rosendahl joined Councilman Dennis Zine, who was not present, in speaking out against the cameras.  Koretz read a list of studies done by other cities on the benefits of their red light programs, all of which found the program lacking.

“Red light cameras make no sense for the City of Los Angeles, currently,” he concluded.

Oddly, he did not mention his own city’s study, which found a reduction of 62% in crashes at intersections where the cameras were implemented.  While 200 cyclists and pedestrians have been killed in car crashes since the cameras were instituted throughout the city, none of them were killed in intersections with the lights.  He also didn’t mention that the Federal Highway Administration have found that crashes are reduced at intersections with red light cameras.

Rosendahl conducted a lengthy interview with Rhodes Rigby, the Mayor of Loma Linda.  Loma Linda is a city of 22,000 people and had once installed four red light cameras.  Four years into the project, they pulled them out after one camera was bringing thousands of tickets for people illegally turning right on red lights without stopping.  Apparently Loma Linda’s experience is a perfect counterpart to the City of Los Angeles which has over four million people and installed 32 red light cameras.

Rigby and Rosendahl both believe that illegally turning right at a red light without stopping isn’t a major issue.  Rigby even stated that “few crashes and fewer injuries” are caused by these crashes.

Since I know the Councilman’s staff reads Streetsblog, let’s say it again, with links:

When the Federal Highway Administration discusses the conflict between pedestrians and automobiles it ranks “right on red” as the top concern.  A look at crash fatality statistics nationwide shows that in Los Angeles, almost one quarter of all crash fatalities are pedestrians.

Which is not to say the cameras didn’t have its share of support in the Council.  In addition to Alarcon and Parks, Councilmen Jose Huizar and Richard Alarcon both spoke in favor of the motion to continue the program.  Alarcon noted that the issue is personal for him and that, “There is a culture we need to change in Los Angeles, and in particular in the San Fernando Valley.”

The Council is expected to vote on this issue next Tuesday.  Before the Council debate began a group of speakers that included public health and public safety officials spoke in favor of keeping the lights while a coalition of neighborhood activists and one technology expert spoke against.  During one particularly moving part of testimony, when a family showed a picture of their daughter killed by a red light runner at an intersection, Council Woman Jan Perry, who was chairing the meeting allowed them to speak well over their allotted time.

The police can't figure out if this car was speeding when it crashed into a group of cyclists, some of whom are undergoing surgery and one of whom is in a coma.

Early Thursday morning, Christina Dahab plowed into a group of cyclists standing in the road waiting to head off for the last leg of a bike ride.  Nine of the cyclists were hurt so bad, they were hospitalized, at least two underwent surgery early yesterday evening and one other person is reportedly still in a coma.  Another handful of cyclists escaped with less serious injuries and an dozens of bicycles were mangled some beyond repair.  By yesterday evening, Dahab was back on the street, free on $15,000 bail, and charged with “Misdemeanor DUI.”

If she’s found guilty, Dahab could lose her license for as little as one month and face various fees and penalties.  Usually any DUI involving personal injury automatically results in a felony, but the LAPD determined that her blood and alcohol level was not past the legal limit.  That’s bad news for anyone hoping the wheels of justice would roll over Dahab as fiercely as she rolled over the cyclists.  If a driver is drunk, the case is an easy one to make and the full weight of the law will come crashing down on them.

If a driver is just unbelievably and dangerously negligent, it’s often viewed as acceptable level of carnage for all the other wonderful things are car culture brings us such as obesity, isolated communities, sprawl, global warming and an oil-dependent economy that is destroying the world.

Riders who met with the LAPD are already raising red flags about the quality of the investigation.  While the investigation is being handed over to the Culver City police, the initial report by the LAPD has some real whoppers.  The police report reads as though it was written by Dahab’s defense attorney noting that the driver was turning around a blind curb and that there’s no way to tell if she was speeding when she assaulted eleven people with her car.

The LAPD's definition of a "blind curb." Dahab followed the blue line before plowing into a group of people.

The LAPD’s explanation that they can’t prove whether or not she’s speeding is also somewhat questionable.  A driver drove into a group of people standing next to bicycles with flashing lights and reflectors without stopping or braking sending 11 people to the hospital.  Does it matter whether they were technically speeding?  Also, the state’s speeding law reads like this.

