CT Ranks 10th in Percentage of Structurally Deficient, Functionally Obsolete Bridges

Of Connecticut’s 4,225 bridges, 357 are structurally deficient (8.4%) and another 1,087 are functionally obsolete.  That’s 34 percent of the state’s bridges deemed deficient by experts – and it ranks Connecticut as the 10^th worst state in the nation, by percentage. Worse than Connecticut?  Only Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Pennsylvania, Alaska, New York, West Virginia, New Jersey and Maine.  The data, compiled by the Federal Highway Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation, reflects information and analysis through December 31, 2015. 

While the number of structurally deficient bridges in Connecticut is the lowest since 2006, the number of functionally obsolete structures has climbed in recent years, and is now the highest since 2010.  The total number of bridges in the two categories has dropped in each of the past three years, but remains at about one-third of the state’s bridges.  Connecticut ranks 26^th in the percentage of structurally deficient bridges.

According to the Nation Bridge Inventory Database website, Structurally Deficient is a status used to describe a bridge that has one or more structural defects that require attention. This status does not indicate the severity of the defect but rather that a defect is present. Conditions driving the designation could include the bridge deck, the superstructure or the substructure of the bridge.

The sufficiency rating is calculated per a formula defined by the Federal Highway Administration, which places 55 percent value on the structural condition of the bridge, 30 percent on its serviceability and obsolescence, and 15 percent on its essentiality to public use. According to the Iowa Department of Transportation, “a structurally deficient bridge, when left open to traffic, typically requires significant maintenance and repair to remain in service and eventual rehabilitation or replacement to address deficiencies.”

The category Functionally Obsolete is a status used to describe a bridge that is no longer by design functionally adequate for its task. Reasons for this status include that the bridge doesn't have enough lanes to accommodate the traffic flow, it may be a drawbridge on a congested highway, or it may not have space for emergency shoulders, according to the National Bridge Inventory Database. Functionally Obsolete does not communicate anything of a structural nature – it may be perfectly safe and structurally sound, but may be the source of traffic jams or may not have a high enough clearance to allow an oversized vehicle.

A year ago, Connecticut has 378 structurally deficient bridges and 1,079 considered functionally obsolete. Two years ago, 413 bridges were defined as structurally deficient and 1,059 were listed as functionally obsolete.

A January 2016 report by the American Road & Transportation Builders Association compiled the most traveled U.S. Structurally Deficient Bridges, and identified the West River Bridge in New Haven, built in 1957, ranked as the 98^th most travelled structurally deficient in the nation.  At number 110 on the list was the Yankee Doodle Bridge in Fairfield, also constructed in 1957. At number 148 was the I-95 bridge over the Wepawaug River, south of Route 121 in New Haven, built in 1958.

Also ranking in the nation’s top 200 most travelled structurally deficient bridges were the I-95 bridge in Fairfield over Route 33 at Exit 17 (ranked number 159), the I-91 Bridge over North Front Street and Quinn River in New Haven just north of I-95 (number 160), and the I-95 bridge over Byram River in Fairfield (number 161).  Those bridges were built in 1957, 1964 and 1958, respectively.

Safety Gap: Parents Impose Rules on Teen Drivers, Teens Don’t Think So

Teen drivers are at the highest risk for crashes and crash-related fatalities, and are particularly vulnerable to distractions while driving.  The results of a new nationwide survey of teens and their parents suggest a considerable disconnect between the limitations parents believe they are imposing on driving and the use of cell phones, and their teens’ view of limitations imposed by their parents. The gap in numerous instances is wide, and has raised concerns about the resulting risks to teen drivers.

In families where parents reported limitations on their teen drivers – such as restricting cell phone use, number of teen passengers and driving times and locations – teens themselves sometimes said they did not have those limitations, according to the C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital National Poll on Children’s Health, which indicated that parents play a key role in promoting the safety of their teens by setting expectations for driving.

“We found that the great majority of parents do have rules for their teen drivers; however, teens consistently perceive fewer limits on their driving than what their parents report. This signals an opportunity for parents and teens to have more conversations about safe driving habits,” says lead author Michelle L. Macy, M.D., M.S., an emergency medicine physician at the University of Michigan’s C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital.

Parents of teens 13-18 years old and teens themselves were asked about limits placed on driving circumstances that can increase a teen driver’s risk of a crash. About nine in 10 parents report they place at least one limit on their teen drivers while eight out of 10 teens report having at least one driving limit placed on them by their parents.

