Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
Indianapolis City-County Council members plan to vote Monday on a proposed ordinance that would allow the city to install no-turn-on-red signs at traffic signals throughout downtown, with an amendment designed to insulate the city from legislation written by a Republican state senator that threatens to thwart the ordinance.
The proposed measure was yanked from the May council meeting over concerns that the new state law that prohibits the city from adopting a “no-turn-on-red” ordinance had already gone into effect. Since that meeting, the three sponsors of the local proposal have consulted with attorneys to determine whether the state amendment goes into effect on July 1, possibly giving the city a chance to pass the law before it can be prohibited.
Based on their consultations, council President Vop Osili, Vice President Zach Adamson, and Councilor Kristin Jones told reporters Thursday that the council will hold a final vote on the proposal at the June 5 meeting, along with an amendment.
The city measure is intended to decrease Indianapolis’ high rate of pedestrian deaths, which hit a record of 40 last year. A Department of Public Works study determined that nearly 57% of vehicle-pedestrian collisions in downtown were at stoplights where drivers failed to yield.
Two weeks after it was introduced at a press conference attended by Mayor Joe Hogsett, Republican State Senator and former City-County Councilor Aaron Freeman introduced an amendment to an omnibus motor vehicle bill that would specifically prohibit the Indianapolis council from passing ordinances to put up no-turn-on-red signs in intersections. The bill was passed by the state legislature and signed by Indiana Gov. Eric Holcomb.
The councilors will introduce an amendment to the local ordinance Monday designating zones where Department of Public Works engineers could decide if no-turn-on-red signs are necessary without council approval. Sponsors believe the zones will allow Indianapolis to continue adding restrictions to intersections without violating the law that specifies that the city may not pass ordinances for turns at red lights.
The zones were created using the 2018 Indianapolis-Marion County Pedestrian Safety Action Plan and the 2016 Indianapolis-Marion County Pedestrian Plan. The more recent plan utilized the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration standard called “zone efficiency,” which is calculated by dividing the percentage of total crashes in an zone area and divided by the total land area in the individual zone. Sixteen areas of Indianapolis had ratings higher than three, which is the federal agency’s threshold for intervention, Jones said Thursday.
The Democrat-controlled council has expressed disappointment in Freeman’s attempt to overrule the city’s traffic decision.
“It’s rather sad to have to jump through these kinds of hoops and loops for a city to be able to do what every other city in the state of Indiana is obligated to do in the pursuit of protecting pedestrians and their community,” Adamson said.
Freeman told IBJ on May 17 that he would be “happy to address” the council’s street signal plan during the next session, if necessary.
Adamson addressed the possibility of a retroactive state law Thursday.
“There’s always a chance that they can do just about anything, but it is my my belief that the legislature grows weary of Sen. Freeman’s vindictive nature to the city of Indianapolis,” he said.
Republican councilors have been reluctant to support the proposal, which Minority Leader Brian Mowery characterized as a “blanket ban” on turns on red through downtown. Majority members of the council have been supportive.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Hopefully the city will review where the needed rule actually exists in downtown and not just do wholesale. Secondly, great our council acted. Why do legislators, who are only here part of the year, need to even get involved in deciding what is best for Indianapolis. They cannot even consider what is best for the citizens of Indiana, so stay out of local rules!
My question/concern is that the police do not enforce the no turn on red signs that already exist downtown. Nor do they enforce the speed limit so what’s the point of putting up more signs? At times, downtown literally looks and sounds like the Indy 500, with cars flying by at dangerous speeds. Put up more signs up if you think it will help but, just like all the other laws on the books, how about we start actually enforcing them!
I’m downtown every weekday. I see the wholesale disregard of traffic signals by distracted drivers. I’d say a majority of the drivers downtown are on their
Cancel reply phones or not paying close attention.
And: IF the IMPD is not enforcing laws, that’s a separate problem. It’s not sufficient reason to ignore the opportunity to pass an Ordinance to better-protect walkers.
We can urge the Mayor to tell IMPD to better-enforce traffic. Simultaneously we can pass and enforce strong Ordinances dealing with traffic. The IMPD situation should not veto this chance to do the right thing.
It is possible (if not likely) that IMPD ignores enforcement of traffic laws because, if it wrote tickets, cops would be in court testifying rather than on the streets solving actual crimes. It is a shame that state legislators also prohibit the use of cameras to catch and ticket speeders and red light runners. With photographic evidences, there’s no need for cops to be in a courtroom. And for those who argue that cameras violate a constitutional right to privacy, the SCOTUS has consistently rules that there is no reasonable expectations to privacy in public spaces.
No Turn on Red won’t do anything but cause more congestion and road rage. And most folks around here ignore the signs anyways. All the near-misses I have experienced and witnessed stemmed from drivers making legal (but distracted?) turns at green lights but failing to yield to pedestrians. Maybe more “Yield to Pedestrians” signage and hope drivers will pay more attention?
Aaron Freeman needs to remember his elected role is to benefit the citizens of Indy – not just be a pain in their ass because he’s one of the few elected Republicans in Marion County. Better yet – replace him with someone who actually will work for our city.
Hear Hear!
The one who looks stupid here is Freeman.
This is classic virtue-signaling behavior. A city government that can’t be bothered to put proper crosswalk markings down onto the pavement – fresh white rectangles that drivers and pedestrians can see from a distance – nonetheless takes “action” to snarl traffic further. Meanwhile, the Cultural Trail crosswalks, with their garish curlicues and names of rich donors, are left to fade out and endanger pedestrians – but you wouldn’t want to replace them with sensible normal crosswalk markings, just to ensure the safety of pedestrians. No, that would arouse the ire of rich donors. Aaron Freeman is spot-on in working to stop this stupid initiative.
The city is trying to prevent pedestrian and cyclist deaths any way they can. That is a good “virtue to signal” in my book. It would be great to get better crosswalks as well. Great point! Doing neither is immoral though. And putting car speed above all else is immoral for a dense city as well.
Haha you didn’t know that where the sidewalk ends at intersections are crosswalks? You need to replace markings? Maybe if you didn’t rely on those markings so much looking off in a distance to know you can look down at your phone…you’d be looking for people and bikers and cars and signs and lights….not for markings. You’re downtown. Be aware. Kids may even pop out behind a car.
I am in favor of right and left turn on red. It eases congestion, saves fuel and time. Related comment: I believe the 25 mph limit is a good thing. I ask all drivers to do the speed limits. It is one of the safest things a driver can do. I love Indianapolis, my hometown for 68 years.
Your idea creates an environment that is hostile to every other form of transportation. People like to walk and cycle here as well. The car-only mentality you have and share with many others holds the city back from so many good things.
Aaron Freeman is anti-safety and anti-Indianapolis. He would do better to focus on improving the suburbs he loves and lives in and leave governing the city of Indianapolis to the people that actually live here. He’s a negative force for the city and is hurting the economy and safety of its citizens.
He should run for Mayor if he’s so good for Indianapolis.