Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ab168 Idaho Stop topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly bill to allow cyclists to ‘stop‑as‑yield’ at intersections wins broad support, excludes e‑bikes and scooters in amendment
Summary
Assembly Bill 168 would allow bicyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs and, in certain circumstances, proceed cautiously through red lights when no other traffic is present — a policy commonly called the "Idaho stop." Sponsors pointed to studies in Idaho and Delaware showing fewer bicycle injuries after similar laws; an amendment excludes
Assembly Bill 168 would let bicyclists treat stop signs as yield signs and allow limited movement through red lights when no other traffic is present — the practice commonly known as the "Idaho stop." Assemblymember Heather Goulding presented the bill and said the measure is intended to reduce cyclists' exposure at intersections.
"Intersections are the most dangerous places for bicyclists," Goulding told the committee, citing national and state data. The sponsor and witnesses referenced Nevada Department of Transportation figures that between 2019 and 2023 the state recorded 66 bicyclist fatalities and more than 2,400 injuries, and described a 55 percent increase in fatalities and a 44 percent increase in injuries over that period.
Goulding and Kai Plaskon of the Nevada Bicycle Coalition noted that Idaho adopted the stop‑as‑yield in 1982 and that several other states and jurisdictions have followed; they highlighted safety studies from Idaho and Delaware showing declines in bicyclist injuries after the change. Plaskon and other supporters argued that allowing a cautious roll through an intersection when safe reduces the time a cyclist is exposed in the roadway and can improve overall traffic flow without changing right‑of‑way rules.
A conceptual amendment introduced during the hearing would exclude electric bicycles and electric scooters from the bill’s protections. Municipal governments and law enforcement representatives testified in neutral to express operational and safety concerns about e‑bikes and micro‑mobility devices and said excluding those devices addressed their principal issues.
Supporters included environmental and regional transportation agencies, local bicycle advocacy groups and individual riders; several young cyclists provided personal testimony about the difficulty of stopping and re‑accelerating at intersections and urged the committee to adopt the measure for safety reasons. The Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada and multiple local governments supported the measure in principle; some municipalities asked for the e‑bike/e‑scooter carve‑out and described Vision Zero and multimodal planning efforts.
Opposition was limited at the hearing; a few callers and commentors raised concerns about sidewalk riding, enforcement and user education. Committee members asked about law‑enforcement readiness and whether traffic signals that fail to detect bicycles would be addressed; witnesses said the bill permits cautious movement when a cyclist stops at a red light and confirms no other traffic is present, and noted the bill does not change basic right‑of‑way responsibilities.
The committee did not take a final vote at the hearing. Sponsors said they would work with municipal partners and law enforcement on drafting language and the amendment, and supporters urged the committee to advance a law they said has reduced injuries in other states.