Among parents and teens who both responded, teens consistently say they have fewer limits on their driving than were reported by their parents.  Overall, 81 percent of teens report having at least one driving limit placed on them by their parents. In families where parents report limits on cell phone use, 13 percent of teens say they have no limits. In families where parents report limits on passengers or driving times/locations, 20 percent of teens say they have no such limits.

Limits on cell phone use and texting while driving are most commonly reported by parents and their teens. Fewer limits are set on passengers and driving times/locations. As many as one-quarter of parents report placing no limits on teen passengers or nighttime or highway driving, suggesting opportunities to increase teen driver safety by encouraging parents to place limits on these high-risk driving conditions, officials indicated.  Among the key limitations parents impose, according to the survey:

Limits on cell phone use include:

• requiring teens to park to use their cell phones (86%)
• forbidding texting while driving (73%)
• having cell phone turned off or put away (62%)

Limits on passengers include:

• allowing only 1-2 friends in the car (59%)
• allowing only certain friends (54%)
• no teen passengers allowed (40%)

Limits on driving times/locations include:

• no driving after 10 p.m. (61%)
• driving only to/from school, work, or activities (57%)
• no highway driving (36%)

Parents who judge their teens’ driving ability as “above average” (32% of all parents) are less likely to place limits on passengers and driving times/locations. Sixty-seven percent of parents set limits on passengers for their “above-average” teen drivers, compared with 81percent of parents who perceive their teen drivers as “below average.” Similarly, 69 percent of parents set limits on driving times/locations for their above-average teen drivers, compared with 85 parents of parents who perceive their teen as below average. In contrast, parents do not adjust their restrictions on cell phone use in relation to their teens’ driving ability.

There was greater agreement between parents and teens on limits placed on cell phones than on passengers or driving times/locations, according to the national survey, conducted in September 2015 and released earlier this year.

“This may indicate that parents communicate to their teens more clearly their expectations around cell phone use while driving than for other driving situations. It is also possible that parents and teens have greater awareness of the risks of using cell phones while driving, due to media attention on cell phone distractions as a common cause of crashes,” the survey analysis points out.

The analysis also indicated that the higher degree of disagreement between teens and parents in relation to the limits set for passengers and driving times/locations suggests the need for more dialogue in families to ensure rules and expectations around driving are understood. Written parent-teen driving agreements are one way for parents to clearly communicate rules and expectations, officials indicated.

Connecticut’s Tim Hollister, author of two books about parenting and safe teen driving and the website From Reid’s Dad, recently developed a video for parents, with financial support from the Travelers, which underscores the influence of parents in teen driving.  Hollister will be speaking on the subject at the Easton Public Library on February 10 and the Newington Public Library on February 24.  Hollister, whose son Reid died as a result of a car accident at age 17, will share information parents should know regarding teen driving and discuss his most recent book, His Father Still.

https://youtu.be/QmCJKvyXhEQ

https://youtu.be/wccN8aqOWA4

CT Ranks 20th in Dependence on Gun Industry, But 3rd in Firearms Output, 2nd in Industry Wages

Connecticut’s place in the ongoing national debate about guns is reflected in a new analysis which ranks the state 20^th in the nation in overall dependence on the gun industry, but also ranks the state 3^rd in total firearms industry output per capita and 2^nd in highest average wages & benefits in the firearms industry. With the gun debate center-stage in the presidential primaries and in Washington, D.C., the website WalletHub analyzed which states depend most on the arms and ammunitions industry both directly for jobs and political contributions and indirectly through firearm ownership. WalletHub’s analysts compared the 50 states and the District of Columbia across three key dimensions: 1) Firearms Industry, 2) Gun Prevalence and 3) Gun Politics and eight metrics.

Connecticut also came in 41st in its "firearms prevalence rank" and 47th in "gun politics rank."

The states Most Dependent on the Gun Industry were Idaho, Alaska, Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, Wyoming, New Hampshire, Minnesota, Kentucky and Alabama.

Officials point out that the gun industry plays an important role in the U.S. economy, and Connecticut is no exception. By one estimate, firearms and ammunitions contributed a total of nearly $43 billion to the national economy in 2014. That figure accounts for more than 263,000 jobs that paid $13.7 billion in total wages, according to the report from the Connecticut-based National Shooting Sports Foundation. In the same year, federal and state governments collected from the industry more than $5.79 billion in business taxes, plus an additional $863.7 million in federal excise duties, the WalletHub report indicated.

In the overall rankings, the states determined to be least dependent on the gun industry are Maryland, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Delaware.