CVC 22350. No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent having due regard for weather,  visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the  highway, and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of  persons or property.

It sounds like regardless of the posted limit, Dahab was driving at a speed that endangered the safety of persons or property.

But of greatest concern is that the primary factor for the crash is listed as “pedestrians in the roadway.”  Such a determination places the blame squarely at the feet of the victims.  It’s the traffic crash version of “she was dressed slutty” or “she shouldn’t have walked in that area at night.”  It’s especially galling because that section of the road, adjacent to an intersection is an “unmarked crosswalk” so the reporting officer is basically giving her, and any other driver, the right to run people down in a crosswalk.

It’s also something that can be appealed, so if you have any information on the crash, you should contact the Culver City Police Department Traffic Division at  (310)253-6200.

Last week the Los Angeles Police Commission, the citizen panel that oversees the LAPD, unanimously voted to reject the LAPD’s recommendation to extend the city’s contract with an Arizona based group that provides, maintains, and utilizes “red light cameras” at 32 Los Angeles intersections.  The move came as a shock to the LAPD, but has been widely praised, including two editorials in the city’s two largest newspapers.

The City Council can override the Police Commission with a two-thirds vote.  And while it is unlikely they will do so, it’s too bad that the program is going down without a whimper.

Red light cameras have always been a political hot potato.  Privacy advocates have long argued against the government’s right to place cameras at intersections.  Others have argued that those ticketed by the cameras don’t have the right to face their accuser as guaranteed by the Constitution.  But most people just don’t like getting ticketed when they break the law and are caught doing it.  There’s even an Orwellianly named group of “local activists” called “Safer Streets L.A.” that lobbied against the cameras by arguing that cars making right turns on red lights without stopping isn’t really that big of a deal.  Nearly two-thirds of tickets given by red light cameras are for cars making illegal right hand turns.

As we n0ted three years ago, cars making right hand turns without yielding is a major traffic safety concern.

When the Federal Highway Administration discusses the conflict between pedestrians and automobiles it ranks “right on red” as the top concern.  A look at crash fatality statistics nationwide shows that in Los Angeles, almost one quarter of all crash fatalities are pedestrians.

And as the L.A. Times noted in their editorial burying the camera program, the red light cameras are working.

The LAPD cites a 62% drop in red-light-related collisions at the intersections with cameras, compared with a 22% drop citywide during the same period. Yet local activists have questioned whether the improvements are due to the cameras; at the same time the devices were installed, engineers added “all-red” intervals, during which the lights in all directions are red.

While the “all-red” intervals doubtless help the situation, some of those “all-red” times are a total of .1 seconds.  A 62% drop in collisions (not “accidents,” good job Times!) is an amazing statistic and if the cameras and intervals are working that magic together with the all-red signals; I would want to see more cameras, not less.

The Daily News didn’t even bother to mention the number of crashes that have been reduced, hiding behind the dishonest claim that, “Of course, safety is the No. 1 concern. But while the LAPD and the camera’s peddlers quote data showing the cameras help, opponents cite less conclusive evidence. And many skeptics believe the cameras even cause rear-end collisions by prompting drivers to stop abruptly.”  It’s a neat trick to equate statistics with criticism that people make up without doing research, but it tells you more about the Daily News Editorial Board than it does red-light cameras.

However, joining the anti-traffic enforcement organization in opposing the cameras is Councilman Dennis Zine who referred to the program in the Times as “dishonest” and “really mocks the public.”  I wonder if the Councilman would feel the same about a program that caught gang members that saw a 62% reduction in gang related crime.

Another common argument against red-light cameras is that they are a scam to impoverish people by ticketing them hundreds of dollars for minor infractions.  Locally, the red light camera program actually loses money, the program spends somewhere between a half million and 1.5 million a year to reduce traffic crashes by nearly one-quarter at intersections around the city.

A third argument is that red-light cameras ticket scofflaws instead of people that are truly dangerous.  This argument ignores basic criminology that posits that those who commit small crimes are most likely to be the ones to commit car crimes.  When it comes to scofflaw drivers, the argument is that those same drivers are most likely to commit major crimes.  In other words, if you are willing to take a right on red without stopping, you’re probably also likely to drive at unsafe speeds or ignore a bike lane.

