Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsor urges early planning for safe school routes; builders seek clarifying amendments
Summary
Delegate Jen Terasa told the Economic Matters Committee HB1296 would require new residential developers in school walking zones to submit a safe-routes-to-school assessment at the preliminary site-plan stage; builders and MDOT raised concerns about authority and scope, and the sponsor said amendments limit developer obligations to reporting and coordination.
Delegate Jen Terasa asked the Economic Matters Committee for a favorable report on House Bill 1296, saying the measure would make developers submit a report as part of a preliminary subdivision or site plan identifying hazards along school routes and proposing mitigation measures.
"HB1296 will require developers to prepare and submit a report on safe routes to school as part of a preliminary subdivision or site plan," Terasa said, adding the proposal is intended to ensure decision-makers have considered how children in new developments would get to elementary, middle, and high schools safely.
Terasa anchored the bill in safety concerns, noting a November 2023 crash in Prince George's County that killed two children who were walking to Riverdale Elementary School and citing national figures on child pedestrian fatalities and injuries. She told the committee the bill does not force developers to build sidewalks or crossings: the amended text requires reporting and early coordination so counties, school systems and developers discuss potential mitigations before approvals.
Don Butchko of Mako testified in support with amendments, thanking the sponsor for working to address authority concerns. "We had some concerns with the legislation as drafted, particularly with authority," Butchko said, but added that the amended language largely resolves the group's objections and urged a favorable report with amendments.
Opponents speaking for the Maryland Building Industry Association argued the burden falls on developers for conditions beyond their parcel and pointed to existing State Highway Administration programs, including federally funded Safe Routes to School grants and engineering capacity. Robert Utn said the association "does not think it's appropriate for this to become part of what the developer of a piece of private property has to do," though he expressed willingness to continue negotiating amendments.
Committee members pressed practical questions about implementation and right-of-way issues. Delegate Hornberger described a local high-school connection that took more than 20 years because of fragmented rights of way and asked whether counties or transit authorities could assume responsibility for easements and long-term pedestrian connections. Terasa and witnesses said the bill's scope is limited to new construction and early planning; it aims to trigger conversations among developers, counties, and school systems rather than require that one party complete all off-site improvements.
The sponsor told the committee she intends amendments to clarify responsibilities and to ensure the bill does not add duplicative approvals. The hearing concluded after members asked the sponsor to confirm Maryland Department of Transportation language had been reconciled with the amendments.
