Traffic Calming – Response

298

This guest editorial is in response to an editorial by Mayor Jones, published on May 21.

By Marveena Miller

We would like to respond to a few statements:

In response to the mayor’s statement that she “strongly feel(s) that this concept should be brought before the Council and the citizens of Ferguson,” we asked to meet with her because Ferguson City staff asked us to meet with her. When we met, we asked the Mayor if she has seen the recent social media posts and comments about speeding and if she would be receptive to us presenting in front of council either in person or over a zoom. We specifically asked if we could address and questions or concerns, she had on traffic calming and the pros & cons of a traffic diet.

Mayor Jones also stated that “Public policy should not be driven by special interest but instead be based on firm public policy, policy that is fact based.” This is a Ferguson City plan, developed by an engineering firm chosen by the city. This is in no way a special interest plan. It is a plan that would cost very little to implement and has already been seen by residents, business owners and staff. 

Mayor Jones also stated that “I am committed to the safety and wellbeing of all our citizens.” This is something people have been asking for the city to address. Residents have been extremely vocal asking what can be done. If the mayor is committed to safety, we are confused by her words and actions on traffic control. We had hoped after almost two weeks she would have listened to the residents and asked for more information on the plan, if only based on the recent comments to the traffic calming plan. 

As we have said, we will continue to work hard and have the necessary conversations on traffic calming. We believe even one life is too valuable to lose simply because the wrong people asked the mayor to address this. Based on the feedback received, we plan to move forward with a residents meeting in June to discuss a city-wide presentation to council.