Arizona 2025 Regular Session

Arizona Senate Bill SCM1002 Compare Versions

Version 1 (Old)

Version 2 (New)

Old	New		Differences
1		-	~~Senate Engrossed~~ vision zero; transportation planning State of Arizona Senate Fifty-seventh Legislature First Regular Session 2025 ~~SENATE CONCURRENT MEMORIAL~~ 1002 A CONCURRENT MEMORIAL Urging the president and congress of the United States to eliminate the Vision Zero approach to transportation PLANNING and instead prioritize sound engineering and safe outcomes. (TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
	1	+	REFERENCE TITLE: vision zero; transportation planning State of Arizona Senate Fifty-seventh Legislature First Regular Session 2025 SCM 1002 Introduced by Senators Werner: Angius, Carroll, Gowan, Shope A CONCURRENT MEMORIAL Urging the president and congress of the United States to eliminate the Vision Zero approach to transportation PLANNING and instead prioritize sound engineering and safe outcomes. (TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
2	2
3	3
4	4
5	5
6	6
7	7
8	8
	9	+	REFERENCE TITLE: vision zero; transportation planning
	10	+	State of Arizona Senate Fifty-seventh Legislature First Regular Session 2025
	11	+	SCM 1002
	12	+	Introduced by Senators Werner: Angius, Carroll, Gowan, Shope
9	13
10		-
11		-	Senate Engrossed vision zero; transportation planning
12		-	State of Arizona Senate Fifty-seventh Legislature First Regular Session 2025
13		-	SENATE CONCURRENT MEMORIAL 1002
14		-
15		-	Senate Engrossed
16		-
17		-
18		-
19		-	vision zero; transportation planning
	14	+	REFERENCE TITLE: vision zero; transportation planning
20	15
21	16
22	17
23	18
24	19
25	20
26	21
27	22
28	23
29	24		State of Arizona
30	25
31	26		Senate
32	27
33	28		Fifty-seventh Legislature
34	29
35	30		First Regular Session
36	31
37	32		2025
38	33
39	34
40	35
41	36
42	37
43	38
44	39
45		-	SENATE CONCURRENT MEMORIAL 1002
	40	+	SCM 1002
	41	+
	42	+
	43	+
	44	+	Introduced by
	45	+
	46	+	Senators Werner: Angius, Carroll, Gowan, Shope
	47	+
	48	+
	49	+
	50	+
	51	+
	52	+
	53	+
	54	+
46	55
47	56
48	57
49	58
50	59
51	60
52	61
53	62
54	63
55	64		A CONCURRENT MEMORIAL
56	65
57	66
58	67
59	68		Urging the president and congress of the United States to eliminate the Vision Zero approach to transportation PLANNING and instead prioritize sound engineering and safe outcomes.
