|
I know this is a lot of information, but that’s because we have a lot of evidence showing that this is a proven step that saves lives and prevents injuries. This is not new. Other cities have already implemented NROR, and the data from those cities has shown reductions in deaths and injuries of 92%, with some reporting reductions as high as 97%. That is the consistent outcome being reported by cities that have implemented this step. I know some of my colleagues want to propose pilot programs. But we need to ask ourselves: What exactly are we piloting? We already have 24 years of studies and real world results from other cities. A pilot program does not create new evidence about whether this approach works. It simply delays implementation of a proven safety measure. The data is not going to change. It has not changed in 24 years. We also have five resent years of the data that is being asked for. The only numbers that continue to change are the number of people getting hurt, and those numbers have not stopped increasing. If there were significant questions about whether this works, a pilot might be appropriate. But when we have decades of evidence and communities that have already implemented this approach and seen dramatic reductions in deaths and injuries, the burden should be on us to explain why we would delay action. And a pilot is not without a cost. The cost is measured in time, and during that time people remain exposed to the same risk we already know how to reduce. We should not require our community to serve as another experiment when other cities have already provided us with the evidence. Obviously, this will not solve everything. It is one tool among many. NDOT will also have an opportunity during those three months, while the signs are being installed, to look at other safety measures, such as signal timing. If we are serious about safety, then let’s be serious about taking action. NDOT has said this will essentially cost nothing because it requires only signage. Everyone asked for the data. Here it is. We have the evidence, we have the experience from other cities, and we know the problem is continuing. At some point, continuing to study the problem becomes a reason not to act, rather than a reason to be more careful. We don’t need another pilot to tell us what the data has already told us. We need to act on what we already know.
|