There’s clearly some problems with the city’s red light program.  Some intersections were chosen for political purposes, i.e. every Council District gets at least one, and the collection program is in desperate need of repairs.  But the fury aimed at the program has more to do with drivers not liking to get tickets than it does complaints with the particulars of L.A.’s program.

Sgt. David Krumer answers your questions. He's going to need more phones. Photo: Biking in L.A.

Late last month, I asked you to submit questions for Los Angeles Police Department Sargent David Krumer, the officer who has been the point person for bicycle issues for over a year.  Many of you responded with solid questions, and Krumer was good enough to respond to each of them.

Want to know how to report scofflaws on the River Path?  Do you crave information on the LAPD training program for bike incidents?  And what the heck does Krumer do all day when not answering Streetsblog questions?  The answers to these questions and more can be found after the jump.

Joe: Why does the LAPD advertise the exact time and place of DUI checkpoints? I can see why you would want to publish that they are happening, for the deterrent effect. But when you publish details like, “From 7 p.m. Friday until 3 a.m. Saturday, officers
will be monitoring drivers for signs of intoxication on Topanga Canyon Boulevard between Devonshire Street and Chatsworth Street.” (http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_18138131), won’t drunks just find a different route home?

Sgt. Krumer: Case law as embodied in Ingersoll v. Palmer requires law enforcement conducting a lawful sobriety checkpoint to provide advance notice of the roadblock to the public, although they are not required to disclose its specific location.

“Advance publicity is important to the maintenance of a constitutionally permissible sobriety checkpoint. Publicity both reduces the intrusiveness of the stop and increases the deterrent effect of the roadblock……Publicity also serves to establish the legitimacy of sobriety checkpoints in the minds of motorists.”

In addition to publicizing the DUI checkpoint, law enforcement is required to provide sufficient advanced warning to a motorist that is approaching a checkpoint.  Basically a motorist can always avoid a checkpoint by making a U-turn when they see the checkpoint up ahead. We have no authority to go after them for opting out of the checkpoint.  So even if we did not disclose the exact location of the checkpoint, the motorist can still avoid it.

Mihai: How many hours a week does Sgt Krumer put in to Cyclist Task Force stuff? If he ever feels swamped with work, how many more officers does he wish he had on board the Task Force?

Sgt. Krumer: The number of hours I spend on bicycle related issues varies depending on the workload for that week. I am assisted by Officer Jeff Kievit.  If I had to estimate how much time is spent I would say that on average we spend 5 hours per week on research, reviewing training and policy, responding to emails and addressing general concerns of cyclists.  If you include meetings then perhaps it will average another 3 hours per week. As of right now I have sufficient support….but as more cyclists become aware that LAPD has a point of contact for their issues my workload may justify additional assistance.

River: Slightly off topic, but who should I call when I see youths congregating on the L.A. river bike path (between Figueroa and Fletcher) openly consuming malt liquor and marijuana in the middle of the day? I ride there frequently during the week, and see these kids almost every time.

Sgt. Krumer: Law enforcement responsibility along the L.A. River bike path falls within the jurisdiction of the Office of Public Safety, General Services Police.  “General Services Police Officers are dedicated exclusively to patrolling all of the City’s 400 parks…”  Their 24 hour dispatch number is 213-978-4670.

Anonymous: Can the LAPD do anything about residents who routinely block the bike lane (usually about 2 days/week) with their garbage cans in violation of CVC 21211? It’s clearly against the law, creates a pretty serious hazard, and is fairly defeating of the modest bits of bike infrastructure that we do have. Where can I report violations (either within the LAPD or other city departments)? Can the residents be ticketed?

Sgt. Krumer: This has been the topic of much discussion.  The Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation is responsible for the trash bins. Trash bins are not tied to a specific residence and even if they were there is no way to show that the resident is actually the one who placed the bins into the bike lane…a citation can not be issued.  The penalty for misusing the trash bins would be their removal…however the resident can simply call and have new bins brought to replace the ones taken. Realistically there is no way to address the problem and compel compliance.

On those days that the bike lane is obstructed by trash bins the cyclist has the right to use a regular lane of traffic. Vehicle Code section 21208(a)(3) states that a cyclist is not required to stay in the bike lane when reasonably necessary  “…to avoid debris or other hazardous conditions.”

