Return to Home page

Search | Statistics | User Listing Forums | Calendars | Albums | Quotes
Sidecar.com Forum ->  Use care in reading the advice of others. -> Legislative Watch -> View Thread

You are logged in as a guest. ( logon | register )

Random quote: I drink grape juice because OJ kills.
- (Added by: lineman29)

Washington State Licensing Changes
Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6
Now viewing page 4 [25 messages per page]
View previous thread :: View next thread
   Use care in reading the advice of others. -> Legislative WatchMessage format
 
Joyce
Posted 8/8/2007 9:56 PM (#28311 - in reply to #1998)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 3023
Location: St. Joseph,MO
Wow, I think I did it. Now everyone will be really confused. So page 4 does contain the most recent post.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/8/2007 11:49 PM (#28315 - in reply to #28308)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA
Help me out a little, that's a pretty wide open question. What fiasco? Not dodging the question, just not sure what you want to know. I'll try a brief history:

Washington has had a 2 wheel rider ed program since the 80's. Here the course is subsidized so that the tuition can be reasonable. The money comes from endorsement fees only. The rights groups here put legislation together to create a fund that would be seperate from the general fund and not subject to raiding. They wanted only motorcyclist money in the fund so that no one else could make any claims on the money or direction of the program. This has turned out to be an excellent idea in light of other state funds being raided and programs being co-oped.

When I came to WA in 2000 there were already trike riders that were concerned because they did not have any training availible. They continued to work with their legislators until in 2003 a bill was passed establishing a training program. Since prior to this bill trike and sidecars did not pay anything (they were able to get a restriction on the regular drivers license for 3 wheels only and here restriction cost nothing) there had to be equity in fees to be equity in training (this from the folks that drafted the bill in agreement with the rights groups).
That is how the program came to be.

Now with regard to limited places to take the test, as you may have read already, there were only 93 test last year in the whole state. If the folks giving the test don't have enough experience giving the test, what's the purpose? Would I like more facilities? Sure, but not if it makes the testing useless. By the way, we worked with Brothers of the Third Wheel on the testing.

I'm sure you have other questions, ask away.

You said to move, that may not work very well. We are getting calls from other states about how our system works. I think folks are wondering why one type of vehicle doesn't need to test to operate on the roadway when everything else does.


Top of the page Bottom of the page
RedMenace
Posted 8/9/2007 1:14 AM (#28317 - in reply to #28315)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 673
Location: GoodLiver, Oregon
You have a law requiring a special test and a special endorsement for three wheels. You have a responsibility to see that residents of the state have access to those tests so they can comply with the law, no matter if you do 3 tests or 1003 tests per year. People outside of the Seattle area simply do not have reasonable access to testing or training. If the numbers are so low they do not justify Washington's DOL making an effort to provide the tests and training to the rural areas of the state then how can you justify the requirements in the first place?

As for having competent testers-that is the DOL's responsibility. The sidecar test you use is simple, straightforward and not very different from
the test used for motorcycles. If a testing site can do a motorcycle test, they should be able to do the occasional sidecar test. What about some training for your people? Shouldn't that be part of the whole program?

I teach S/TEP classes in Oregon . You won't waiver the students that pass my class, even though it is the same program Evergreen offers in Seattle. It wouldn't cost the State of Washington a dime and it would provide access to classes and licensing for South Central Washington. I was told there was no need for it because there is no demand, yet I get inquiries every month from Washington residents who have trouble getting to your training and testing centers.

Sidecars will never have the numbers that motorcycles or autos have, but I have to believe the real reason you only did 93 tests last year is because you do such a poor job of extending this service to the public!

Vernon Wade
Adventure Sidecar
info@adventuresidecar.com

Edited by RedMenace 8/9/2007 9:37 AM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
claude #3563
Posted 8/9/2007 6:23 AM (#28318 - in reply to #28317)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 2471
Location: Middleburg, Pa
WASHCI (Steve) wrote:
>>>Help me out a little, that's a pretty wide open question. What fiasco? Not dodging the question, just not sure what you want to know.<<<

With all due respect and a lack of knowing how else to put it the 'fiasco' has been pretty much laid down as far as present tense by Mark and his posts.