The analysis also found:

• The number of firearms-industry jobs per capita is highest in New Hampshire, which is seven times greater than in the District of Columbia, where it is lowest.
• The average wages & benefits in the firearms industry is highest in the District of Columbia, which is three times greater than in New Mexico, where it is lowest.
• The total firearms industry output per capita is highest in New Hampshire, which is 18 times greater than in Hawaii, where it is lowest.
• The total taxes paid by the firearms industry per capita is highest in Montana, which is six times greater than in Delaware, where it is lowest.
• Gun ownership is highest in Alaska, which is 12 times greater than in Delaware, where it is lowest.

The eight relevant metrics utilized in the analysis and their corresponding weights were as follows:

Firearms Industry – Total Points: 35

• Number of Firearms-Industry Jobs per 10,000 Residents: (~14 Points)
• Average Wages & Benefits in the Firearms Industry: (~7 Points)
• Total Firearms Industry Output per Capita: (~7 Points)
• Total Taxes Paid by the Firearms Industry per Capita: (~7 Points)

Gun Prevalence – Total Points: 35

• Gun Ownership: (~17.5 Points)
• Gun Sales per 1,000 Residents (approximated by using National Instant Criminal Background Check System data): (~17.5 Points)

Gun Politics – Total Points: 30

• Gun-Control Contributions to Congressional Members per 100,000 Residents: (~15 Points)
• Gun-Rights Contributions to Congressional Members per 100,000 Residents: (~15 Points)

Data used to create these rankings were collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the BMJ Publishing Group and the Center for Responsive Politics, according to WalletHub.

Bullying Is Parents Top Concern, Depression Next

Across the country, parents with children under age 18 are most concerned about their child being bullied, with 6 in 10 expressing that concern.  The next most prevalent concern – expressed by a majority of those surveyed by the Pew Research Center – is that their child will struggle with anxiety or depression.  Fifty-four percent have that concern. Noting that comprehensive statistics on bullying are difficult to obtain, Pew referenced the 2013 Youth Risk Behavior Study (which covered only high-school students) finding that 19.6 percent had been bullied on school property in the previous 12 months, and 14.8 percent had been electronically bullied. In both cases, white teens and female teens were more likely to say they’d been bullied.

Connecticut’s statistics were higher than the national average in both categories.

In the 2012-13 school year, there were more than 1,400 incidents which an investigation was conducted and active bullying was concluded to have occurred, according to the state Department of Education.  The most recent data posted on the department’s website indicates that “21.9% of Connecticut students had been bullied on school property. Nationwide, the rate is 19.6%. In Connecticut, the prevalence of having been bullied on school property is significantly higher among females (26.1%) than among males (17.9%). The prevalence of having been bullied on school property is significantly higher in grade 11 among students in CT (22.8%) than in the US (16.8%).”

The Youth Risk Behavior Study also indicated that 17.5% of Connecticut students had been electronically bullied. Nationwide, the rate is 14.8%, according to the study report.

Earlier this month, the parents of a high school freshman in Westport who died last month asked the local Superintendent of Schools to investigate reports that their son may have been the target of bullying and the nature of widespread social-media comments about his death among students.

In a letter to school officials, the parents wrote: “several current Staples High School students have reported observing bullying, humiliating or inappropriate behavior by one or more peer or peers toward others, and these students report that they do not know how to respond or intervene. They feel guilty and ashamed of their inaction and passive consent to the blatant behaviors. This is a critical area needed to stop these types of malevolent behaviors.”

Published reports indicate that police have found no evidence of bullying in the student's death.

The likelihood of their child facing anxiety and depression is also of great concern to parents, ranked second-highest in the survey.  About one-in-ten adolescents, or around 2.6 million, have experienced major depression in the past year, according to 2013 data reported by National Institute of Mental Health, the Pew report indicated; for 7.7 percent, their depression caused severe impairment.

Depression was three times as common among teen girls as teen boys (16.2% versus 5.3%). Available data suggest that a quarter of teens have experienced some sort of anxiety disorder (such as phobias, panic disorder or post-traumatic stress disorder) at some point in their lives, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.

The nationwide survey by the Pew Research Center survey also found that the nature of parental concerns varies considerably across demographic groups.  The research found, for example that:

• low-income parents are more concerned about teen pregnancy and their kids getting in trouble with the law than are higher-income parents.
• Black parents are more likely than white parents to worry about their children being shot, while white parents are more likely than black parents to worry that their children will struggle with anxiety or depression.
• Hispanic parents worry more than black or white parents in all eight areas of concern, from being bullied to having problems with drugs or alcohol

Pew Research Center points out that in 2014, the rate of firearm deaths for black youths was 4.26 per 100,000, almost three times the rate for white youths and nearly four times the rate for Hispanic youths. Hospital emergency departments, from which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention gathers its injury data, don’t always obtain information on race and ethnicity for their patients, the report noted. But based on the 80 percent or so of nonfatal firearm injury cases involving juveniles in 2013 for which race and ethnicity data are available, the disparity among different subpopulations was stark: 1.68 per 100,000 for white youths, 5.3 per 100,000 for Hispanic youths and 24.67 per 100,000 for black youths, the Pew report indicated.

