PUBLISHER ‘S CORNER While driving to work recently, I saw a school bus pulled over with its red loading lights
flashing and stop arm extended. Some cars stopped completely and remained so, while others proceeded cautiously. Some didn’t stop at all and swerved around the stopped bus and cars. Te issue of illegal passing is an ongoing dilemma. Most motorists simply don’t under-
You’re on Camera
By Tony Corpin
tony@stnonline.com
Smile,
stand the rules of the road when it comes to school buses. Last summer, NASDPTS released a study that disclosed truly disturbing data. Nearly 112,000 school bus drivers in 28 states reported 37,756 total stop-arm passing violations, often involving several cars during the same incident. Tat equates to well over 13 million violations by private motorists in a 180- day school year. NASDPTS was encouraging all states to once again hold a one-day count this spring. Washington is one state taking the lead with a new law that requires all school districts to
count how many cars illegally pass school buses each May 1. Meanwhile, a student’s death during an illegal passing incident in Iowa last year resulted in a new state law that increases penalties for these drivers. It inspired a federal bill called “Kadyn’s Act” in memory of 7-year- old Kadyn Halverson, who was killed as she crossed the street to her school bus. Te legislation would extend penalties nationwide to motorists who are convicted of passing stopped school buses, and it threatens to cut federal highway funds to states that don’t comply. A growing trend is the use of external cameras on school buses to catch illegal passers. Ar-
kansas, for example, created a grant program that funds the installation of exterior cameras on school buses. Te result is higher prosecution levels. A similar concept applies to red light cam- eras at traffic intersections to produce evidence in court that assists law enforcement. Redflex Traffic Systems says red-light violations typically decrease by 25 to 40 percent within a year of a program being implemented. Tese laws vary by state in terms of how some data are captured (i.e., from license plates,
facial recognition or both), but the technology remains the same in terms of collecting vehicle speed, weather conditions and time of day. Te data must also meet the burden of proof in court, so correctly processing the violation is vital. Te quality of the camera equipment, the software supporting it and the administrative and legal processes make a huge difference. An unintended consequence, however, is that state and local government agencies are in-
creasingly grappling with the ticketing aspects of these enforcement programs. Te cost of the equipment is also an issue, but the camera quality has increased while economies of scale have begun to lower prices. One way to acquire this technology is through a revenue share with the service provider, which makes it a cost-neutral project for the district. Te other option requires the district to absorb the cost of the equipment and management. As the implementation of this technology evolves, so does public opinion and the legal
action surrounding it. A lawsuit in New Orleans’ Jefferson Parish School District argues that the cameras violate the Louisiana Constitution by using civil proceedings to address moving violations and empower private companies to influence law enforcement. Would this lawsuit have been filed if 75 percent of the revenue went to the district as opposed to the vendor? Potential safety benefits exist but so do possible financial gains for the school districts
and communities. Funding models vary from state to state. For example, Connecticut al- locates 75 percent to local safety programs. Legislators are earmarking dollars from fines collected to student safety and transportation, so the fines collected go back to the local community to improve overall safety. Tis could be a good indicator that installing exterior cameras will improve safety around the school bus. With pending legislation in 11 states, surely time will tell. Ultimately changing motorists’ behavior to help reduce illegal passing incidents is key to improving school bus safety. ■
66 School Transportation News Magazine May 2012
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68