WASHCI (Steve) wrote:
>>> I'll try a brief history:
Washington has had a 2 wheel rider ed program since the 80's. Here the course is subsidized so that the tuition can be reasonable. The money comes from endorsement fees only. The rights groups here put legislation together to create a fund that would be seperate from the general fund and not subject to raiding. They wanted only motorcyclist money in the fund so that no one else could make any claims on the money or direction of the program. This has turned out to be an excellent idea in light of other state funds being raided and programs being co-oped.<<

We are not speaking of a two wheel program here. If we were maybe a tabulation of how many two wheel tests were given woudl be in order. Surely it is more than 93.
What we are talking about here is the fact that legislation has been put into place that puts a mandate onto three wheel operators to get a specific liscense. This may be acceptable to some and may sound good to some on the surface but if your state cannot efficiently provide the means to make it happen then it is just not fair.
Asf ar as the handicapepd stance goes In other states a person who takes a test on a three wheeler to get a liscense will have a restriction on that liscence that says 'three wheels only' or something of that nature. That covers the handicapped etc quite well the same as a pesron who may be required to have an automatic transmission or hand controls.
There is additional three wheel training avaiable in the 'aftermarket' for those who wish to take it. The simple plan works and is not under any law , especially one that cannot uphold the responsibility to do their part.I am not saying these classes are redily available either but they are in some places. That is nto the point anyhow.


WASHCI (Steve) wrote:
>>When I came to WA in 2000 there were already trike riders that were concerned because they did not have any training availible. They continued to work with their legislators until in 2003 a bill was passed establishing a training program. Since prior to this bill trike and sidecars did not pay anything (they were able to get a restriction on the regular drivers license for 3 wheels only and here restriction cost nothing) there had to be equity in fees to be equity in training (this from the folks that drafted the bill in agreement with the rights groups).
That is how the program came to be.<<

Is there what you call 'equity' with the present program? Sure someoen can take an Evergreen course if one is avaiable and it can count but what about the state courses? I see where Vernon is asking why an evergreen course taken and passed elsewhere cannot count. Why is that if the course is put on by an approved evergreen instructor? Same course. I am not saying that Washington State shoudl subsidise part of a course taken in another state but there is no reason if evergreen's instructor training is approved in washington it shoudl not be recognized as a means to fulfill the washington state laws if taken somewhere else.
I frankly do not agree with allowing an outside entity to be able to make a profit (non profit organization or not) off of a law like this anyhow but that is just my opinion.

WASHCI (Steve) wrote:
>>Now with regard to limited places to take the test, as you may have read already, there were only 93 test last year in the whole state. If the folks giving the test don't have enough experience giving the test, what's the purpose? Would I like more facilities? Sure, but not if it makes the testing useless. <<<

Individuals take the test because they are required to by law. This means that you (the state)is responsible for doing your part to allow the law abiding people to o

Edited by claude #3563 8/9/2007 6:46 AM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Reardan Tom
Posted 8/9/2007 8:55 AM (#28322 - in reply to #28315)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 1171
Location: Reardan, WA
Originally written by WashCI on 8/8/2007 10:49 PM

I think folks are wondering why one type of vehicle doesn't need to test to operate on the roadway when everything else does.



What about the folks who've never driven anything other than their car and then, when they're old and grey, can climb into a huge motorhome with their car or boat hooked to the back and head down the road with no special endorsement?

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Reardan Tom
Posted 8/9/2007 8:59 AM (#28323 - in reply to #28311)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 1171
Location: Reardan, WA
Originally written by Joyce on 8/8/2007 8:56 PM

Wow, I think I did it. Now everyone will be really confused. So page 4 does contain the most recent post.


