Stop signs

Talking about stop signs is public discourse in miniature.  Few things are more ubiquitous than the white-on-red octagonal signs.  To engineers, they are traffic control devices governed by the MUTCD--the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

The MUTCD is exactly the thrilling page-turner you'd expect from engineers writing about inanimate objects.  A far more readable Cliff's Notes version can be found here, with the more racy title, "Speed Control in Residential Areas."

Here's an excerpt:

"Residents’ complaints are usually accompanied by a proposed solution to the speeding problem...stop signs. Traffic officials respond that stop signs installed to control speeding: (a) don’t work, (b) are frequently violated, (c) are detrimental to safety, (d) are not warranted in the Manual* and, (e) actually increase speeds between stop signs. When residents are told that stop signs are not the answer to the speeding problem, they feel they must fight city hall to get them installed. A confrontational relationship is established between residents and traffic officials and the stop sign becomes a “trophy” which is awarded to the winner of the confrontation. Solving the speeding problem becomes secondary to winning the “trophy”. The end results of this process are: (1) unhappy citizens, (2) continued complaints and requests for more stop signs, (3) increased political pressure and, (4) often, approval of stop sign installations to bring the controversy, temporarily, to an end."

Obviously, the authors have experienced the unmitigated joys of a public debate over putting stop signs at the corner of <insert random tree name> avenue and <insert random number> street.

Like the problems that occupy most of local governments' time, speeding is complex, widespread, and slippery.  And like many issues, it's only a problem when "other people" do it.  For those who doubt cosmic justice, I offer the example of the resident who was complaining most loudly about speeding in their neighborhood being the first to receive a traffic citation on the same street for <wait for it> speeding!  To add sauce to the goose, most speed studies come back showing the perceived speeding is not nearly as excessive as portrayed.

People want simple, straightforward solutions to problems they perceive.  Few pieces of painted metal are more simple and straightforward than a stop sign.  Engineers and pretty much anyone who believes in the Enlightenment prefer rational solutions to specific, real problems.  One can have an intuitive notion that stop signs make a street safer... but belief is not the same as proof.  And the expenditure of public funds and governance of public facilities--even on something as modest as a stop sign--should be governed by rational thought, engineering best practices, and scientific evidence.

The great advantage of scientific discourse is that someone eventually wins, understanding that all such victories are temporary, good only until better data, measures, or testing comes along.  We no longer argue about whether the earth is flat (well, mostly). Theological debates, on the other hand, are endless absent one side eliminating the other.  If we can't agree to follow a rational process in putting up or taking down stop signs... how much chance do we have solving much larger problems?

A lemonade stand by any other name...

According to News &7 Miami, code enforcement officers in Miami-Dade County began issuing warning citations to property owners only hours after Hurricane Irma passed.

The report quotes Celso Perez saying:

“At the time this officer was out here, we didn’t have power, we didn’t have food, we didn’t have ice. He is crazy, ridiculous. The mayor said that the county would help us recover from the storm and were there to help us. Before the county picks up the debris, the code enforcement guy will beat them to it and some for having my fence down, write me a ticket or something. I’m mad, very upset about this.”

Perez' response is not surprising or unusual.  It is the same reaction one sees when local authorities declare war on a lemonade stand.  The issue became pervasive enough to wind up on the pages of the National Review.

What is it that causes local government officials to apparently lose any semblance of common sense?  Is it as simple as NR's Kevin D. Williamson concluding, "We are ruled by power-mad buffoons."

Having known many well-intended (though occasionally ham-handed) enforcement officials, I don't think this is the Madness of King George.  Part of the problem is incentives.  Success in code enforcement is normally measured by the metric of "fixing problems."  This incentivizes seeing things as problems.

There are time when an incentive is financial.  In Delaware, local jurisdictions keep the money from traffic citations.  In Maryland, the fines are remitted to the state government.  Where do you think it is more likely to be let off with warning?  Incentives matter.  Always.

Incentives also can be cultural.  Harkening back to the Miami-Dade example, what do code enforcement officers do?  They enforce codes.  What if the job title was changed to "Regulation Navigators"?  What if building inspectors became construction facilitators?  What if the focus shifted from enforcing a set of rules towards helping residents accomplish goals within a structure?

Until we figure this out, we'll continue to see lemonade stands shut down by overzealous officials.  And with every heartbroken four-year-old, the public trust in local government will further diminish.