If you only pay the $15 once from a purchase of a bike that is not much. If they were using it for roads there are some things that would make that fair. Roads need to be kept up to not have pot holes and other dangers that can be deadly to bicyclists. If that money was also used to maintain and create more bike lanes on the roads that is fair. If they just took the money and put it towards anything but the roads or just to make more damn round abouts then no I see it as not fair.

So for a $200 bike the tax equates to 7.5%, on a $300 bike it would be 5% and even on a $500 bike it would be 3%. A counter argument is that the tax is discriminatory towards bikers.

What is worse is that the bike purchasers are already probably paying 2.9%--the same as those purchasing cars. Are the bikers going to be double-taxed? I think that the bicyclists have some valid concerns.

"...met with hysteria by some and reasonable ideas by others" -- obviously, the former by those who disagree with him and the latter by those who think his idea is brilliant.

The amount of road wear cause by bike is minimal compared to cars and trucks. Maybe he could add a similar tax to the sale of cars and trucks. He evidently doesn't believe in share the road.

If the tax went specifically to building trails and bike lanes, he might get some support.

rack-eteering laws.