Thanks Joyce!!
Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/9/2007 10:58 AM (#28326 - in reply to #28322)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA


What about the folks who've never driven anything other than their car and then, when they're old and grey, can climb into a huge motorhome with their car or boat hooked to the back and head down the road with no special endorsement?



Actually that is being discussed on a national level. It is on the radar. What will be the end result? Don't know, beyond my paygrade.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/9/2007 11:09 AM (#28328 - in reply to #28322)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA
Claude, thanks for the specifics. I'll try to address them although some have already been stated. I'm going to break your post into smaller bits. Hope that's ok.


"We are not speaking of a two wheel program here." Sorry just tried to provide background. The main point is this exists because 3 wheel riders wanted it and made it happen. Folks keep refering to making a law and we are trying to effeciently follow it. My agreement with the law is immaterial (I do for the record), it's my job to try and do the best I can with the resources we have.

You pointed out how other states have a restriction. I stated in the last posting that we were the same until 3 wheel riders wanted it changed (there is a recurring message here).

Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/9/2007 11:22 AM (#28329 - in reply to #1998)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA
To address your (Claude) comments on training:

Training for 3 wheelers is currently availible in 2 "regular" locations. I have given Evergreen permission to provide classes in other areas if that is deemed necessary. Their limitation is funding. And here we go again, the 3 wheel community "appears" to be getting a fair share of the training dollars. I say appears because it's impossible to tell just how many their are. The law made it too easy for those who are not 3 wheel riders to get an endorsement for 2 & 3 wheels during the transition period. So the numbers are off.

With regard to Vernon's training, he and I have discussed this. His training is on dirt and while I understand his logic, we will not substitute dirtbike training for a 2 wheel endorsement so the same applies to 3 wheels. We do accept training from other states that have the same training standards as our own (2 & 3 wheel).
Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/9/2007 11:38 AM (#28330 - in reply to #1998)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA
Testing comments:

I'm afraid we are going to have a hard time agreeing on things here. It makes little sense to accept less quality in the 3 wheel testing. Quality comes through experience and practice. Testing has been distributed among the major population centers. There is one exception and Mark has found it. Kitsap county needs a site and I have been trying to get one for quite a while, I shared this fact with Mark earlier. It continues to be a huge problem finding landlords who will agree to let testing happen on their facilities. Some of it is liability, some is noise (but that's another subject isn't it). I promised Mark I would let him know as I may finally be getting somewhere.

The stoplight analogy is little flawed though. More appropriate would be that it turns green just not as often as you like.

And as I posted before, we do accept training from state programs with the same standards. And maybe there is a point I need to make. We accept training from STATE and MILITARY programs. Private programs have no external quality assurance programs. That really is the primary criteria.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/9/2007 11:45 AM (#28331 - in reply to #1998)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA
Claude, I'm sorry for not quite following this para:

"If the testing is being touted as such a great thing...laws having been passed to make it mandatory etc. did it really work out that way?
Now you allude to lack of qualified instructors , only a few folks actually taking the test statewide and then you are considering asking 'what's the purpose' and saying because of the above it may make the test uesless then it would seem that you are at least considering how dumb this all is. I am sure that those associated with Evergreen will never agree on this but if the facts that you stated are true than the mandated law which in in efect is no doubt useless as you put it. Please if you don't understand what I am saying here ask again...I may be a nobody but I can be patient."

I don't think I've painted you as a nobody and if you have that impression I'm very sorry, I've meant no disrespect. I do very much appreciate your patience on this para.

Let me just say I think the law makes sense and I think testing makes a great deal of sense. I get the impression you feel Evergreen has some influence on things but they are simply the contractor that won the contract to provide training. Others could well win the next contract. Maybe a club here in WA will next time.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/9/2007 12:12 PM (#28334 - in reply to #1998)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA
I'm going to put these last few together:

"Do you have a contact person with Brothers of the Third Wheel?"