Eric: As I understand it, the first training video only touched on lane position because you felt it was a complicated enough topic to warrant its own. Any idea when that might be available? Those of us that work in other jurisdictions need an authoritative source that shows all the circumstances under which a bicyclist may control the right lane–i.e. most of the time in urban areas.

Sgt. Krumer: The training module was submitted for review to our Training Coordination Section in late May.  After their review it will be forwarded to Training Division for production.  Production is dependant on staffing and workload so I do not have an estimate as to when it would be completed as the City’s budget issues impact every aspect of the Department.  I am hopeful that the module will be ready prior to the holiday season…but can not make any guarantees.

Anonymous: How’s the officer re-training going? How many officers in the force have gone through the module and when do you hope to be finished?

Sgt. Krumer: The LAPD is transitioning into a new training management program and as of this Q & A session it can not be queried to answer your question.  When I find out I will advise LA Streetsblog.

Steve: My question is, are there liaisons at each station that we can ask for when making complaints, or asking questions? While I know there are different training programs, but there inevitably will be the “rookie” or the one who has a poor understanding of laws, that should be able to learn things one way or another. It literally took me at least 3 different people before I got to the guy who said he’d follow up… Hopefully we won’t have to ask for you specifically each time? (For background on this question, click here.)

Sgt: Krumer: With regards to making a complaint.  If you have a general question on how to make a complaint a supervisor may provide you with this phone number to our complaint hotline :1-800-339-6868.  If you desire to make a complaint and want to make one immediately, any Department supervisor (rank sergeant or above) must take your complaint then and there.  If you are told by a supervisor to come back at a later time or directed to go to some other location to make a complaint that is a violation of our policies.

With regards to general questions:  A police officer is not an expert on every aspect of the law, policy, or enforcement practices.  Every officer however should be able to direct you to someone who can answer your question in the event they can not…or in the alternative get back to you with an answer in a reasonable amount of time.  Please feel free to contact me at 35128@lapd.lacity.org and we can discuss your particular question in further detail as I fear that I will not be able to do so in this particular forum.

Don: Hi David, according to Bikeside analysis of SWITRS data, 1 in 3 collisions in California are hit and runs. I would like to hear your opinion on what will cause or induce drivers to stop at the scene of a collision.

Sgt. Krumer: This is a difficult question. I believe Hit and Runs are the product of  the chances of being caught and not the penalty associated with being caught.  To decrease Hit and Runs we would need to decrease the possibility of getting away with it. For the average law abiding motorist the current penalty which provides for prison time of up to 4 years (for serious bodily injury) should be a sufficient deterrent.  Even if you were to make this 10 year the average citizen would not be more deterred because 4 years is already horrifying enough to a person who has never been to jail. The average motorist runs not because the penalty is insufficient but because they think they will not get caught. A criminal who flees the scene of an accident would likewise not be deterred by a stiffer sentence because if consequences were a deterrent to them they would not be criminals in the first place.

So the question becomes how do you increase the likelihood of being caught. I do not know but in the future perhaps cars will be equipped with a “black box” type device that registers impacts.  These impacts would be electronically sent to a central computer that stores the time, location, and coordinates of the impact as well as the driver at the time (via a biometric or password used to start the car).  When a victim of hit and run reports the incident the perpetrator will not be able to avoid the responsibility and will also face criminal prosecution.  The incentive to run is eliminated and there is actually now an incentive to stay.

I would argue that the only other way to reduce hit and runs is to eliminate the incentive to run…which would be to avoid responsibility (usually financial).  If a person strikes another user of the roadway but knows there will be no financial repercussions they have no reason to flee.  This alternative of course can not be put into practice.

Jessica: Who at LAPD can help use move the City of LA SRTS plan forward? Law enforcement is a critical partner in Safe Routes to School efforts everywhere – it’d be great to have LAPD be a big part of these strategies – esp as they’re developed.

Sgt. Krumer: I’d welcome the opp to learn more about how to involve the LAPD in Safe Route to School efforts – things are moving with the City and soon with the school district. LAPD plays a great role around morning arrival and departure at a handful of schools I know about – but is there a larger strategy?

Krumer at the June 2010 Los Angeles Critical Mass.