The report also indicated that every state in the nation, as well as the District of Columbia, has a lower teen birthrate than it did in the early 1990s. The birthrate for 15- to 19-year-olds (the metric tracked by federal researchers) has been dropping for decades, Pew pointed out, and hit a record low in 2014. There were just 24.2 births per 1,000 teen females that year, compared with 61.8 per 1,000 in 1991 and 41.5 as recently as 2007.

Background Checks Up 71 Percent in Past Five Years in CT, 12th Highest Increase in U.S.

Between 2010 and 2015, the number of background checks in Connecticut related to the purchase of firearms grew by 71.4 percent, ranking Connecticut 12^th in the nation in the increase in background checks, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.  The number of background checks during the five-year period increased in every state in the nation, except Utah. In Connecticut in 2010, there were 179,595 background checks conducted as part of the process of purchasing  a firearm.  In 2015, that number had increased to 307,750 during the year, the data compiled by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) revealed.

The states with the largest increased in the number of background checks, from 2010 to 2015, were Indiana (211% increase), Delaware (162%), Alabama (139%), California (115%), District of Columbia (112.6%), Florida (105.1%), Wisconsin ((96.8%) Ohio (90.3%), Illinois (79.4%) and New Jersey (78.2%).

Overall, the largest number of background checks occurred in Kentucky, with 3.2 million.  California conducted 1.7 million, Texas 1.5 million, Illinois 1.2 million, and Wisconsin 1.1 million.

The Bloomberg news website ranked the 50 states and the District of Columbia by the percentage increase in number of NICS firearm background checks from January 1, 2010 through December 31, 2015. NICS is the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

In six jurisdictions – the states of Indiana, Delaware, California, Alabama, Florida and the District of Columbia – the number of federal firearm background checks more than doubled from 2010 to 2015.

Because of varying state laws and purchase scenarios, the statistics do not represent the number of firearms sold, the data analysis indicated.

Gun Buyback Program in Hartford on Saturday As Controversy Swirls

In the midst of a heightened public debate regarding gun control, in the aftermath of mass shootings around the country and an increased homicide rate in Hartford in 2015, the Capital Region Gun Buyback program – now in its 7^th year – will take place on Saturday, December 19 at the Community Renewal Team in Hartford. “Unwanted firearms in the home are dangerous,” officials point out, asking that Connecticut residents “turn in a working gun in a clear plastic bag” in exchange for a gift card.  Guns may be turned in anonymously.  Those doing so will receive a $200 gift card for an assault rifle, $100 gift card for a handgun or revolver, and $25 gift card for a shotgun or rifle.  Although held in Hartford and focused on the capital region, the buyback is open to all state residents.

Participating sponsors include Hartford Hospital, Connecticut Children’s Medical Center, Saint Francis Hospital and Medical Center, Connecticut Trial Lawyers Association, Stop & Shop, Lamar Advertising and the Community Renewal Team, at 555 Windsor Street, which is the drop-off location for the weapons.

The program also occurs in the midst of renewed efforts by gun control advocates including Gov. Dannel Malloy. On Monday, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo and Sen. Charles Schumer announced plans for New York to join Malloy in banning gun sales to those on federal no-fly lists.  Malloy proposed the ban last Thursday, announcing he would issue an executive order to ban the sales.  A similar law was passed by New Jersey's legislature two years ago, according to published reports.

Officials in Worcester, Mass. report that the local annual Goods for Guns buyback program there saw over 271 firearms and 54 pellet guns to law enforcement throughout central Massachusetts last Saturday (Dec. 12).  Local residents were able to trade in guns for supermarket gift cards at police departments across the region.  Rifles, replica guns and pellet guns were exchanged for $25. Pistols could be traded in for $50, while $75 was given for semiautomatic weapons.  The Associated Press, citing local officials, reported that 103 rifles, 125 handguns and 43 semiautomatic weapons were turned in.  Worcester collected weapons for the towns of Shrewsbury, Northborough and Westborough.