They were from Tacoma and I understand the chapter isn't active anymore. The riders were a father and son (The dad name was Greg and they rode custom built trikes) and a gentleman with a VW conversion. The last had a really unusal name but I can't recall right now. I'll have to do some homework and get back to you. Only state organizations and riders were contacted to determine a state issue (I'm sure you can appreciate that). However, Evergreen as the course owner was involved in the process. Dave Wendell helped as well as some input from Dave Hough. Their help was primarily with the training side but suggestions were taken from all sources that offered with regard to the whole program.


>>> I may have and may have other statments as well. I feel that you shoudl comment on some of the real issues already presented here already though. You cannot provide training now for those it is required of. All of this mandated three wheel testing may sound good on the surface when presented in some board room but it surely seems that in reality it ain't working too well. <<<

Looking at the entries, I belive I have commented. As far as sounding good in a board room, again it was more like the clubhouse. WA citizens shaped this and we work to try and follow their lead.


>>I spent $693 for tax & registration on a USED rig, and they can't
even provide me with a reasonable way to comply with an utterly
stupid and unnecessary law!<<
Is that price real? Is it the going rate??? Subsidised training come from that ? Hmmm.

Mark is talking about registration (tags) not the drivers license endorsement. I listed all of the fees associated with endorsements and how they are distributed in an earlier post.

Thanks for the chance to present some of this info.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mark 42
Posted 8/9/2007 12:16 PM (#28335 - in reply to #28315)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 107
Location: Olalla, WA
I've already spent $693 for registration.
$30 for endorsement.
I figure another $25 to take the riding test.

So how much of my $745 will go to 3-wheel rider education?

I could have easily paid for the training (which I never took,
and would have cost another $100) myself.

I don't think the government should even be involved in offering
rider education; it's not their job.

I don't need the government to parent me. I'm not a child, I can
make a responsible decision for myself as to whether I need to
take special training to be safe.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
WashCI
Posted 8/9/2007 12:31 PM (#28336 - in reply to #28335)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes


Posts: 27
Location: Seabeck, WA
Originally written by Mark 42 on 8/9/2007 12:16 PM

I've already spent $693 for registration.
$30 for endorsement.
I figure another $25 to take the riding test.

So how much of my $745 will go to 3-wheel rider education?

I could have easily paid for the training (which I never took,
and would have cost another $100) myself.

I don't think the government should even be involved in offering
rider education; it's not their job.

I don't need the government to parent me. I'm not a child, I can
make a responsible decision for myself as to whether I need to
take special training to be safe.



There is no fee for the test.

Only monies associated with endorsements/permits go to the Motorcycle Safety Education Fund. Someone else would have to let you know where the registration/tags go. The local office may be able to say for certain.

WA is involved in training because the riders set it up that way. It works well here (my opinion of course).
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mark 42
Posted 8/9/2007 12:34 PM (#28337 - in reply to #28334)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 107
Location: Olalla, WA
Originally written by WashCI on 8/9/2007 9:12 AM
...WA citizens shaped this and we work to try and follow their lead.

Were 3-wheelers crashing willy-nilly into other people or something?
Were there people dying daily, monthly, even yearly due to a lack
of 3-wheel specific training?

I am a citizen.
My voice hereby says "Repeal the law requiring a special endorsement
for trikes and sidecars. Return to the motorcycle endorsement being
a blanket license to ride a motorcycle with two or three wheels."

What about vehicles with two front wheels and one rear wheel?
Should they be seperate? Even a trike and a sidecar rig are
very different from each other... but there is no need for
a breakdown into a multitude of classes.

How about just a warning label on the gastank of 3 wheelers
that reads "This does not handle like a two wheeled motorcycle.
Proper training and practice are advised before venturing out
onto roads with traffic".

Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mark 42
Posted 8/9/2007 12:53 PM (#28338 - in reply to #28337)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 107
Location: Olalla, WA
More info:

I have 90 days to take the riding skills test before my written test
and temporary permit (daytime only with no passengers) expires.

