David Price: “In considering this amendment, it is important to be very clear about what the amendment means when it refers to…”

“In considering this amendment, it is important to be very clear about what the amendment means when it refers to enrichments. This refers to improvements to a transit project like a sidewalk, paths, plazas, lighting, and signage, things that can help individuals in utilizing transportation infrastructure and ensure that they do so in safety. Unfortunately, Madam Chair, there are approximately 4,000 pedestrian deaths, comprising 14 percent of overall traffic fatalities each year. These enrichments are just the kinds of projects that could help reduce the risk for pedestrians, for bicyclers, and other users of our systems. Now, the gentleman offering this amendment is just bordering on ridicule when he talks about site lighting. Really, site lighting? What is more important to promoting safety, promoting visibility, and discouraging those who would prey on individuals than site lighting? Site lighting is extremely important in improving general safety in public places. It is incredibly important for protecting individuals against crime, including harassment and assault. That is what we are talking about here. Now, the amount of funding that goes towards such enrichments is small relative to other expenditures, but it is a commonsense way that we can enhance our transportation projects, we can broaden their use, and, above all, we can ensure that they are safe for all users. It is an unwise amendment, Madam Chair, and I urge its rejection.…”