The Eugene City Council’s decision not to move forward with a simple roadway safety ordinance was disappointing. The proposal was narrow and practical: It would have asked drivers not to hand items out of their windows in active traffic lanes. It didn’t criminalize poverty, panhandling or compassion. It addressed a specific behavior that pulls people closer to moving vehicles.

Several councilors said they needed more data before acting. But as Councilor Randy Groves and Eugene Police Chief Chris Skinner both pointed out, the data doesn’t exist because collision reports don’t track whether a pedestrian was panhandling at the time. A lack of data isn’t proof of a lack of risk — it’s a gap in the reporting system. Meanwhile, anyone who drives in Eugene has seen the near‑misses that prompted this ordinance in the first place.

It was also surprising to see Councilor Mike Clark vote against a measure framed squarely as traffic safety. When both the former fire chief and the police chief say this would reduce vehicle‑pedestrian conflict, that should carry weight.

Eugene has real work to do on traffic safety — including for people biking, walking and standing at busy intersections. This ordinance wouldn’t have solved everything, but it would have reduced one preventable risk. I hope the council will revisit this issue with a clearer understanding that harm‑reduction doesn’t always come with perfect data attached.

Curtis Taylor
Eugene