The test is offered in Kirkland and Centralia... one Saturday per
month. That means I have only three opportunities to take the test.

If I were to fail the test for some reason, I would probably have to
start the entire process over again!

Explain how any of this is fair and equitable?

If I were in the process of buying a sidecar rig I probably would
have said forget it. When I asked if I should get a Ural, I never
suspected that the government would make owning one hell for me.

At the begining of my posts in this thread I was a bit irritated
by the new requirement... but I figured I would just go ahead and
comply... now I am frustrated and angry beyond words.

I didn't like having to pay extra fees... but that is trivial compared
with the time investment to either take the safety class or the tests.

And I don't consider paying money to the government trivial either.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mark 42
Posted 8/9/2007 2:03 PM (#28339 - in reply to #28334)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 107
Location: Olalla, WA
I've been in contact with Rich Bright from ABATE WA.
Here is some of what he had to say:

ABATE was opposed to this legislation, The board and I felt it was incomplete, and that
the system for instruction was not even in place, but the folks at the WRRA pushed it
as though they represented all of you.... Currently i know that the limited number of
students taking the MSF Classes for three wheel is so small, those still offering the
classes can't make any money, and after all that is what it is all about- not safety-
Below is the 2003 message put out by the folks that gave you this legislation....

WASHINGTON ROADRIDERS ASSOCIATION

SB 5229; the bill to incorporate sidecar / trike training into the subsidized portion
of the WMSP passed the House of Representatives this afternoon. It has now passed both
the House & Senate, and will be forwarded to the Governor for signature.

The WRRA met with Governor Locke's transportation advisor the first week of session.
The feedback was very positive. The WRRA will be in contact with the Governor's office,
and will post information when this bill is scheduled for signature.

I once again offer my serious gratitude to all of you who called, e-mailed, and lobbied
this legislation. Final passage is due to your efforts. You DO make the difference.

I would also like to acknowledge the efforts of Sen. Mary Margaret Haugen; Sen. Jim
Horn; Rep. Ed Murray and
Rep. John Lovick for their help with, and attention to, SB 5229.

Special "well done" to Dave Wendell, WRRA Director of Rider Education, for his time and
work. Dave spent a year working with Sen. Haugen, and staff, assisting with the
original draft, preparation of lobbying materials...and more than a few hours in Olympia.

Karen Bolin kbolin53@attbi.com
WRRA Gov't Relations

This message will be posted on the WRRA web site at: www.roadriders.com


PS:
If you like the prior info I sent- look what else the WRRA and it's officer approved as
"endorsed by motorcyclist"

SB 5134 - 2007-08
Authorizing police officers to impound vehicles operated by drivers without specially
endorsed licenses.

Sponsors: Senators Haugen, Swecker, Rasmussen, Delvin
By Request: Washington State PatrolDepartment of LicensingWashington Traffic Safety
Commission


This is being used to fish for motorcyclist-

They also approve this bill:

SB 5273 - 2007-08
Modifying motorcycle driver's license endorsement and education provisions. (To take
the MSF course it now cost $125- A $50 increase, 5 years ago it was only $50, now it is
$150- Again, is it about safety? Or Money?

I think we should be able to force the legistion to fund this program better or
eliminate the rule.

The real reason for this, was money for the folks who forced this. Some where paid
money to devolpe the plan.
What happened was a "Concerned Three Wheeler" wanted classes taught to her- So in 2002
a bill was drafted and set asside when it was pointed out that 3 Wheelers pay no
endorsement fee. In 2003 a new bill was introduced, SB-5229-

If you are opposed to this mess, let me know that the Three wheelers want a change, and
I will help you get the law improved ot removed?

