Well, I am not a lawyer, but I guess that depends on how they define
"inoperative". Because it doesn't say "shall ONLY apply" in the last
sentence of (d)(1). So if you define inoperative as "traffic signals that
don't work with bikes" I think we're in the clear! =) Although, I guess they
might argue that the traffic light was not "inoperative" because we could
have pressed the pedestrian crossing button.

Saw the article in the Press-Tribune today when it was delivered. Nice.

Regards,
Mike

----- Original Message -----
From: "bjhaake" <bjhaake@...>
To: <bikingroseville@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 5:54 PM
Subject: [bikingroseville] Non-Triggering Lights and the Law


> Someone told me once that you could proceed over a red light if it is
> not workign and you waited three minutes. I never found this in the
> traffic law, but I did pass it on to a few people (by saying I have
> never been able to officially confirm it...).
>
> I did now find this in section 21800 in the CVC. The first one
> unfortunately doesn't really apply b/c of the mentioning of failing
> batteries. But at least closer than the three minute approach...
>
>
> (d) (1) The driver of any vehicle approaching an intersection which
> has official traffic control signals that are inoperative shall stop
> at the intersection, and may proceed with caution when it is safe to
> do so. This subparagraph shall apply to traffic control signals that
> become inoperative because of battery failure.
>
> (2) When two vehicles enter an intersection from different highways at
> the same time, and the official traffic control signals for the
> intersection are inoperative, the driver of the vehicle on the left
> shall yield the right-of-way to the vehicle on his or her immediate
> right, except that the driver of any vehicle on a terminating highway
> shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle on the intersecting
> continuing highway.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>