Speed Camera Foe Eric Ulrich Says He Cares About Street Safety
Does Eric Ulrich really believe that motorists who drive at up to 45 mph on neighborhood streets “pose no threat to anybody else on the road,” as he said at a City Council hearing Monday? You be the judge.
We contacted Ulrich’s office yesterday to see if he was aware that motorists have killed at least four pedestrians in his district in the last 11 months. The victims include John Eberling, 76, an active retiree killed by an alleged drunk driver; Sheena Mathew, 38, a mother of young children struck by a motorist who did not stop; Francisco Camacho, 59, hit head-on by a driver on Cross Bay Boulevard; and Rohan Singh, 47, an immigrant from Guyana left to die in the street by a hit-and-run killer.
In an email to Ulrich’s office, we asked if he knew the identities of these victims, and if he has spoken with their families. We asked if he knows that speeding is the lead factor in NYC traffic deaths, and that the probability of pedestrian death increases dramatically with motorist speed.
Ulrich has publicly ridiculed proven safety measures, and his reaction to a bloody crash outside his own district office was to tell those concerned about vehicular violence to “get a life.” In light of his performance on Monday, his opposition to speed cameras, and previous dismissive remarks regarding street safety, we also asked what Ulrich is doing to reduce traffic deaths in his district, assuming he considers them an issue.
Here is his response, in its entirety:
First, let me begin by thanking you for your concern for the safety of my constituents. I share this concern and want you to know that I am committed to ensuring the safety of pedestrians, motorists and cyclists alike — not only in my district but across the five Boroughs. I believe that greater traffic enforcement by the NYPD and installing traffic calming measures such as speed bumps and stop signs in speed prone locations is the best way to achieve this goal. If the State Legislature approves the use of speed cameras, I believe they will be used primarily as revenue generators for the city’s coffers. Therefore, I am opposed to Res. No. 916-A and will be voting “no” at tomorrow’s stated meeting.
Strip away the platitudes and what we know for sure is that, once again, Eric Ulrich opposes definitive action to reduce crashes and save lives.