Over the past year, LAPD Sergent David Krumer has emerged as one of the key figures in the Los Angeles bicycle scene.  Charged with improving relationships between the LAPD and the bicycling community Krumer has been involved with the LAPD’s presence at Critical Mass, the “Give ME 3″ Poster Campaign that is now being used to rally cyclists statewide, better LAPD training videos and even an outreach plan to help cyclists better lock their bikes.

While Krumer has developed a reputation for reading cyclist blog and message boards and responding to concerns, I thought it would be useful to have a place to ask the Sergent questions directly.  As a result, I’m inviting all readers to leave any questions they might have about anything bike related for Krumer.  We’ll post his answers later next week.

While Krumer has a pretty good sense of humor (someone better ask about e-bikes!) let’s try and keep the tone somewhat respectful.

At the Mayor’s Bike Summit, a promise was made to the cycling community that there would be greater communication and cooperation between the various City Departments and the cycling community.  To that end the LAPD has recently posted the training that all LAPD officers were required to take to educate them on the specific rules of the road as they apply to cyclists. The training can be found on LAPDonline in the cycling awareness section and was also posted to youtube by Joe Linton (Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee).  Additionally the training may also be available soon on the Mayors website as well as LADOT.

The training was developed with input from our partners which included Aurisha Smolarski (Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition), Ted Rogers (Bikinginla/LACBC), Ron Durgin (Sustainable Streets), Enci Box (Illuminate LA), Dr. Alex Thompson (BikesideLA.org), Stephen Box (SoapBoxLA), Carlos Morales (Eastside Bike Club), and Glenn Bailey (Mayoral appointee to the Los Angeles Bicycle Advisory Committee). These activists and cycling representatives worked tirelessly to ensure your voices are heard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1N3Q3lLBIk

Sgt. David Krumer

On Thursday, December 2, 2010, at about 9:17 p.m., 60-year-old, Razia Shariff, was getting out of her car when she was struck and killed on Centinela Avenue north of Nebraska Avenue. Investigators say the suspect vehicle is possibly a 1992-1997 Toyota Corolla. The driver of the Corolla left the scene without stopping to help the victim, or identifying himself/herself as required by law.

If you’re wondering why it took so long to offer an award, the LAPD and Rosendahl’s office previously announced the award in mid-December but is hoping the press event will draw attention to the crash again in the new year.

Brigette Burdine

The second crash happened right after Christmas and involved a famous video game programmer best known for her casting and voice work on World of Warcraft.  On Wednesday, Dec. 29, 2010, at about 1:45 a.m., 48-year-old Brigette Burdine was walking on Culver Boulevard and Pershing Drive when possibly a dark-colored sedan traveling in an easterly direction collided with the victim.  While the driver fled the scene, Burdine was left dieing in the street.

Anyone with information about either of these cases is asked to call CRIMESTOPPERS at 800-222-TIPS (800-222-8477).

Some Do's and Dont's from the LAPD. Read the whole flyer, here.

The LAPD/Cyclists Task Force has released a “Bike Theft Alert” to encourage and educate cyclists on the many ways to best secure your bicycle.  There are a few nitpicks I have with the two page flyer,  I think Streetfilms’ bike locking expert would have kittens at the thought of someone locking their bike with just a U-Lock, but as cycling becomes more and more common we’re going to continue to see bike theft become a larger and larger problem.  It’s good to see the LAPD taking an active interest in preventing bike thefts instead of just dealing with the issue after the fact.  And it’s double good to see them working with the community to put out the best flyer that’s possible.

“I’m pleased to see the LAPD take bicycle theft seriously by taking action  to educate our communities on it’s specific prevention and safety.”  writes Jeremy Grant a cyclist on the committee.  “Over the past year the Cyclist/LAPD Task Force has reached a mutual understanding, fostered a shared respect, and improved many facets of police operations.  This alert is just a glimpse of what’s to come as we empower the bicycling citizen’s voice in our fair City.”

Meanwhile, the LAPD is sending signals that they see bike theft as a larger issue, and that they understand how traumatic one losing their bicycle can be for their lifestyle.

