View Poll Results: Should the MOST program End

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    0 0%
  • No

    6 60.00%
  • Need More Info

    4 40.00%
Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Should the MOST Program go away?

  1. #1
    Senior Member Lifetime Supporter
    Site Admin
    bornwildnfree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Arvada, CO
    Posts
    1,666

    Should the MOST Program go away?

    *edited to include the information provided by Terry from ABATE. Please also see my apology to Terry posted below.

    I apologize, this has taken a long time for me to write, partially because I have been checking facts and partially because I've been trying to wrap my head around what's been happening. I went to the CDOT MOST Motorcycle Operator Safety Advisory Board meeting and here's what I came away with:

    1. Most of the people that were there were for profit vendors (T3RG and Motorcycle Training Academy are on the board), and the for profit vendors (T3RG and MTA), IMHO, were very upset that CDOT wants to end the vendor rebate. More info on this: For the longest time, the vendors could basically use the fund as their own slush fund, applying for and receiving funding for things such as picnic tables and new motorcycles. That ended after an investigation by the state which was started, in part, by ABATE (thank God someone was paying attention), now the rebate has been limited to classes that result in an endorsement and it is only $35 per student. CDOT spends a lot of time verifying what the vendors send them and making sure the rebate is warranted. This is part of their duties, but they are very tired of trying to rangle the vendors.

    2. CDOT wishes to end the rebate program to the vendors. Instead they wish to:
    a. Bring in a company to oversee the vendors and make sure they are compliant. This will most likely be the MSF (which brings on it's own problems and I don't necessarily agree with it) but could be any motorcycle company that applies for the job
    b. Take the remaining money and if it's financially feasible, give the rebate directly to the student using a 3rd party rebate program (something like Visa gift card rebates). Feasible means if the third party company isn't going to charge too much and if the student rebate is going to be more than say $10.

    3. The Department of Revenue is the one responsible for collecting the fees from our endorsements and registrations and according to ABATE, the collection of the fees will end when MOST ends, however according to CDOT, DOR will continue to collect the fees. I have a call to the Department of Revenue to confirm whether ending MOST will end the Fee collection. Depending on the answer, that sways my vote.

    4. I have to go to a meeting on the 22nd sponsored by the Coalition of Clubs to "bring me into the fold" and try and talk me into supporting the end of MOST this year through legislation. Last time I checked, I'm not a sheep, however, it is not what I believe that I must represent. It is the riders of Colorado. So I need your help.

    Now, for my opinions:
    The MOST program is pretty messed up right now and the reason we are in this mess, IMHO, and in danger of losing the program lands partially on CDOT, but mostly on the vendors. They used the MOST funds as their own personal slush fund. Now that they won't be getting a check anymore they are very angry and want to end the program all together. They are also seem opposed to having anyone oversee that they are in compliance.

    If ending the most program means the ending the fund collection, then maybe MOST should end. It's a big pile of crap and while it does some good, there are federal funds available to provide awareness etc.

    However, if ending the MOST program means the funds will still be collected and put into a general fund, then no, the MOST program shouldn't end. According to CDOT and DOR, it is extremely difficult to end a tax on anything if the state is collecting it so it is very likely that the fees will still apply even if the MOST program ends which means we will still be paying for the program but have no control and no vote on what happens to those funds. They will go into the general fund to be used by the state as it sees fit.

    I also have a question out to the DOR asking if they will still accept the endorsement certificates from vendors if the MOST program ends. The vendors say yes, CDOT and DOR say no. I'll keep you posted on that one as well.

    If you can't tell, I'm pretty angry about the whole thing. I am really angry at the vendors on the board for acting like small children, screaming because their check won't be happening any more. It looked like something off of Jerry Springer. "How dare they take away my check! That's it the program must end. " I'm angry that they are trying to bring me into the fold and I'm angry that I've been lied to by people that I thought I could trust. So thanks for hanging out through the whole thing. Please vote and let me know what you think.
    Last edited by bornwildnfree; Wed Sep 10th, 2014 at 09:43 AM.
    "With every broken bone, I swear I lived."


  2. #2
    Member Grant H.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Longmont
    Posts
    414

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    I'm with you.

    If the fees end, then yes, MOST should just end.
    If the fees do not end, then no, MOST should not end, and those funds should be diverted back to their original purpose.

