Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Pedestrians topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge Columbia council to act on pedestrian safety and police follow‑up
Summary
Multiple residents told the council they feel unsafe walking in town, described vehicle strikes and delayed police response, and asked the borough to use code 207‑4 flexibly to allow other trained personnel to direct traffic when crossing guards are unavailable.
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Pedestrians topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Several residents used the public‑comment portion of Columbia Borough Council’s June 9 meeting to press for stronger pedestrian protections and better police follow‑up in traffic incidents.
Robert Thompson said he has been struck twice by vehicles and criticized police for how they handled two separate incidents. "We're tired of feeling unsafe in our own streets," he told council. Thompson said he provided video evidence and asked the police for the driver’s insurance information; he said borough records requests have not produced that information and that the department once threatened to cite him.
Thompson and other speakers also raised staffing shortages for crossing guards and police and asked the borough to consider using other trained personnel — including fire department crews — under borough code 207‑4 when crossing guards are unavailable. A resident suggested expanding authorization to any trained traffic director rather than limiting the authority to police.
Council members acknowledged the concerns, discussed clarifications to code 207‑4 and promised to review staffing and cross‑department options. The council encouraged residents to report sidewalk hazards and unsafe conditions so staff can follow up; residents said they will continue to collect evidence and ask for better enforcement.
What happens next: Councilors and staff discussed bringing additional materials and potential changes to code language back to a future meeting. The issue was raised as part of broader public‑safety and streetscape conversations rather than as an immediate regulatory change at the June 9 meeting.
Provenance: Robert Thompson’s remarks and the code‑207‑4 exchange (timeline SEG 565–SEG 824).

