Committee weighs allowing bicyclists to treat stop signs and flashing red signals as yields; schedules more testimony

On April 20, 2025, a legislative committee reviewed proposed amendments to the motor vehicle (DMV) bill that would let an individual operating a bicycle treat a stop sign or flashing red signal as a yield when it is safe to do so and would add definitions and bicycle-specific signal rules to state law.

Damien Leonard, Office of Legislative Counsel, told the committee the draft would add three new sections to the motor vehicle bill: updates to the statute governing bicycle operation, a definition of a flashing red signal and “immediate hazard,” and a section on bicycle control signals. Leonard said the proposal would require bicyclists to “follow all traffic control devices and traffic control signals” as a default but create limited exceptions allowing cautious crossing or turns at stop signs and flashing red signals when no immediate hazard exists. Leonard noted one clear exclusion: the change would not apply at active railroad grade crossings.

The draft would also require the Commissioner of Motor Vehicles and the Commissioner of Public Safety, working with stakeholders representing bicyclists, pedestrians, municipalities and law enforcement, to produce written and graphical education materials by April 1 following enactment and to file a report by Jan. 1, 2027 comparing bicycle crash rates after implementation with the three calendar years before it. Leonard flagged an editorial typo in the effective date language and said the intended implementation date was July 1, 2026.

Representative Pouch, the bill sponsor, described personal experience as a long‑term bicyclist and said the proposal could improve safety and traffic flow at some intersections, particularly for riders carrying gear who take longer to accelerate. “If we move forward with this, the education is a key piece,” Pouch said, adding that outreach and graphics would help the public picture allowed movements.

Other committee members raised concerns. Representative Caesar questioned whether the proposal would allow bicycles on certain divided or partially controlled highways and said she opposed allowing bicyclists to roll through red lights or flashing red signals without stopping, citing driver confusion and enforcement challenges. The transcript records members asking whether electric bicycles would be covered by the same exception; the proposal text in committee did not specify e‑bike treatment.

Committee members also reported that the Agency of Transportation (AOT) had previously told the committee it found no evidence that similar laws decreased safety in states that enacted them, and the committee noted a national report that indicated possible safety improvements in jurisdictions that adopted an Idaho‑style approach. Members repeatedly emphasized the outreach requirement and the 2027 crash‑rate report as central safeguards.

The committee did not vote to insert the language into the DMV bill. Instead, members agreed to schedule additional testimony from agencies and other stakeholders — including AOT, DMV and proponents and opponents of the amendment — before making a decision. The chair characterized the decision as a next step to “hear other viewpoints” and confirmed that the scheduling of testimony does not equate to final approval of the amendment.

Where it was discussed: the committee cited local examples (State and Main, Court Street and Elm Street, and Route 2) during the discussion and noted Burlington already permits riders to use crosswalk signals in some locations. Several members urged public education and suggested monitoring crash data for multiple years as the best test of real‑world effects.

The committee’s next steps are to invite additional witnesses, receive the agencies’ views, and consider whether to add the amendment language to the DMV bill; no formal vote on adoption occurred at the April 20 session.