    As for the Vendors... Well, they had their chance to do things right, and it sounds like they blew it.
    2005 GSXR 1000 - Not stock...
    2006 SV650S - Rebuild in progress, with some upgrades...
    1998 Yamaha WR400 - Not stock...
    2008 Dodge QCSB 6.7L Cummins - 525/1019 HP/TQ

  3. #3
    Senior Member Matrix's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Arvada
    Posts
    1,156

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    Admittedly, I am not an expert on government programs but closing the program sounds like a bad idea to me. I find it difficult to comprehend that if it closes that it will start again under a new name and provide more value. To be honest, I like what CDOT is trying to do. They questioned the means in which the vendors were operating and now plan to regulate the shit out of them. Those that don't like it will leave which could open up the door for better training from new vendors who can figure out ways to be profitable under the new payback method. Win win in my opinion.

    Taking the fees away is also a concern. While I despise all form of taxes I know that the money is at least pointed in our general direction. If they stop the fees it will be even harder to start collecting them again in the future (because of people like me who oppose all new taxes) and in the meantime, we loose.

    I would like to see the program fixed before deciding to pull the plug.
    Owner and General Manager - Fun Center Cycles in Durango, CO
    _________________________________________
    What do all men with power want...more power!

    11 BMW S1000RR - Street - Lady on the street
    13 Kawi ZX6R - Track - Freak in the bed
    13 Triumph Daytona 675R - Wifes bike

    2014 MRA 400 Production Class Champion

  4. #4
    (formerly "ABATEStateCoord") THoward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    162

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    I would like to make some clarifications on your information. Please see my responses in bold.


    Quote Originally Posted by bornwildnfree View Post
    I apologize, this has taken a long time for me to write, partially because I have been checking facts and partially because I've been trying to wrap my head around what's been happening. I went to the CDOT MOST Motorcycle Operator Safety Advisory Board meeting and here's what I came away with:

    1. Most of the people that were there were vendors (ABATE, T3RG and Motorcycle Training Academy are on the board), and they were very upset that CDOT wants to end the vendor rebate. More info on this: For the longest time, the vendors could basically use the fund as their own slush fund, applying for and receiving funding for things such as picnic tables and new motorcycles. (ABATE is not nor was not upset that the "check" ins't coming to us anymore....as long as the check is going to the student. I cannot speak on behalf of other vendors) That ended after an investigation by the state (THAT WAS PROMPTED BY ABATE), now the rebate has been limited to classes that result in an endorsement and it is only $35 per student. CDOT spends a lot of time verifying what the vendors send them and making sure the rebate is warranted. This is part of their duties, but they are very tired of trying to rangle the vendors.

    2. CDOT wishes to end the rebate program to the vendors. Instead they wish to: (Completely end the student tuition subsidy that you refer to as a rebate)
    a. Bring in a company to oversee the vendors and make sure they are compliant. This will most likely be the MSF but could be any motorcycle company that applies for the job (Not just ANY motorcycle company can apply for this) ABATE has no issue with compliance. We have passed every QA that we have gone thru. We complain that some other vendors are not compliant. The problem with a 3rd party like MSF over seeing the program....vendors will not be able to offer other advanced curriculum. Remember....MSF is a curriculum PROVIDER, they are not a training company Is it not the point to educate people to be safer riders? MSF is a good curriculum....but there are others out there that could address Colorado riding conditions a bit better.
    b. Take the remaining money and if it's financially feasible, give the rebate directly to the student using a 3rd party rebate program (something like Visa gift card rebates). Feasible means if the third party company isn't going to charge too much and if the student rebate is going to be more than say $10. 3rd party rebate company means a reduction in the subsidy to the student.

    3. The Department of Revenue is the one responsible for collecting the fees from our endorsements and registrations and according to ABATE, the collection of the fees will end when MOST ends, however according to CDOT, DOR will continue to collect the fees. I have a call to the Department of Revenue to confirm whether ending MOST will end the Fee collection. Depending on the answer, that sways my vote. ABATE has never suggested ENDING the MOST program. We have suggested and intend to pursue repealing the fees that motorcyclists pay for the program. Another note, this program is TOTALLY funded by motorcyclists. IF we accomplish this, there will still be enough funding to keep the program running thru the year 2022, then the State will need to figure out how to pay for the program. By the way, this means ending the subsidy which is what CDOT wants to do anyway. So I am not sure how you figure ABATE was acting like "a child" concerning this issue. You saying ABATE said if the MOST program ends so will the fees. I am the ABATE you are referring to, I said the fees SHOULD end if the MOST program ends. I never said they would I am not stupid and I know that has to be done legislatively.