“Bike theft is an ongoing problem that is so much more than simple property theft.  When a bike is stolen, the ability of a person to move freely is stolen as well.  Many rely on their bicycle as the sole means of transportation to get to school or work, to meet with family and friends, and fully participate in their community.”  Writes LAPD Seargent David Krumer.  The reality is that when a bicycle is stolen, the likelyhood of recovery is significantly lower than a motor vehicle, and as such it is all the more important to prevent the theft in the first place. For additional tips on securing your bicycle please visit www.LAPDONLINE.com and check out the Cycling Safety Awareness section in the lower right hand area of the website.”

My guess is that most Streetsblog readers will find the advice pretty basic, at least until one reaches the end of the document where the “D.I.Y.” section is.  I suspect this is the part where the cyclists really added to the flyer.  Just a guess, but I’m guessing that Sargent Krumer didn’t write “hot glue ball bearings into tightly adjusted allen bolts.”  Just a guess.

Feel free to pass along the flier to anyone you know who can use the advice.  And if you have any advice of your own to add, please leave it in the comments section and we’ll make sure to pass the information on to the LAPD, if they don’t just see it here themselves.

There's being a danger to yourself...Photo: Seattle Daily Photo.

The Downtown LAPD is at it again.

Downtown has long been known as one of the least pedestrian-friendly precincts. LAPD officers on the downtown beat have routinely ticketed pedestrians for such “infractions” as crossing an intersection against a flashing red hand signal while motorists breeze through red lights mere feet away; now the Division is proudly touting a new effort to crackdown on Downtown “jaywalkers” to reduce pedestrian crashes.

Unlike the commenters on the Times’ article announcing the “crackdown,” who assume this effort is a ploy to fill the city’s coffers to the tune of $191 per infraction, let’s take the LAPD at their word.  Let’s assume that this crackdown is about making the Downtown safer for pedestrians.  Then, let’s ask them to please spend more time enforcing the law against automobile drivers who are far more likely to cause a fatal crash than a pedestrian.

...and being a danger to everyone. LAPD should learn the difference. Photo:Los Angeles Times

An astute reader might note that the Times’ article, available on the paper’s L.A. Now page, quotes a Lieutenant Vernon who claims that in 2009 there were “three accidents involving a vehicle and a pedestrian in the downtown area between Nov. 25 and Dec. 31.  Two of those incidents were blamed on the person on foot and resulted in serious injury to the pedestrian, Vernon said. The third incident, which resulted in a pedestrian’s death, was due to a speeding driver.”

Wow, that means, based on this uselessly small sample size, that pedestrians are twice as likely to cause a crash than a driver.  It also makes you wonder which of these crashes were the fault of the pedestrian: the December 14th crash where a car jumped a curb and killed a photographer on the sidewalk or a November 26th crash where a woman was dragged over a half mile before the police stopped the driver after noticing the body.

Even if the LAPD had their facts straight, there’s still the question as to whether or not a “jaywalking crackdown” is the best way, or even a good way, to make streets safer.  Traffic expert Tom Vanderbilt, author of the book Traffic, argues otherwise.

So what can be done? The answer is not jaywalking crackdowns. These tend to be hard to enforce, lower the public opinion of the police, reinforce the idea of car dominance on city streets, and, most importantly, do not provide an effective bang for the buck. Indeed, the Netherlands, which has essentially legalized jaywalking, has an enviable pedestrian safety record.

Vanderbilt closes the above article by noting that media reports on crashes are often selective and slanted, and they discourage readers from digging beyond the assertions thrown out by reporters and the police.  Nowhere is that more true than in Los Angeles.

One benefit of having the LAPD along for the ride, hit and run drivers have their nights ruined awfully quickly. Photo: Mikey Wiley/Flickr

While the relationship between the Los Angeles Police Department and large group bike rides, such as Critical Mass or CRANK Mob, have improved by leaps and bounds over the summer; reactions to last Saturday’s CRANK Mob ride, aka CRANKMAS III, shows there is still some work to do.

Readers may remember that after an ugly confrontation between the LAPD and Critical Mass riders in May, the police decided to escort Critical Mass instead of react to it.  The result was a June Critical Mass that left ride organizers smiling and new relationships being formed.  But that’s not the end of the story.  As any complicated relationship between large groups, especially when there’s an imbalance of power, the relationship can get complicated.  Last Saturday, the third anniversary party of the popular CRANK Mob ride, was dispersed by the LAPD after community complaints about noise and other disruptions.  While police in riot gear were called to the scene, the event dispersed without any major confrontation.

