Correspondence - Item 27 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Flores, Dora From:Lexxy S. <aserrato9473@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, To:eComment Subject:Agenda Item #27: Prioritize Safe Streets without Surveillance Attention: This email originated from outside of City of Santa Ana. Use caution when opening attachments or links. I am writing to express our strong concerns regarding Item #27, which proposes a resolution requesting amendments to AB 645 to allow the City of Santa Ana (City) to establish a Speed Safety System Pilot Program (Program). I support prioritizing safe streets, without surveillance. I appreciate the City’s interest in improving traffic safety and reducing harm on our streets, I too want to see safe streets. However, I urge the City Council to proceed with caution and take additional steps to evaluate alternative, non- surveillance based traffic measures before providing direction to staff that would advance the establishment of a Speed Safety System Pilot Program. When AB 645 was originally debated and passed in 2023, it faced significant opposition from civil rights and community organizations, including Human Rights Watch, Black Lives Matter California, and ACLU California Action. These groups raised concerns about privacy, data collection, potential misuse, and the disproportionate impact automated enforcement systems can have on low-income, and immigrant communities. There are also implementation concerns. Cities like San Francisco have experienced delays and challenges in rolling out speed camera programs, raising questions about feasibility, cost, and effectiveness. Importantly, there are proven, non-surveillance alternatives to improve traffic safety. Measures such as speed humps, raised crosswalks, bulb-outs, lane reductions, chicanes, and roundabouts can effectively slow traffic and improve safety without relying on data collection or enforcement technology. The City has invested in these types of infrastructure improvements and should continue to. We support improvements that make streets safer for all users, especially pedestrians and cyclists. It is critical that the City take a more deliberate and community centered approach before providing direction that would advance the establishment of a Speed Safety Pilot Program. We respectfully urge the Council to direct staff to: - Conduct comprehensive research on how other cities have implemented AB 645, including timelines, costs, outcomes, and any challenges or unintended consequences - Engage in robust community outreach, particularly with immigrant communities and those most likely to be impacted, before pursuing legislative changes - Determine the fiscal impact of such a Program, its funding source, its feasibility and priority with Measure X beginning to sunset April 1, 2029. The Council needs to be wary of expenditures that may outlast revenue I ask that the Council pause on advancing this resolution and instead prioritize research, transparency and community engagement. Sent from my iPhone 5