60	69
61	70
62	71
63	72
64	73
65	74		(TEXT OF BILL BEGINS ON NEXT PAGE)
66	75
67	76
68	77
69	78		To the President and Congress of the United States of America: Your memorialist respectfully represents: Whereas, Vision Zero and the safe systems approach originated in Sweden in the 1990s and have since been adopted internationally, including in the United States since 2016; and Whereas, Vision Zero is promoted as a framework for eliminating traffic fatalities and serious injuries through a safe systems approach, but its implementation in cities in the United States has not cured traffic fatalities but rather has increased serious injuries and fatalities and caused delays in emergency response vehicles; and Whereas, the Vision Zero safe systems approach diverts from sound transportation engineering methodologies and instead employs a one-size-fits-all approach that requires the adoption in all circumstances of lower speed limits, fewer and narrower roads and draconian traffic enforcement measures; and Whereas, Vision Zero prioritizes a uniform roadway design, regardless of local geography, traffic patterns or historical crash data, compromising tailored context-specific engineering solutions; and Whereas, Vision Zero's design philosophy integrates multiple transportation modes in ways that create conflicts between motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians rather than separating these uses for improved safety; and Whereas, Vision Zero policies subordinate the needs of drivers, which is the majority mode of transportation in the United States, to walking, biking and public transit, often reducing roadway speeds and capacity. This diminishes efficiency and accessibility for the majority of travelers; and Whereas, Vision Zero emphasizes equity and ideological goals over traditional engineering-based safety approaches, shifting the focus of transportation planning away from pragmatic, data-driven solutions; and Whereas, major cities in the United States have implemented Vision Zero in recent years with the goal of eliminating traffic fatalities, but suffered the opposite effect. New York City experienced the highest traffic fatalities in a decade, Los Angeles sustained a 22-year record high in fatalities in 2023 and Seattle has been subject to a steady increase in fatalities; and Whereas, after adopting Vision Zero, Denver, Colorado's traffic fatalities increased by 33% in the next five years compared to the previous five years, with motorcyclists, pedestrians and cyclists experiencing the highest fatality rates; and Whereas, Portland, Oregon's 2024 city auditor report attributed a doubling of fatalities to Vision Zero policies, despite reduced speed limits, stricter enforcement, intersection reconfigurations and improved lighting, raising concerns about its real-world safety outcomes; and Whereas, Vision Zero's traffic calming measures and design changes can impede emergency response times for public safety vehicles, potentially endangering lives; and Whereas, Vision Zero has been supported and funded by organizations motivated by anti-car and anti-sprawl ideologies, diverging from established engineering standards; and Whereas, the safe systems approach begins with the premise that America's transportation infrastructure has systemic inequities that must be corrected, an assertion that may not align with practical safety objectives; and Whereas, the free movement of goods and people is essential to the American economy and way of life, particularly for the commercial trucking industry, which relies on efficient and reliable roadways; and Whereas, the Vision Zero safe systems approach mandates lower speed limits that conflict with roadway design and natural operating speeds, leading to increased speed variation, reduced safety and a higher incidence of speed violations; and Whereas, a core element of the Vision Zero strategy is to reduce single-occupancy vehicle miles traveled, restricting individual freedom, disrupting personal travel flexibility, increasing commute times and limiting access to jobs, essential errands and daily activities; and Whereas, safety improvements can and should be achieved without sacrificing freedom of movement or imposing a rigid framework that limits alternative solutions; and Whereas, Vision Zero proponents acknowledge that achieving zero fatalities may ultimately require eliminating or controlling private vehicle use; and Whereas, Vision Zero's underlying philosophy assumes that driving culture and human behavior must be reshaped, which is impractical; and Whereas, this state and its cities are compelled to implement the deeply flawed Vision Zero program as a condition of receiving federal grant funding tied to transportation projects, leading to wasteful removal of existing road infrastructure that is still serviceable and functional. Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays: 1. That the President and Congress of the United States eliminate Vision Zero and the safe systems approach to transportation planning and funding, and instead promote transportation solutions that prioritize sound engineering methods, reliable safety outcomes, flexibility and engineering innovation without compromising individual freedoms or economic efficiency. 2. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona transmit copies of this Memorial to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.