Hartford police also conducted a gun buyback program in June, which brought two dozen weapons, according to published reports.  And reports leading into last December’s buyback program in Hartford indicated that more than 800 unwanted firearms were collected in the first five years of the annual program.  On December 14, 2014, a total of 104 weapons were collected, according to local officials.  That compares with the first year of the program, in which 78 weapons were turned in.

A similar program in Bridgeport since 2012 has netted more than 1,000 guns.  The most recent buyback program was held in August, according to local news reports, led by the Bridgeport Police Department’s Community Services Division, in which 127 weapons were turned in.  In Stamford, a gun buyback program in 2013 brought in 63 firearms and in 2014 the city’s police department saw 76 firearms turned in.

Officials point out that non-working guns, black-powder weapons, flare guns, pellet/BB guns and ammunition /magazine clips may be turned in, however they will not be eligible for a gift card.  More information about Saturday’s program in Hartford is available by calling 860-249-1072.

In Rochester, New York last month, a one-day gun buyback program saw more than 200 working firearms turned in.  A gun buyback program was held in San Francisco this past weekend.  That city has seen 950 guns turned in during gun buyback programs since 2011.  Totals for this year were not yet available.  That same day in Clearwater, Florida a total of 458 guns were collected by local police officers in about four hours.

CT Ranks 15th in Increase in Gun Permit Background Checks in Recent Years

Last Friday – Black Friday – the number of background checks in the U.S. hit an all-time high for a single day, up five percent from the same day a year ago.  The increase shouldn’t have come as a surprise to those watching the trends in recent years. In seven states, the number of federal firearm background checks more than doubled from 2008 to 2014. No states reported a decrease. Connecticut’s increase ranked the state 15^th highest in the nation.

The 50 states and the District of Columbia were ranked by the percentage increase in number of NICS firearm background checks from 2008 to 2014, in an analysis of data from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System done by Bloomberg media.

The largest increases during the six year period were in North Carolina (240%), Indiana (194%), Delaware (137%), New Jersey (127%), Illinois (118%), Alabama (107%), Florida (105%), D.C. (97%), California (89%) and Tennessee (88%).

The number of background checks in Connecticut grew from 155,885 in 2008 to 270,297 in 2014, and increase of 73.4 percent.

The largest number of background checks in 2014 were in Kentucky (2,492,184), California (1,474,616), Texas (1,465,992), Illinois (1,344,096), North Carolina (1,182,349) and Florida (1,034,546).  Connecticut, with 270,297 background checks in 2014, ranked 25th in the nation.

Because of varying state laws and purchase scenarios, Bloomberg points out that the statistics do not represent the number of firearms sold.

On Black Friday, a record 185,345 background checks – roughly two a second – were processed, according to published reports of FBI data.

Hartford, Stamford Among Nation's Most Congested Highways

A new study by the American Highway Users Alliance identifies America’s 50 worst bottlenecks and finds that the very worst bottleneck, as measured by hours of delay, is in Chicago, IL. Los Angeles, CA owns the next six of the top 10.  While Connecticut’s highways did not reach the top 50, two bottlenecks did receive honorable – or dishonorable – mention. The I-84 section in Hartford between Trumbull Street and Park Street, and the I-95 section in Stamford between Fairfield Avenue and Elm Street, both made the list of 43 “Other Zones of Congestion” in the U.S. -thereby earning status as among the nation's 100 most congested traffic tie-ups.  According to the data, the average length of the back-up in Hartford is 1.4 miles; in Stamford 1.3 miles.  The average total annual delay at the Hartford bottleneck is 705,000 hours; in Stamford 494,000 hours of lost productivity.

Speaking at the American Highway Users Alliance press conference where the report was released, U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said, “This report furthers the unassailable truth that America is stuck in traffic. The good news is that this problem is solvable, and Congress can be part of the solution. As a long-term surface transportation bill moves through conference, I urge our elected leaders to provide the funding growth and policies that are necessary to improve commutes, to raise the bar for safety, and to keep the country moving in the 21st century.”

Hartford and Stamford were among 43 “zones of congestion” around the country that were noted in the report in addition to the top 50.  The report indicated that “although congested, the worst segments of highway do not have the same severe delays/mile as the nationally ranked bottlenecks.”  They are, the report points out, in many cases “the most congested in their states.”

I-84 in Hartford may be receiving a re-make over the next decade.  The Department of Transportation is in the midst of determining the preferred option among three possibilities - to replace the I-84 raised viaduct or replace it with a ground-level highway or dig a tunnel.  The various options have been presented in a series of public meetings in recent months, and a decision is anticipated early next year.