Rich Bright
ABATE of WA- State Coordinator


Edited by Mark 42 8/9/2007 2:05 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Mark 42
Posted 8/9/2007 2:14 PM (#28340 - in reply to #28334)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 107
Location: Olalla, WA
I urge you to contact your legislative representatives and complain
to no end about this!
I have contacted all 3 of my reps today.
Here's a list of reps by district..... mine's the 26th district.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rosters/MembersByDistrict.aspx

Contact Governor Gregoire too (I did)
http://www.capwiz.com/politicsol/mail/?id=31787&type=GV&state=WA
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Reardan Tom
Posted 8/9/2007 4:56 PM (#28346 - in reply to #28326)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 1171
Location: Reardan, WA
Originally written by WashCI on 8/9/2007 9:58 AM

Actually that is being discussed on a national level. It is on the radar. What will be the end result? Don't know, beyond my paygrade.


I think the AARP lobbyists will put up more of a fight and with much more clout than anyone ever could over any sidecar/motorcycle issues.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
claude #3563
Posted 8/9/2007 9:44 PM (#28354 - in reply to #28346)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 2471
Location: Middleburg, Pa
WASHCI,
You stasted that three wheel riders requested this law. Who? Most that I have heard comment on it knew noting about it.
I asked if you had previously contacted th eSidecar Industry Council. Did you?
Did th eUSCA know of it except for maybe a selct few.
Who were the officers of the Washington Road Riders at the time this legislation was being considered. How long had the club been in existance?
Is it a big club now? Sounds liek it is? How many sidecarists belong to it?
You say you contacted the Brothers of the Third wheel. A father and son? Nice try..sounded good the first time around but doesn't hold much merit really. Note that I had posted about the only BTW chapter in Washington being defunct as far as what their website says in my last post. How long had they been in exisitance prior to that? No matter I suppose as obviously they were there long enough for you to say you contacted THE brothers of the third wheel.Sure did sound good.
You mentioned Dave Wendall. What hat was he wearing at the time of this legislation being formed? He has had quite a few different titles.I think he was awarded the Pop Dryer award by the USCA -SSP one year. Who is (was)thE USCA -SSP? Basically David Hough. Oh and a reminder to clear the air that the letters USCA are only letters according to David Hough and do not stand for anything in this case.
David Hough? I think he was awarded the Pop Dryer award by the USCA-SSP one year too...hmmm.
Top of the page Bottom of the page
RedMenace
Posted 8/9/2007 10:01 PM (#28355 - in reply to #28329)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 673
Location: GoodLiver, Oregon
Originally written by WashCI on 8/9/2007 11:22 AM


With regard to Vernon's training, he and I have discussed this. His training is on dirt and while I understand his logic, we will not substitute dirtbike training for a 2 wheel endorsement so the same applies to 3 wheels. We do accept training from other states that have the same training standards as our own (2 & 3 wheel).


Steve, you and I both know there is a little more to it than that. Aside from the disingenuous remark in the last sentence quoted above( and which states might those be?) there seems to be some active effort to discourage additional training being provided to Washington residents.

When I first approached Carl Spurgeon about it the excuse was you couldn't inspect me because I am 2 miles outside of your borders so that made it impossible for you to ensure I was actually teaching to your standards.

I offered to find a place in Washington to do it and was told I could only do it if I charged no more than $100 for the class OR I bid for monies from your program. This was an interpretation of the legislation not the letter of the law as I read it, anyway.

Unable to persuade Carl that it would be better to let me charge my normal fee and forget about the State subsidy I asked to be sent the bidding information so I could submit a bid. That never happened even though I was assured it would. When I followed up I was told that bidding was closed, then I was told that it had been decided not to allow new sites to bid. Then I got the rigamaroll about not being valid because I train on a grass lot, even though you have no experience upon which to base that judgment. The traction is comparable to that of Boeing field on a damp day and better than Boeing field on a wet icy day. I know, because I have taught for Evergreen there under those conditions which are not unusual.

