House panel debates bill to let bicyclists treat stop signs as yield when no vehicles present; police urge education

The House Transportation Committee on April 30 considered an amendment to S.123 that would let bicyclists treat stop signs and flashing red lights as yield signs in certain circumstances — a policy often called the “Idaho stop.” Representative Pouch introduced the amendment and committee members asked the Vermont State Police about enforcement and safety implications.

Lieutenant Paul Raval told the committee that the department is “neutral” on the discretionary change but raised practical enforcement and investigation concerns. He said the amendment’s proposed language, which would apply only when “no other vehicles were approaching,” reduces the occasions when the alternative rule would apply but does not eliminate questions about how officers would observe or prosecute violations that occur out of sight.

“Initially my approach to this is like, I don't ever want to put a bicycle up against the vehicle in any, in any way, at any intersection at any time,” Raval said, noting that many bicyclists receive no formal road-safety education comparable to licensed drivers. Still, he said some states have adopted similar laws and studies show mixed patterns of bicyclist crashes at intersections.

Raval cited a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) dataset discussed during past studies: the study referenced roughly 966 fatal bicycle crashes nationally in the period covered, with about 29% occurring at intersections. In Vermont, he said the state averaged about one bicyclist fatality per year over several recent years, with two in one recent year; he characterized the statewide totals as small but noted that even single fatalities prompt calls for policy change.

The department recommended any statutory change be narrowly defined. “If there is an acceptance to this, that the definition of that person who can use that is limited to what we're trying to keep safe, and those are the people that are the most vulnerable… human powered pedal cyclists,” Raval said, explaining that NHTSA’s studies focus on pedal cyclists and do not include e-bikes or motorized vehicles.

Several committee members emphasized consistency and education. Representative Lyle said letting bicyclists use crosswalks or an explicit statewide rule would improve clarity: “I just wanted to speak, especially in favor of allowing cyclists to cross with the crosswalks. I think there's a real, like, just legibility to that that makes a lot of sense to many people,” she said, adding that clearer, statewide rules could make it safer and easier to teach children to walk and bike to school.

Other legislators voiced concerns about younger riders and the low-barrier nature of bicycle riding. Raval and members discussed the three E’s of traffic safety—engineering, education and enforcement—and Raval recommended that Vermont agencies such as VTrans and the Vermont Highway Safety Office lead education and outreach while law enforcement provide investigatory support and data for any follow-up report.

No votes were taken on the amendment during the hearing. Committee members asked for further study and noted existing municipal ordinances in some Vermont cities that already permit variants of the Idaho stop.

Ending: The committee recessed after hearing testimony and invited further study and input; Raval said law-enforcement training and statewide education would be necessary if the Legislature changes the statute.