The work, which has yet to be funded, is likely to include moving or eliminating some exits and entrances – and possibly adding others in new locations - to improve traffic flow.  Cost estimates range from $4 billion to $12 billion, depending on the option selected. Upcoming public meetings are to be held in East Hartford on Dec. 2 and Hartford on Dec. 10.

In the top-ranked Chicago traffic bottleneck highlighted in the report, the Kennedy Expressway (I-90) between the Circle Interchange (I-290) and Edens junction (I-94), was found to extend 12 miles, costing motorists 16.9 million hours’ worth of time, equivalent to $418 million in 2014. More than 6.3 million gallons of fuel is wasted on I-90 while cars idle or crawl in traffic.

Besides identifying and ranking the nation’s 50 worst traffic bottlenecks, the study, Unclogging America’s Arteries 2015, examines the top 30 chokepoints closely and details many of the major benefits that will accrue to society by fixing them. In addition to improving mobility and quality of life for motorists, the report indicated that fixing the top 30 bottlenecks alone would, over 20 years:

• Save $39 billion due to lost time,
• Save 830 million gallons of fuel,
• Reduce over 17 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions (CO2), and
• Prevent 211,000 vehicle crashes

“These findings are critically important and mean that our nation will derive huge benefits from fixing the worst gridlock in our nation’s highway system: benefits that go way beyond improving mobility for highway users,” states Greg Cohen, President and CEO of the American Highway Users Alliance.

Amongst the top 10 was New York City with the 8th and 9th worst bottleneck at the notorious Lincoln Tunnel and on I-95 from Manhattan across the Bronx. Metropolitan New York also had the 18th, 19th, 21st, 31st, 33rd, 37th, and 42nd – ranked chokepoints.

As for the bottlenecks themselves, the study’s top 50 list includes trouble spots in the following Metropolitan Areas: 12 in Los Angeles, 9 in and around New York City, 3 in Chicago, 3 near Washington DC, 3 in Houston, 3 in Boston, 3 in Dallas, 3 in Miami, 2 in Atlanta, 2 in Philadelphia, and 2 in San Francisco/Oakland.

The report notes that bottlenecks can be fixed and points to specific chokepoints that have been addressed and, as a result, were not included in the rankings. Projects cited include the Woodrow Wilson Bridge replacement on I-495 in the Washington, DC area, the Marquette Interchange in Milwaukee, and the Katy Freeway reconstruction in Houston.

Will CT School Buses Be Required to Add Seat Belts? New Federal Policy May Spur Change

When word came down from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration last week that the longstanding preference for school buses without three-point lap/shoulder seat belts was being reversed, one Connecticut town could say: been there, done that. Wilton, which has about 4,200 school children on busses each day, has had the three-point safety belt system installed on its school busses since August 2012.  They apparently were the first in the state to do so.

Earlier this year, Massachusetts legislators considering a requirement for seat belts on school buses were told that passenger restraint systems would add between $11,000 and $13,000 to the cost of buses, which currently range from $90,000 to $105,000.

Frank Underhill, executive director of the School Transportation Association of Massachusetts, which includes more than 100 school bus contractors and municipalities who run their own school buses, told members of the legislature’s Public Safety Committee that six states require seat belts on school buses, but said that none of those states has fully implemented the requirement, due to a lack of funding.

Those states - California, Florida, Louisiana, New Jersey, New York and Texas -- have some sort of legislation in place requiring seat belts on school buses, according to Governing magazine. The states’ laws vary in levels of enforcement; some simply require two-point seat belts to be present on school buses, while others require that all passengers use the more secure, three-point belts.  Connecticut does not have a statewide requirement.

Wilton Transportation Coordinator Mary Channing isn’t aware of other Connecticut communities that have followed her community’s lead.  The town included the three-point belt as an option in their most recent RFP, in 2012, for student transportation, and the winning bid included the lap/shoulder belts.  It is not a board policy.

Statewide, nearly 500,000 children are transported on buses to and from school each day.  National policy, based on numerous studies, has been that buses are designed to be inherently safer than cars because of the high backs/fronts creating a “compartmentalization” and providing better crash protection.  It has been noted, however, that when students lean outside the seating “compartment” – which can occur as students, backpacks, winter gear, overcrowd seats – their level of safety diminishes.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is endorsing three-point seat belts on school buses for the first time.  NHTSA Administrator Mark Rosekind acknowledged that the agency "has not always spoken with a clear voice on the issue of seat belts on school buses. The position of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is that seat belts save lives," Rosekind said. "That is true whether in a passenger car or in a big yellow bus. And saving lives is what we are about. So NHTSA's policy is that every child on every school bus should have a three-point seat belt."