But that hasn’t stopped some group riders from being outraged by the kind of interference that would have been a surprise just a year ago. A quick read through this comment thread on Midnight Ridazz shows how divided the community is about whether or not the LAPD should be on these rides or not.  In addition to an argument between regular Ridazz, you can see a discussion of what biking LAPD Seargent David Krumer meant when he discusses some of the restraint being shown by officers on these rides.  By the end of the thread, at least at the time of publication, Krumer writes:

I in no way implied that restraint referred to going in “guns blazing and batons swinging” or engaging in a use of force.

But that doesn’t mean that all cyclists view the relationship with the LAPD as a poisoned one.  Before Friday’s Critical Mass, leaders from Bikeside, the Eastside Bike Club and other community leaders will be working with Critical Mass riders to “POLICE OURSELVES” and make the ride more about promoting cycling and claiming their rights to the street rather than being confrontational or law-breaking.  A Facebook page encouraging riders to arrive early for training and an overview so that the rolling escort doesn’t have to step in and create conflict.  For those that don’t have access to Facebook, the principles that will be preached on Friday can be found after the jump.

DO

• talk to stranger, bystanders, bus riders, motorists – welcome people to join us next time

• help cars stuck in mass to exit to the right

• stop regularly if you’re in front (no matter how slowly you think you’re going, gaps are opening up behind you)

• stop at red lights when in front to allow the rest of the ride to “mass up” behind.

• keep going in dense packs through red lights to stick together and keep it safe for everyone.

• fill gaps; Critical Mass depends on bicycle density to displace cars.

• remember that pleasure and friendliness are more subversive than anger and blaming.

DON’T

• race ahead to block cross traffic before the Mass has arrived

• ride into oncoming traffic on the wrong side of the road

• pick fights with motorists, even (especially) if they’re itching for one

• fail to turn and twist through the city to make the ride more interesting

• forget to smile and wave and talk to strangers!

• imagine that you are morally superior just cuz you’re on a bicycle (you’ll be in a car again soon enough)

• hesitate to tell other Massers what you think of their behavior, whether good or bad. Talk to each other!

• forget – we are all responsible to make Critical Mass what we want it to be.

If you’re of the same mind on these issues and wish to help spread the word to people new to Critical Mass, please meet at 630pm sharp at the start of the ride. We’ll hand out flyers and maybe even a ROUTE if we are able to organize one in time! PEACE, LOVE AND HARMONY!

For a full size version, click here.

According to the LAPD, those days are in the past.  Apparently, there's more benefits from hanging out with cyclists' new BFF's, the Los Angeles Police Department, then just escorted Critical Mass Rides.  

Via the Los Angeles County Bike Coalition's blog, the LAPD is circulating a flow chart to help cyclists decide who and where to call for help after a crash.  It reads a little like a "choose your own adventure" book, but if approved by LAPD brass would mark the first time a clear policy exists for reporting bicycle crashes.  For example:

If there is an injury, regardless of if there is contact, a Traffic report will be completed.
If there is no injury (regardless of contact) there is no report.
If there is an allegation that the driver purposefully struck/attempted to strike the cyclist a crime report will be completed if the elements of the crime are articulated.

No report will be made for violations of the vehicle code or rude comments made by drivers.

There's also information on how to report bicycle thefts:

If the theft is currently happening and the suspect is still at scene:
• Call 911.
• Let them know that the theft is in progress and the suspect is in the area.
If the theft has already occurred:
• Call 911 to take a report,
• or call local precinct to make a report,
• or call 1-877-ASK LAPD.
Things to check: maybe getting your bike back –D.I.Y. style
• Craigslist – you may want to check San Diego and San Francisco listings as well.
• Used bike shops and pawn shops

And if you're having trouble with police not taking your report, Email Sergeant David Krumer, LAPD bicycle liaison.

But don't take my word for it, here's three videos shot in the CVS parking lot at Sunset and Western.

Responding to the poster put out last week by the LAPD inviting themselves to Critical Mass, at least one rider wasn't impressed.  Rider Plebis Power, roughly translated to Power of the People, posted a poster at Biking in L.A. that both lampooned the LAPD's flyer and made the point that the bad relationship between the LAPD and the cycling community is hardly just the fault of cyclists.  Where the LAPD creates a list of infractions that will earn cyclists a ticket tomorrow; Power writes a list of "incidents" caused by the LAPD at "recent group rides."