70	79
71	80		To the President and Congress of the United States of America:
72	81
73	82		Your memorialist respectfully represents:
74	83
75	84		Whereas, Vision Zero and the safe systems approach originated in Sweden in the 1990s and have since been adopted internationally, including in the United States since 2016; and
76	85
77	86		Whereas, Vision Zero is promoted as a framework for eliminating traffic fatalities and serious injuries through a safe systems approach, but its implementation in cities in the United States has not cured traffic fatalities but rather has increased serious injuries and fatalities and caused delays in emergency response vehicles; and
78	87
79	88		Whereas, the Vision Zero safe systems approach diverts from sound transportation engineering methodologies and instead employs a one-size-fits-all approach that requires the adoption in all circumstances of lower speed limits, fewer and narrower roads and draconian traffic enforcement measures; and
80	89
81	90		Whereas, Vision Zero prioritizes a uniform roadway design, regardless of local geography, traffic patterns or historical crash data, compromising tailored context-specific engineering solutions; and
82	91
83	92		Whereas, Vision Zero's design philosophy integrates multiple transportation modes in ways that create conflicts between motor vehicles, bicycles and pedestrians rather than separating these uses for improved safety; and
84	93
85	94		Whereas, Vision Zero policies subordinate the needs of drivers, which is the majority mode of transportation in the United States, to walking, biking and public transit, often reducing roadway speeds and capacity. This diminishes efficiency and accessibility for the majority of travelers; and
86	95
87	96		Whereas, Vision Zero emphasizes equity and ideological goals over traditional engineering-based safety approaches, shifting the focus of transportation planning away from pragmatic, data-driven solutions; and
88	97
89	98		Whereas, major cities in the United States have implemented Vision Zero in recent years with the goal of eliminating traffic fatalities, but suffered the opposite effect. New York City experienced the highest traffic fatalities in a decade, Los Angeles sustained a 22-year record high in fatalities in 2023 and Seattle has been subject to a steady increase in fatalities; and
90	99
91	100		Whereas, after adopting Vision Zero, Denver, Colorado's traffic fatalities increased by 33% in the next five years compared to the previous five years, with motorcyclists, pedestrians and cyclists experiencing the highest fatality rates; and
92	101
93	102		Whereas, Portland, Oregon's 2024 city auditor report attributed a doubling of fatalities to Vision Zero policies, despite reduced speed limits, stricter enforcement, intersection reconfigurations and improved lighting, raising concerns about its real-world safety outcomes; and
94	103
95	104		Whereas, Vision Zero's traffic calming measures and design changes can impede emergency response times for public safety vehicles, potentially endangering lives; and
96	105
97	106		Whereas, Vision Zero has been supported and funded by organizations motivated by anti-car and anti-sprawl ideologies, diverging from established engineering standards; and
98	107
99	108		Whereas, the safe systems approach begins with the premise that America's transportation infrastructure has systemic inequities that must be corrected, an assertion that may not align with practical safety objectives; and
100	109
101	110		Whereas, the free movement of goods and people is essential to the American economy and way of life, particularly for the commercial trucking industry, which relies on efficient and reliable roadways; and
102	111
103	112		Whereas, the Vision Zero safe systems approach mandates lower speed limits that conflict with roadway design and natural operating speeds, leading to increased speed variation, reduced safety and a higher incidence of speed violations; and
104	113
105	114		Whereas, a core element of the Vision Zero strategy is to reduce single-occupancy vehicle miles traveled, restricting individual freedom, disrupting personal travel flexibility, increasing commute times and limiting access to jobs, essential errands and daily activities; and
106	115
107	116		Whereas, safety improvements can and should be achieved without sacrificing freedom of movement or imposing a rigid framework that limits alternative solutions; and
108	117
109	118		Whereas, Vision Zero proponents acknowledge that achieving zero fatalities may ultimately require eliminating or controlling private vehicle use; and
110	119
111	120		Whereas, Vision Zero's underlying philosophy assumes that driving culture and human behavior must be reshaped, which is impractical; and
112	121
113	122		Whereas, this state and its cities are compelled to implement the deeply flawed Vision Zero program as a condition of receiving federal grant funding tied to transportation projects, leading to wasteful removal of existing road infrastructure that is still serviceable and functional.
114	123
115	124		Wherefore your memorialist, the Senate of the State of Arizona, the House of Representatives concurring, prays:
116	125
117	126		1. That the President and Congress of the United States eliminate Vision Zero and the safe systems approach to transportation planning and funding, and instead promote transportation solutions that prioritize sound engineering methods, reliable safety outcomes, flexibility and engineering innovation without compromising individual freedoms or economic efficiency.
118	127
119	128		2. That the Secretary of State of the State of Arizona transmit copies of this Memorial to the President of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives and each Member of Congress from the State of Arizona.