The issue of seat belts on schools buses garnered considerable attention in Connecticut in 2010 when 16-year-old Vikas Parikh was killed in a school bus accident. The Rocky Hill High School student sustained a traumatic head injury while riding a school bus that tumbled down an embankment off of I-84 after hitting another car.  As a result, state lawmakers reopened the debate on whether to require Connecticut's roughly 10,000 school buses to install three-point seatbelt systems.  They did not.

Instead, Public Act 10-83, created a Connecticut School Bus Seat Belt account to help school districts respond to the cost of equipping school buses with lap/shoulder (3-point) seat belts, should they choose to do so.  In June 2010, the office of then-Gov. M. Jodi Rell announced that “under the law, the Department of Motor Vehicles will begin offering a program in July 2011 that offsets a portion of the sales tax bus companies pay for school buses equipped with three-point seatbelts. The program will be funded through a $50 increase in the fees paid for restoring suspended or revoked driver’s licenses, commercial driver’s licenses and vehicle registrations. The program will run through at least 2018. During the 2018 legislative session, lawmakers will hold a hearing on the program and decide whether it should be continued.”

Said Rell: “This law provides a modicum of state assistance to districts wanting to add seat belts to their fleet but does not impose a costly new mandate on all districts –- striking a good balance between incentive and choice.”

It is unclear if funds have accumulated in that account, or if any towns or companies have sought the assistance.  Some published reports suggest that the funds have been diverted to other uses in recent years.  The law requires that “school district participating in the program shall provide written notice concerning the availability and proper use of such seat belts to a parent or legal guardian of each student who will be transported on such school bus,” and that participating  school districts “instruct such students on the proper use, fastening and unfastening of such seat belts.”

A 2010 editorial in The Hartford Courant noted that “A study of emergency room visits by Columbus (Ohio) Children's Hospital found 17,000 school bus injuries in the U.S. every year — two to three times National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates, which use only a sampling of data and exclude field trips like the one on which Vikas Parikh died.  Seat belts work best in rollover and side-impact collisions in which students are thrown out of their seats, as Vikas was. The American Academy of Pediatrics supports restraints on buses.”

The website of the Connecticut School Transportation Association (COSTA) points out that a three-point system, “similar to the ones in automobiles, works with compartmentalization and, according to NHTSA, could provide some additional benefit to occupants of school buses, if it is consistently and properly used. But the federal government does not believe that a mandate for lap/shoulder belts is justified, because the safety benefits are very small and the cost is high. Furthermore, there are several potential negative factors, such as children wearing the shoulder portion improperly, that could mitigate the benefits of the restraints and result in a net loss of safety.”

The organization goes on to “emphasize that school buses without restraints are still safer than any other current mode of transportation—whether it’s walking to school, riding bikes, or traveling in parents’ cars,” adding “the biggest mistake that districts could make is to reduce the number of students who qualify for transportation in order to afford new buses with restraint systems. Any possible benefit of the restraints would be completely overshadowed by the increased risk to students who were denied school bus transportation.”

Last week, however, the Parikh family was among those lauding the federal change and looking for follow-through from Connecticut policy makers.  Vikas’ mother told NBC Connecticut, “If it can save at least one life, it is worth it.”

https://youtu.be/LGqmgUy2BrM

Safety in Sharing the Road Urged for Drivers, Cyclists, Pedestrians

Bike Walk Connecticut, the statewide organization that works for active transportation and making Connecticut a better place to bike and walk, has released a new brochure to remind drivers, cyclists, and pedestrians on the rules for sharing the road, as the organization prepares for its annual fundraising dinner and awards ceremony. Entitled Give Respect, Get Respect:  Share the Road, Connecticut, the brochure is available for download at www.bikewalkct.org. Connecticut's roads are traveled by walkers, runners, and cyclists who are welcome and expected to use the roads for transportation, fitness, and recreation, the organization emphasizes.

Marking the launch of the new Share the Road campaign, this year's featured speaker is Colleen Kelly Alexander.  Bike Walk Connecticut officials describe her remarkable story:  After undergoing brain surgery in 2007 for a chiari malformation, Colleen overcame a lupus and cryoglobulinemia diagnosis in 2009, pushing forward to become a successful, competitive triathlete. In 2011, while on a routine bike ride, she was run over by a freight truck. Crushed, ripped apart and bleeding out, she flatlined twice, spent five weeks in a coma and has since endured over twenty surgeries. Defying diagnoses, dire predictions and death, Colleen stunned doctors by bucking the odds and coming back to run more than 50 races and complete 15 triathlons, including 4 half Ironman events since her trauma. Colleen and husband Sean Alexander were elected to the Bike Walk Connecticut board of directors in 2015.  