    4. I have to go to a meeting on the 22nd with ABATE, T3RG, and the Coalition of Clubs to "bring me into the fold" and try and talk me into supporting the end of MOST this year through legislation. Last time I checked, I'm not a sheep, however, it is not what I believe that I must represent. It is the riders of Colorado. So I need your help.

    Now, for my opinions:
    The MOST program is pretty messed up right now and the reason we are in this mess, IMHO, and in danger of losing the program lands partially on CDOT, but mostly on the vendors. They used the MOST funds as their own personal slush fund. Now that they won't be getting a check anymore they are very angry and want to end the program all together. They are also seem opposed to having anyone oversee that they are in compliance. Do not include ABATE in this angry comment. Also, ABATE was investigated as to a "slush fund" that you refer to and guess what....we were actually using the funding to reduce the cost to students. You can verify that with CDOT if you would like.

    If ending the most program means the ending the fund collection, then maybe MOST should end. It's a big pile of crap and while it does some good, there are federal funds available to provide awareness etc. CDOT cannot or will not get these funds...it is up to a private entity to apply for these grants. So far the only ones in the state that have done so is ABATE and Ride Smart....is CSC interested in applying for the grants to provide awareness?

    However, if ending the MOST program means the funds will still be collected and put into a general fund, then no, the MOST program shouldn't end. According to CDOT and DOR, it is extremely difficult to end a tax on anything if the state is collecting it so it is very likely that the fees will still apply even if the MOST program ends which means we will still be paying for the program but have no control and no vote on what happens to those funds. They will go into the general fund to be used by the state as it sees fit. ABATE has assured me that this is not the case and the fees will no longer be collected but I want to hear directly from the Department of Revenue. I will keep you posted. ABATE has not assured you of any such thing. If the fees are not repealed legislatively the money will go in to a general fund. IF the fees are repealed then DOR will no longer collect them.

    I also have a question out to the DOR asking if they will still accept the endorsment certificates from vendors if the MOST program ends. The vendors say yes, CDOT and DOR say no. I'll keep you posted on that one as well. Again, no one has asked for the program to end. ABATE is only asking that the motorcyclists no longer pay for it because the funds are not being used as intended by original legislation. There again, you can feel free to call former Senator Tochtrop for the full history of the MOST program.

    If you can't tell, I'm pretty angry about the whole thing. I am really angry at the vendors on the board for acting like small children, screaming because their check won't be happening any more. It looked like something off of Jerry Springer. "How dare they take away my check! That's it the program must end. " I'm angry that they are trying to bring me into the fold and I'm angry that I've been lied to by people that I thought I could trust. So thanks for hanging out through the whole thing. Please vote and let me know what you think.
    Tell me what I have lied to you about? Have I tried to bring you in to the fold? My apologies if you feel I am trying to persuade you in any way. What I told you about ABATE is not my thoughts, it is the VOTE of the members that attend our meetings. Yes you need to know the facts. While you have several correct points you have several incorrect points. I'd be happy to send out the minutes and slide show presentations that were presented at that meeting to anyone that would like to see them so you can see what I am stating is fact. Message me with an email address and I will forward them. I do not appreciate you dragging ABATE (me because I am the only one authorized to speak on behalf of ABATE) thru the mud. And yes I take it personal. ABATE has tried for YEARS to correct the problems in MOST....because WE represent motorcyclists first and foremost. ABATE has stated and complained since 2005 about how this program is being run. I have documents to prove my statements. ABATE IS ANGRY THAT CDOT IS NOT USING THE MOST PROGRAM AS IT WAS INTENDED AND WHY SHOULD MOTORCYCLISTS PAY FOR IT. WE AS VEHICLE OWNERS DO NOT PAY A FEE TO PAY FOR DUI PROGRAMS OR CAR SEAT PROGRAMS OR DRIVER'S ED, SO WHY SHOULD MOTORCYCLISTS PAY FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE PROGRAM. PERIOD END OF STORY.
    Sorry for my rant....but I want everyone to know ABATE's position and it is NOT what has been portrayed in this post.
    Terry

  5. #5
    Gold Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    nv
    Posts
    8,381

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    Well this just got interesting.

