Connecticut 2019 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB06590

Introduced
1/28/19  
Refer
1/28/19  
Refer
1/28/19  
Refer
2/21/19  
Refer
2/21/19  
Report Pass
3/20/19  
Refer
3/29/19  
Refer
3/29/19  
Report Pass
4/4/19  
Report Pass
4/4/19  
Engrossed
5/8/19  
Engrossed
5/8/19  

Caption

An Act Concerning Speed Limits In Municipalities.

Impact

The bill significantly impacts state laws regarding traffic regulation. By granting local traffic authorities the capability to set their own speed limits, HB 06590 intends to address unique traffic conditions in various municipalities. This flexibility can improve road safety and responsiveness to community concerns, especially in areas with high pedestrian activity or specific safety hazards. However, it mandates compliance with state guidelines which can limit local changes if they're deemed unsafe. Ultimately, this could lead to improved safety protocols relevant to the context of each locality.

Summary

House Bill 06590, titled 'An Act Concerning Speed Limits In Municipalities', aims to revise and streamline the process by which municipalities can establish and enforce speed limits on public highways and roads. The bill provides local traffic authorities the power to determine reasonable speed limits while ensuring such changes receive the necessary approvals and comply with state traffic regulations. This change is intended to enhance local governance over traffic management, allowing municipalities to tailor speed limits to their specific community needs.

Sentiment

Throughout legislative discussions, the sentiment surrounding the bill appeared to be largely supportive among local lawmakers who see it as a necessary step towards local empowerment and improved public safety. Advocates argue that local authorities are better positioned to understand their specific challenges and can respond more effectively to changing traffic conditions. Conversely, some critics express concern that this decentralization might lead to inconsistencies in traffic regulation across municipalities, which could confuse drivers and create potential safety risks.

Contention

Notable points of contention in the bill's discussions included concerns regarding public safety and standardization of traffic laws across the state. Opponents of the bill worry that allowing municipalities too much discretion could produce a patchwork of speed limits, complicating law enforcement and compliance for drivers. They argue for maintaining a more uniform standard at the state level to ensure clarity and consistency, particularly on major highways that serve multiple towns or regions. In light of these discussions, the bill passed with an overwhelming majority, indicating strong legislative support despite the concerns raised.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CT HB05197

An Act Implementing The Recommendations Of The Program Review And Investigations Committee Concerning The Postponement Of Program Termination Dates In The Sunset Law.

CA AB3061

State highways: property leases.

NV AB308

Revises provisions relating to cannabis establishment agents. (BDR 56-822)

CT SB01027

An Act Implementing The Recommendations Of The Program Review And Investigations Committee Concerning The Postponement Of Program Termination Dates In The Sunset Law.

CA SB1089

Food and prescription access: grocery and pharmacy closures.

IL HB4222

VIDEO GAMING-CHANGE OF OWNERS

IL HB3729

VIDEO GAMING-VARIOUS

CA AB3209

Crimes: theft: retail theft restraining orders.