The annual event will be held November 20 at Central Connecticut State University.  Proceeds fund Bike Walk Connecticut's work to make Connecticut "a great place to bike and walk."  Regarding the Share the Road initiative, Bike Walk Connecticut officials point out that "with common courtesy, common sense, and respect for the rules to share the road, Connecticut's roads can be safer for everyone."  The brochure urges state residents to “please do your part whether you're driving, cycling, walking, or running.”  The brochure includes the following guidelines:

For Drivers:

• Please slow down.  Obey speed limits.  A pedestrian hit by a car going 40 mph has an 85% chance of being killed.  At 20 mph the risk is 5%.  Drive at a speed that's safe for all.
• Expect cyclists, walkers, runners and others on the road.
• Yield to pedestrians at or in any crosswalk.  It's been the law since 1978, but it's not widely observed in Connecticut.  Every intersection is a crosswalk, even if it's not marked.  "Yield" means slow down or stop.
• Come to a complete stop at stop signs and red lights.  Be vigilant at intersections.
• Signal your turns and look both ways before changing lanes, turning, and at driveways.
• Expect the unexpected around curves and over hills, where visibility is limited.
• Let cyclists ride as far to the right as is safe.  Cyclists should ride as far to the right as they judge to be safe.  Give them space to avoid hazards like potholes, debris and drain grates.
• Expect cyclists in the travel lane.  Cyclists may ride in or near the middle of the travel lane when it's not safe to ride on the far right side of the road.  Cyclists should ride in the travel lane to avoid hazards and when the road is too narrow for cars and bikes to proceed safely side by side.
• Pass with care.  Give cyclists at least 3 feet.  It's the law since 2008.  Keep at least 3 feet of space between your vehicle and a cyclist.  You may cross the center line to pass a cyclist if it's safe.
• Mind the door zone.  Check for approaching cyclists before opening your car door so you don't hit them.
• Avoid distracted driving, aggressive driving, and driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
• 2014 Vulnerable User Law Mandates $1000 Fine.  Connecticut requires a fine of up to $1000 on drivers who cause the death or serious injury of a pedestrian, cyclist or other vulnerable road user who used reasonable care.

For Cyclists:

Bike Walk Connecticut urges all cyclists to be good ambassadors for cycling and always follow these rules to share the road in Connecticut. Cyclists who follow the rules of the road are visible, predictable, safer, and earn respect from other road users.

• Follow the rules of the road.  Obey stop signs and traffic signals.  Ride on the right in the direction of traffic.  Riding on sidewalks is prohibited in many Connecticut towns.
• Ride as far to the right as is safe.  If there's no bike lane, ride in the travel lane when necessary for your safety.  The extreme right edge of the road isn't always the safest place to ride.  Riding in the travel lane makes it easier for drivers to see you and reduces the chance that a driver may pass too close.
• Be visible.  Always ride with lights at night.  Wear bright clothes during the day and reflective materials at night.  For night riding, Connecticut requires a headlight visible from at least 500 feet and a red tail light visible from 600 feet.
• Be predictable.  Ride in a straight, predictable manner.  Don't weave, swerve, or stop suddenly.
• Signal all turns.  Use proper hand signals in advance to tell others where you are going.
• Ride single file in traffic.  You may ride two abreast if traffic can pass you safely.  Common courtesy usually requires riding single file in traffic, except when passing others.
• Stay out of the "door zone."  Ride 3-4 feet away from parked cars so you don't get hit by an opening car door.
• Alert others that you're approaching or passing.  Allow plenty of space when passing others.  Cyclists must yield to pedestrians in or at crosswalks.
• Don't ride distracted.  Distracted riding is dangerous riding.  Wait to use your cellphone until you're off the road.  Riding with headphones is unsafe if you're distracted and can't hear other road users.
• Wear a helmet correctly on every ride.

For Pedestrians:

• Be aware.  Watch for cars that are turning, at driveways, or backing up.  Never assume a driver sees you or will stop or slow down at an intersection.
• Use sidewalks.  No sidewalk?  Walk facing traffic.
• Use crosswalks and obey crosswalk signals.  No Crosswalk?  Yield to Traffic.
• Be Alert.  Don't be distracted by devices that take your eyes and ears off the road, especially at intersections.  Distracted walking is dangerous walking.
• Be Visible.
• Wear Bright, Reflective Clothing. 
• Runners are Pedestrians Too.  Like walkers, runners should run against traffic, cross at crosswalks whenever available, and obey crosswalk signals.