  6. #6
    Senior Member The GECCO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    HPR
    Posts
    1,245

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    Quote Originally Posted by ABATEStateCoord View Post
    Sorry for my rant....but I want everyone to know ABATE's position and it is NOT what has been portrayed in this post.
    Thank you, Terry, for setting the record straight.
    The GECCO

    You begin your riding career with a bag full of luck and an empty bag of experience. The trick is to fill the bag of experience before you empty the bag of luck.

  7. #7
    Chief Viffer Lifetime Supporter dirkterrell's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Erie
    Posts
    5,871

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    This is a an example of why I am against involuntary taxation to accomplish even admirable goals like this. It sounds to me like the politicians have gotten wind of a way to pull more money in for their spending frenzy. If MOST goes away, the money is still collected and then used for other things? Bullshit. And if that happens, then all motorcyclists need to raise holy hell about it. It is only "extremely difficult to end a tax on anything if the state is collecting it" if no noise is made about it in the wider arena. This kind of thing should have, at best, been set up as a voluntary contribution by motorcyclists. That way, when abuse arises, we can voice our disapproval by removing the funding. That is the only sure way to maintain control over something. If you give the government the right to take the funding by force, this is the kind of situation you inevitably end up in.
    Formerly MRA #211 - High Precision Racing

    "A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self- preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property, and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means."

    --Thomas Jefferson



  8. #8
    Senior Member Lifetime Supporter
    Site Admin
    bornwildnfree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Arvada, CO
    Posts
    1,666

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    So, I owe Terry Howard a personal apology and ABATE as well. I do want to thank Terry for taking the time to reply to my ranty post and for setting the record straight as far as ABATE's position as well as her own. I will be editing the posts on FB and on the CSC with the new information. I should have checked with Terry before I went off and that was wrong and because I did not do so, I spread misinformation. That was not my intention and I let my anger against T3RG, Motorcycle Training Academy and the Coalition of Clubs cloud my judgment and ABATE and Terry got thrown in with guilt by association and misunderstanding of what was being said, not that it makes it right. So, Terry, I am very sorry.


    I do want to set the record straight. Terry has never once lied to me and I do consider her a friend. It is part of the reason it took me so long to post what I did, because I knew including ABATE included Terry and she did not deserve to be part of my rant and from her reply, neither did ABATE. So again, I apologize, and I will do what I can to fix it.
    "With every broken bone, I swear I lived."


  9. #9
    (formerly "ABATEStateCoord") THoward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Aurora
    Posts
    162

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    Thank you Christi, I consider you a friend as well!
    Terry

  10. #10
    Senior Member Lifetime Supporter
    Site Admin
    bornwildnfree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Arvada, CO
    Posts
    1,666

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    Received in a FB post from Deb Craig who works for ABATE. It has some good info in it so I thought I would share:


    Deb: It is definitely difficult to rescind a tax. This is a 'tax' that you, as motorcyclists, are paying for. No one else pays for it. The original intent of the legislation was to make training available and affordable. Terry already addressed most of your comments but you may want to take it from someone who has been involved with this project since the beginning in 1990. The MOST program is NOT meeting the intent of the original legislation and has come right out and said they do not have to because they can't find it written -- they should look at the older rules (the ones that were in effect before the bureaucracy made it their goal to totally corrupt the program). I have a copy so I'm sure they do too. In fact, I know they do because I emailed a copy to Glenn. We went in to the legislature in a later year (I'd have to look up the exact year) and asked them to increase the fees so that the subsidy to the student could be increased. This was a VOLUNTARY surcharge requested by motorcyclists FOR motorcyclists. Yes, there are associated administrative costs and the legislation accounted for that but because the word "subsidy" isn't in legislation, MOST feels they don't have to give it and can use the fees for anything they want.


    Christi: What if motorcyclists today are more concerned about awareness and could care less about making getting a rebate or making training affordable? I know the program was originally started to make motorcycle training in Colorado affordable but what if the priorities of today's rider have changed? The feedback I'm getting from a lot of riders is, "What rebate, who cares, they need to do more about awareness...where's the commercials, the billboards, the public awareness campaign?"