Ted Rogers, the Biking in L.A. author, writes that even the LAPD officer who created the original flyer found it amusing.

Critical Mass has gone mainstream.  Following last month's "Critical Mass Attack," where an officer was caught on tape kicking at cyclists' bikes before the cameraman was tackled to the ground, it seems you can't go anywhere without reading or discussing Critical Mass.  There have been press conference's, lawsuits, and even a promise that the LAPD will ride with Critical Mass in the future.

So with the LAPD joining what has been a raucous protest ride, one that hasn't had a smooth relationship with the police, what should be expected?  A violent clash?  Mas arrests?  An orderly protest?  Only time will tell, but the history of Critical Mass, both in L.A. and beyond, suggest that it is possible that two can exist.

First off, word is going out within the community that riders should work with the police and should try to avoid some of Critical Mass' more confrontational tactics, such as the rampant running of red lights.  An open letter to the biking community posted in the Streetsblog comments section, LAist, Midnight Ridazz and other forums states:

At the ride start of the Critical Mass on June 25th, there will be a faction of people, including myself, who will be encouraging something we are currently calling, "Project Civil Obedience", in which all cyclists will demonstrate what it means for 1000+ riders to obey all road rules. That includes stopping at every red light. We will also be encouraging mass riders to cooperate in choosing a destination to ride to so that they can reunite if they get separated by red lights from the main group. The plan will be to get to the destination within 45 minutes (a reasonable riding time frame).

In the same article at LAist,  Sgt. David Krumer worries that Critical Mass breaking off into smaller groups could inhibit the ability of the LAPD to police the ride.  But that puts the onus on them, they can either facilitate the ride being able to stay together in one group or figure out a way to deal with riders going in different directions to reach the same pit stops.  It's not like there's not precedence for having city officials cork an intersection.

Whether or not the community, as a whole, can play nice with the police has been a matter of debate.  It's not uncommon to see t-shirts proclaiming "LAPD hates bikes" or even read "fuck the police" on forums; but the call to work together to improve Critical Mass sees to be resonating.  At Midnight Ridazz, the bulk of the comments on a thread previewing Friday's ride are supportive of collaborating.

Of course, to collaborate you need partners.  The LAPD has three choices on their tactics for the ride, what we'll call "San Francisco," "Santa Monica" and a third way.

In recent years, San Francisco Critical Mass has enjoyed a decent relationship with the SFPD.  The ride is accompanied by police who work to make certain that the ride is safe and police it for anyone creating a dangerous situation.  This tactic has led to a relatively incident-free ride.  Meanwhile, in the last two years LACM has seen at least two outrages: the random tackling of cyclists off their bikes in 2009 and the random detainment and physical search of one ride leader in 2008.

In Santa Monica, the bored SMPD over-polices Critical Mass to the point of ridiculousness.  You could say that the SMPD is also "joining the ride," but their actions of ticketing riders for both real and imagined infractions creates a hostile relationship.  In the Santa Monica example, the police actually create a more dangerous situation by buzzing riders on their bikes and breaking up the ride by ticketing teenage minorities seemingly at random.

A third way would be just that, a new way of trying to join and police the ride.  I can't imagine that the LAPD, with its olive branches and newfound appreciation of bike issues, is interested in earning the reputation for cracking down on the 1st Amendment rights of bike riders such as the Santa Monica police did.  Plus the actions and word of Seargent Krumer, the Mayor Villaraigosa and other officials seems to be calling for a lighter touch.

That being said, the LAPD isn't going to get caught in a media game where riders control the message.  in addition to bike cops, the LAPD is also sending its video unit.  Krumer is already pushing the talking point that the LAPD is responding to requests that they help remove trouble-makers from the ride that create a negative atmosphere for everyone, which could be a valuable rhetorical tool if things on Friday don't work out for everyone involved.

So the stage is set for Friday.  Leaders from the bike community that don't often make Critical Mass are readying for the ride.  Route suggestions are bouncing around the Internet.  The LAPD is also readying for the ride.  Whatever happens, its certainly going to be a turning point for Critical Mass and Los Angeles.  What direction it heads relies on a lot of people riding smart.