On Monday, December 12, City Council voted to move a proposed resolution “Regarding a Reduction in Traffic Deaths” to committee for discussion. This would be a first step, potentially, toward essentially asking Hartford’s Department of Public Works to be accountable and show progress.
On the one hand: good.
Forcing the Department of Public Works to report back to City Council with its current plans means giving members of City Council more insight into what the DPW is and is not planning to do, while at the same time showing that these two entities are apparently not communicating so well with one another.
Asking the DPW to identify the top ten dangerous intersections where a roundabout would be feasible is already work the DPW should have done. They do not need to complete studies. Injury data already exists and can be obtained in under five minutes, once everyone decides what is meant by “dangerous” — which I hope people define as causing personal injury, as opposed to property damage. Concepts for roundabouts at various intersections have been floated out in recent years. I know I have seen them, and perhaps they have been modified since.
Asking DPW to provide a report of how it is working with CRCOG is, again, requesting a progress report. Hartford did apply (through CRCOG) for the Safe Streets and Roads for All funding. That deserves a mention, since not all municipalities with a high number of pedestrian/cyclist injuries and fatalities took this step.
The resolution tells DPW to inform City Council about their progress installing red-light and speed cameras.
To sum it up, this resolution, if passed unamended, is DPW being told to explain to Hartford City Council what the actual fuck they are doing over there.
Which is, on the other hand. . . something that should not even have to happen. Council could attend a Complete Streets Task Force meeting. These are held virtually, and the most recent one was at noon on Monday. All of those reports could be delivered then, though it does not have the same “go to the Principal’s Office” vibe as does the resolution.
There have been nine pedestrian fatalities in Hartford during 2022. Seven of those nine people were killed on streets that prioritize speed over safety. The other two involved vehicle design. On March 31, 2022, a 20-year old college student was killed — and two others were physically injured — while crossing New Britain Avenue. In the days after, I asked City Council what they were doing to address this problem. Council President Maly Rosado responded that it was not her job. I told her she was incorrect, that City Council does have levers they can and should pull. It seems that eight months later she has changed her mind enough to introduce this resolution, along with John Gale, Josh Michtom, James Sánchez, Shirley Surgeon, and Tiana Hercules. Council voted unanimously to send this to committee. Why would it be controversial? All they are seeking is information that DPW should have been asked for months ago.
The resolution raises another question: then what?
What are City Council members prepared to do with the information that DPW delivers? Council did not prioritize reducing street violence by budgeting accordingly last spring. Will these reports shape future budgets? Or will this be a case of a notoriously ineffective part of government checking a box to say they did something? Inaction with the appearance of action?
What does not irk me about this resolution is the language leading up to it: “while fatalities have fallen in developed countries over the last 25 years, the United States has fallen behind in progress as we have not prioritized the safety of people outside of vehicles.” This is something that all decision makers in DPW know, but spelling it out is good practice for when, inevitably, someone at some point in the process tries to make street violence seem either solvable by telling people to drive/walk/cycle better, or worse, inevitable. Something can be done, there are models for what that something looks like, so what are those in power going to do with the power they have?