    Deb: First of all, Christi, not all motorcyclists feel that way. Yes, they want awareness and safety -- which, by the way was also built into the original rules and has been increased over the years -- but if you don't think they care about the rebate, come sit on the phone with me one day and listen to the price shoppers wanting a class. I can't tell you how many times a day I hear "can you give me a discount?", "your competitor is only charging____", "I can't come up with that kind of money right now", "I'm going to have to cancel my class because I/my spouse lost my job" (or otherwise can't afford it), etc., etc.. As you may, or may not know, all summer long we ran heavily discounted classes in the more economically depressed areas of the state and many students there STILL had trouble coming up with the money. So I know first hand the rebate DOES matter. There were times in the past, the class was discounted as much as $150, although the average was around $75. Now it's $35 and ONLY for testing classes -- no continuing training. MOST should be renamed MOLT (Motorcycle Operator License Testing). Safety and awareness should, and has always until recently, included continuing education. Next year, there will be NO rebate from what we are being told. The next logical step will be for vendors (training companies) to increase their prices which will definitely decrease the number of people who will register for training.
    "With every broken bone, I swear I lived."


  11. #11
    Member 07D675CO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Centennial
    Posts
    128

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    I for one am ok subsidizing training/license classes. However there needs to be written into the law/bill that at least 95% of the money must go to the actual reduction of the costs. The refunds should be out of the hands of the vendors. They receive a set amount per student that is enrolled. The remaining is for admin. They can charge whatever they want pre-refund. Let the students decide if they want one company over another.

    If there is no guarantee then I can't support such a fee/tax. Clearly many of the vendors need to be priced out or removed from the program.
    2010 Ducati Hypermotard 796

  12. #12
    Senior Member Yearly Supporter Generic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Arvada
    Posts
    864

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    If the fees aren't going away then I want the MOST program to continue with more input on the use of those funds.
    2005 Kawasaki Z750S

  13. #13
    Senior Member Sarge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Fort Carson
    Posts
    1,270

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    The Motorcycle Safety Program (MSP) was established to teach riders of all skill levels the basic fundamentals needed in order to safely operate a motorcycle. The MSP was created from legislation in 1984 and began one year later. The Motorcycle Safety Program is free to all Pennsylvania license holders.

    http://www.pamsp.com

    PA seems to have figured it out.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Moderator Spooph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Golden, CO.
    Posts
    883

    Re: Should the MOST Program go away?

    So I've done some further digging on this issue, and although I continue to dig and there is a lot more information to be unearthed (including much of the history and what the MOST program came from) here are the current facts I have to report:

    - The MOST Program is managed by CDOT, and has 1 staff person available to them. Currently this staff person has spent the majority of their time on working with vendors on processing the rebates. CDOT's position is that MOST's staff person can better be utilized. Why not get another staff person you might ask? I wasn't provided a direct answer to this, however it seemed to hinge on things much bigger than MOST or CDOT and seemed to have something to do with greater state politics. Either way, the practical way forward is that staff isn't going to increase.
    - Along with MOST, CDOT runs other campaigns for motorcycle safety, specifically and not. Look here: http://www.coloradodot.info/programs and here: http://www.coloradodot.info/programs/live-to-ride
    - Included in MOST is some data gathering, all of which is available through CDOT to anybody who wants it. These statistics and the MOST Advisory Board (which has a member from every party who is impacted by it, riders, insurance, vendors, law-enforcement, legislature, etc) guide where MOST's money is allocated.
    - Currently the MOST statue (http://www.sos.state.co.us/CCR/Gener...VersionId=5642) describes the provision of a program for basic rider education toward attaining an endorsement. This is currently the MSF BRC, but could be another curriculum to teach beginning riders the basics of riding a motorcycle. It does not make room for advanced rider courses. This has changed recently, went into effect last year - (Just as a side note and observation - ABATE was all over this change to MOST, and with more members/support things might have turned out differently. I'm not saying it should have turned out differently, but I do know ABATE was there and watching. If you, reader, are mad at the outcome, maybe you should join them as they watch all motorcycle related legislation).
    - The MOST program is scheduled to be sunset in 2017, so, is it worth trying to legislate it to look different, or to put the time we have into making it the most effective program it can be, showing legislatures it's worth keeping around?

    I'm not going to get into the history of MOST yet, I'm just sharing what I know about the program currently in effect.

    The controversy surrounding MOST is how the money should be spent ($2/endorsement, $4/motorcycle registration, totaling about $1.2Million, $800,000 this year.) CDOT is presenting the idea of hiring an oversight entity of some sort to quality check and standardize motorcycle training from the current vendors to ensure all students receive certified training. There are a total of 17 vendors with prices ranging from $50/class - $250/class. CDOT has received feedback that a quality basic rider training course that results in a student's motorcycle endorsement is a reasonable value up to $250. What is more important than the price, according to their research, is that it fit into the student's schedule. CDOT has very explicitly stated that they do not want to put anybody out of business, and that the vendors have built a great infrastructure for training new riders, but there is inconsistency, and that needs to be fixed. How best to do that?

