Senator Michael A. Jackson recently introduced a bill in the Maryland State Legislature that demonstrates a model for removing barriers to speed reduction at the state level. This kind of legislative action to improve road safety demonstrates much-needed leadership and puts the power of safer streets back into the hands of the community.
Speed vs. safety
Roadways designed for high speeds are fundamentally incompatible with safety. The faster people drive, the narrower their field of vision becomes, which means they have less ability to anticipate a potential conflict. The faster a car is going, the longer it takes to stop, especially when an incident arises, and crashes at higher speeds are more deadly. That is why higher speeds are best accommodated on limited access highways where there are few incidents and speeds are designed to be gradual. In high conflict areas, from rural main streets to urban downtowns, high speeds are dangerous. Simply put: Speed + simplicity = safety. Conflict + slow = safety.
This is why speed reduction through street design and lowering speed limits have proven benefits for all road users, pedestrians and motorists alike. So, if we know what works, why aren’t we doing it?
In SGA’s 2024 release of Dangerous By Design, we found that around two-thirds of traffic deaths occur on state roads, despite them only making up around 20 percent of the nation’s road network. In Maryland, it is 75 percent. We know where deaths are occurring, and despite communities and municipal governments wanting to enact urgent change such as lowering speed limits, they rely on the states to provide that authority and flexibility.
State laws on speed limit changes differ from state to state, with many requiring lengthy traffic studies that can increase the amount of time and resources required to improve safety. In most places, a speed study requires the application of the 85th percentile speed rule (a common approach to set the speed limit at or below the speed that 85 percent of the drivers travel on a road segment). This is a passive approach, allowing the drivers to set the speed limit, rather than using well-known safety standards; and it rewards wide-spread speeding by raising the speed limit.
So, when a municipality or a community tries to lower the speed limit, they have to spend a lot of money on a study that rewards speeding and is, therefore, more likely to reinforce the status quo rather than address the epidemic of traffic fatalities. (You can find more information on this and alternative approaches from our colleagues at the National Association of City Transportation Officials.)
Maryland State Legislature action
On January 31st, 2025, the Maryland Senate heard initial arguments for Senate Bill 424, a bill that would allow the State Highway Administration to decrease speed limits by 5 mph on most state highways without an engineering and traffic study. The bill specifically mentions the use of this ruling in both business and residential districts, primarily targeting state owned roadways where high speeds present increased risk for non-motorists. If the ruling passes, decreasing speed limits will become much easier, cheaper, and faster. This leadership demonstrates a commitment to addressing the pressing pedestrian safety crisis and the overall poor safety performance of the U.S. transportation system, especially compared to other developed countries.
This bill’s introduction follows a series of promising steps Maryland is taking to address roadway safety through Complete Streets. Last year Smart Growth America worked with Maryland’s Department of Transportation to pilot three quick-build projects under the Complete Streets Leadership Academy. These projects, in combination with the new ruling from the state’s legislature, set the precedent that safety is a priority in Maryland.
No community should be forced to accept dangerous roads when solutions exist. Maryland’s bill, and efforts from states like Minnesota and Washington, is a step in the right direction, one that every state should take to protect its people. We have the knowledge and tools to prevent traffic deaths—what’s needed is the will to act.