My class is not dirtbike training! It is exactly the same as ESC S/TEP classes taught in Seattle. I get the training materials and the completion cards from Evergreen Safety Council, our instructors are all Evergreen trained and certified and we do the course by the book. All the S/TEP exercises can be and are performed to the same standards as those done on pavement. It works the same & the experience translates directly to the street. If you can stop from speed in the mandated distance and corner at the test speeds without going out of your lane on grass you sure can do the same on dry pavement!

The you said I could subcontract through Evergreen if we could find a paved lot, but you would not let me bid or do it on my own. Even though this is a losing proposition for me I tried to set that up in Vancouver but was unable to put it together.

I get the distinct impression that sidecar training is low priority for you guys, you don't care if some of your residents can't get training or testing and there are some deeper politics going on here.. I am very disappointed.

Don't misunderstand my criticism. I feel this way because I don't think your department is meeting nor does it intend to meet the spirit of the legislation or the needs of the three wheeled motorcycling community. The WA DOL has become an impediment to this sport and to several Washington businesses that contribute to your economy.

For me this isn't about the money. It won't make much difference to me financially if you never allow Washington residents to test through my program. It isn't a money maker for me, it is something I do because it is needed and I enjoy doing it. I sort of break even if you don't look too closely at all the costs. But I do it without any of your funds and don't want or need to change that.

Vernon Wade
Adventure Sidecar



Edited by RedMenace 8/9/2007 10:07 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
claude #3563
Posted 8/9/2007 10:09 PM (#28356 - in reply to #28339)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 2471
Location: Middleburg, Pa
Mark Wrote:
>>I've been in contact with Rich Bright from ABATE WA.....snip<<
Mark, Please see if Rich can alert ABATE on a National Level to be aware that it has been said that other states may very well be considering this type of thing according to Steve who has posted here and said he is a director of something.
I think if a red alert is put out early to ABATE on a national level at least more folks will be able to give some input on each side prior to being blindsided by a selct few as seems to hav ebeen the case in Washington State.
Not a bad idea to contact Brother of the Third Wheel on a National Level either. Be sure they know that the defunct washington state chapter father and son were for it earlier of course.
Oh of course I could be wrong about the blindsiding and am quite sure someone will tell me so. That is not the main point though. The main point is to get the word out and at least allow a voice by those who may be affected by such legislation prior to it being put into law.

Top of the page Bottom of the page
claude #3563
Posted 8/9/2007 10:16 PM (#28357 - in reply to #28355)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 2471
Location: Middleburg, Pa
Hey Vernon after reading your post would you think the word 'F I A S C O'
may just possibly apply to all of this washington State stuff afterall?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
claude #3563
Posted 8/9/2007 10:22 PM (#28358 - in reply to #28357)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 2471
Location: Middleburg, Pa
Sidecar Industry Council
http://www.sidecar-industry.com/index.html

Board of Directors / Contact Sheet
Chairman
President
Primary Contact Doug Bingham
c/o Side Strider Sidecars
15838 Arminta St. Unit 25
Van Nuys, CA 91405
(818) 780-5542
fax (818) 780-1587
bingham@sidestrider.com

Vice President
Pete Larson
c/o Liberty Sidecars
2310 Rainier Ave. S.
Seattle, WA 98144



Edited by claude #3563 8/9/2007 10:26 PM
Top of the page Bottom of the page
claude #3563
Posted 8/9/2007 10:37 PM (#28359 - in reply to #28358)
Subject: RE: Washington State Licensing Changes



Posts: 2471
Location: Middleburg, Pa
Tried to get onto the Washington Road Riders Association website and cannot do so. Is it down..anyone know?
Top of the page Bottom of the page
Jump to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6
Now viewing page 4 [25 messages per page]
Jump to forum :
Search this forum
Printer friendly version
E-mail a link to this thread

 


Copyright 2004-2008, The United Sidecar Association — Built by BarringtonPress — Send your suggestions and comments to the webmaster
USCA Web usage policy



(Delete all cookies set by this site)
Running MegaBBS ASP Forum Software
© 2002-2017 PD9 Software