    Please keep in mind, MOST is a bill for basic rider skills, it is meant to enable new riders, beginning riders and riders who can use a refresher on motorcycle riding, to ride a motorcycle. It is not meant to teach an experienced rider to ride harder, faster, or in conditions that is otherwise taught to be avoided and dangerous. We'll get to advanced rider training in just a moment... So, in order to provide consistent training, how should MOST use it's money to train riders on the basic of motorcycle operation? MOST is the program which certifies a trainer, a program to provide adequate training so that the DMV, which is part of the Department of Revenue (DOR), can provide a motorcycle operator with a motorcycle endorsement. Therefor, MOST needs to first and foremost make sure that all the vendors are educating to the same standard. With just 1 person on staff, that is next to near impossible. As a possible student, do you think you're getting the same quality from the $50 and $250 training? And if you are, why does one vendor charge $250 and the other $50? Where is the difference? Why the different prices, if not for a difference in quality? This is what CDOT, and the MOST Advisory Board is trying to understand how best to accomplish.

    How do you think CDOT/MOST should go about providing a consistent, quality, basic rider training program all across the state of Colorado while respecting the place of vendors and not wanting to put them out of business (or re-invent the wheel for that matter)?

    How do you think some vendors who have a tougher time providing competitive rates to this end might respond differently than vendors who have figured out a way to provide the same quality training at a reduced cost? Or, let me ask the same question in a different way: Wouldn't you want to know if a course's quality is lower if it has a lower price?

    OK, so let's move on to the idea of advanced or continuing education in a more general sense using the MSF curriculum as an example. Remember, CDOT is state, not federal - Colorado Department of Transportation. Quite plainly, the MOST statue does not currently allow for continuing or advanced education (please reference link above), however, there are many federal grants available which anybody can apply for the start an advanced training program. CDOT has even tried provided the ARC to some riders for free, but stopped because of the lack of interest... So, from the data then, it seems in general riders want the basic training, and then to build their skills by themselves or through other means than training... Is this because of the way we, as current and experienced riders build this as a standard, as a culture, to the newbies coming in? Sure, we all tell them to take the BRC, but do we take the ARC, and provide a market for such a class? There is a rather large market for the BRC because it's a huge success....

    PLEASE NOTE: MOST is required to provide a basic rider training course, the BRC or Basic Rider course and the ARC Advanced Rider course are MSF specific courses and their names are used in this instance as an example of qualifying curricula, not as specific of what will be taught. This is important, as the MSF is one provider of curricula, there are others and although CDOT currently uses the MSF BRC as a curriculum they do not want to be limited to or defined by that.

    Having said all of this, thank you for reading and understand this issue to a greater extent! Please know that CDOT is very open to suggestions, through the MOST Advisory Board, and BornwildandFree is your contact and your voice (as a motorcycle rider). Contact her with your thoughts on this as it is her role to report back to CDOT with what you, the riding community is thinking. Don't just throw a one-line PM... If you want your opinion to count for something, present it like you care....

    Think about the issue, do some of your own research, at the very least, get to know all of the parties/players involved. Please keep an eye on this thread, as I will continue to tell the story of MOST as I'm able.

    And for now, I need your immediate input - where else can we take this discussion to encompass more riders? Here we are most sport bikers... I will be posting this on ADVRider in the Rockies Regional. Where else?
    Respect and truth trump all!
    I don't get lost. I explore.

Similar Threads

  1. MOST program Legislation
    By THoward in forum Legal/Legislative
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Thu Jan 17th, 2013, 09:39 AM
  2. Live to Ride Program
    By fasterlaster in forum Technique
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Thu Apr 19th, 2012, 05:33 PM
  3. CIA Facebook Program
    By dirkterrell in forum Pics and Videos
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Tue Mar 22nd, 2011, 10:21 AM
  4. Program Manager type job
    By Vance in forum The Job Board
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Sun Nov 14th, 2010, 08:43 AM
  5. 2006 Program MRA
    By voncon in forum The Pros
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Sun Dec 18th, 2005, 12:57 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •