GHSA Policy on Roadway Safety

Excerpted from GHSA Policies & Priorities

GHSA supports an emphasis on work zone safety and encourages public/private partnerships to address this problem. GHSA encourages enhanced public awareness of work zone safety through training, education, enforcement and the media. GHSA also encourages innovative approaches, such as the use of new technologies, to reduce injury exposure of persons in the work zone.

Coordination and integration of roadway safety, work zone safety, truck safety, rail grade crossing, emergency medical services and other safety programs with driver behavior programs are critical if safety activities are to reach safety goals and have a positive impact at the state and sub-state levels. GHSA strongly encourages every state to coordinate its overall highway safety program by developing a strategic performance-based highway safety document (a Strategic Highway Safety Plan or SHSP) that sets statewide safety goals and coordinates specific safety plans required by federal statute. The state Highway Safety Plan/Performance Plan (HSP/PP) should be coordinated with the comprehensive statewide safety plan and should strive to reach the safety goals expressed in the strategic state safety document. SHSPs should continue to include behavioral highway safety countermeasures. States should revise their SHSPs at least once in between federal reauthorizations.

GHSA urges states to continue to address the problem of grade crossing safety; develop plans for systematically correcting safety problems at public grade-crossings; utilize federal, state and other funds for implementing their grade crossing safety improvement plans; and enforce grade crossing laws. GHSA strongly supports Operation Lifesaver and continued federal funding for the program.

The Association urges states to utilize automated enforcement to address the problem of red light running, speeding, school bus and school zone violations, work zone violations, and distracted driving.

In order to maximize safety benefits, jurisdictions should use automated enforcement appropriately and effectively. GHSA therefore endorses the following principles:

• Automated enforcement should be deployed in an equitable manner, consistent with GHSA’s best practice recommendations on equitable enforcement and community engagement in highway safety planning. Each automated enforcement program should be advised by a comprehensive stakeholder committee.
• Automated enforcement should be used at high crash sites or in situations where traffic law enforcement personnel cannot be deployed safely. If traffic engineering can help address the problem, there should be an engineering analysis of each site before automated enforcement systems are installed and citations issued. Automated enforcement should focus on violations with the greatest safety impact.
• Automated enforcement is not to fully replace traditional law enforcement personnel. Automated enforcement is also not to mitigate safety problems caused by deficient road design, construction or maintenance.
• Use of automated enforcement should be preceded by a public information campaign. The campaign should continue throughout the life of the automated enforcement program.
• Automated enforcement programs should strive for substantial transparency, due process and focus on safety impact. Program rules, procedures, and outcomes should be clear and publicly available. The program administrators should be highly responsive to inquiries from offenders and the public. Violations should be reviewed and approved by law enforcement or appropriately trained personnel. The program should be advertised by prominent warning signs at automated enforcement locations.\
• Automated enforcement should not be used as a revenue generator. Compensation paid for an automated enforcement system should be based on its value and not on the amount of revenue it generates nor the number of tickets issued. Revenues derived from the automated enforcement program should be used solely to fund highway safety functions.
• The implementing jurisdiction should collect and analyze safety data about the program on an ongoing basis, carry out regular field equipment reviews, and undertake a comprehensive evaluation of the enforcement program within three years of the program’s initiation. If positive safety outcomes do not occur, then the program should be terminated.