Back in April 2017, the Bacolod City Sangguniang Panlungsod (SP) and the Bacolod Traffic Authority Office (BTAO) decided it was time to enforce the Anti-Jaywalking provisions of City Ordinance No. 338 (which was passed in 2003). That month, local newspapers were flooded with press releases from the government boasting about how many people were apprehended and the revenue being made from citations.

From the outset, it appeared to be an optimistic start to ending the dangerous practice of jaywalking, which is prevalent on every street in Bacolod City. Unfortunately, as is with nearly every government policy, enforcements ends after a week or so – after local media publish reports on the initial implementation and photographs of officers in action are shown to audiences – then everything goes back to as it was before and the ordinance falls back into oblivion.

Why are most ordinances only enforced for a short period and then forgotten? The only explanation is that policy is made superficially, to give the appearance of meaningful work being done, while promoting the name of the city official that wrote the ordinance – even if it was only enforced for a week, vote for them because they introduced the policy.

In some cases, ordinances are written solely as a directive to enforce past ordinances. Why is that even necessary? Has it come to a point where policies are so rarely enforced that new policy has to be written to remind government officials to enforce past policy?

It’s an illustration of both the massive red tape and redundant bureaucracy that pervades every sector of government – or what elected officials seem to call “progress.”

In addition, as so often is the case, with the way in which careless pedestrians wander into traffic, either engaged in conversation or staring at their phone, with zero regard for oncoming traffic, it is surprising there aren’t more reported incidents of people being struck by cars. In the incidents that are reported, though, because of the said behavior, the driver cannot always be at fault, yet, whenever such cases arise, the operator of the vehicle is always detained following the incident.

Jaywalking pedestrians have a liability in the matter; just because they may not be concerned with their safety, that does not put the onus on the driver that struck them. These are adults who are expected to be somewhat rational. The scary part is they are often with a child when wandering into traffic, putting both their lives at risk and setting a terrible example.

A recent case out of Hackensack, New Jersey offers a suggestion on the enforcement of jaywalking policies.

57-year-old Daniel Gallagher was jaywalking when he was struck by an automobile. After being rushed to a local hospital, he was issued a summons for jaywalking. The driver, meanwhile, was not charged.

Had the pedestrian used the designated crosswalk and was struck by a vehicle, the driver has a responsibility in the case. However, with regard to local behavior, the crosswalk also does not act as a shield against oncoming vehicles, pedestrians still need to be mindful when using the crosswalk – as in, if a car is coming, do not beginning strolling across the street with an arm out, even if it’s a crosswalk, one should still wait for the car to pass. Unfortunately for Gallagher, because he chose to cross carelessly, the responsibility falls on him based on his actions.

The city should stop encouraging such thoughtless behavior. By coddling those who end up in such situations because of their poor (and many times ignorant) choices, it only encourages more to follow suit, knowing they will be benefitted by the government, with no consequences to their senseless actions. There needs to be a firm line drawn that indicates, when a pedestrian chooses to step into the street without any regard for oncoming traffic and, in such situations where a motorist is not given the opportunity to stop or change direction, the burden is on the individual’s poor decision-making.

If city residents learn, first, city policies are strictly being enforced and not just a superficial token used for publicity and self-promotion and, second, a necessity to take responsibility for their actions, there will likely be less cases of jaywalking, less vehicular incidents involving pedestrians, and more revenue for the city from those who continue to defy (what should be) enforced city policies./WDJ