It will soon be 10 years since the city of San Diego adopted Vision Zero with the goal of having no non-motorist traffic deaths on city streets. However, a report published by Circulate San Diego, called “Vision Zero At Ten Years,” found there are more pedestrian deaths occurring now than when the initiative began in 2015. 

Will Moore, policy counsel for Circulate San Diego, authored the 20-page report. He said the city is “struggling forward in a safety crisis.” Moore applauded the city for making certain improvements — like the median work being done at the intersection of University Avenue and 44th Street — but said solutions are not coming quickly enough. 

“We need to do more. We need to re-double our efforts,” Moore said.

According to the report, the organization performed “walk audits” of neighborhoods known to have injuries and deaths based on local, state and federal data. They found points of concern in the City Heights and Grant Hill neighborhoods, including faded crosswalks, short crossing times and uneven roads, that could all be contributing factors to crashes. 

However, the report concluded the main reasons why crashes are becoming deadlier, despite efforts to make roads safer for all users, are bigger, faster cars coupled with smartphones and visibility issues that come with driving at night. 

The city’s response

A spokesperson for the city of San Diego sent NBC 7 a statement that said it agreed with the report’s finding that “substantial” improvement is needed. The statement also said, in part, “safety is the City’s primary concern regarding mobility and the work to create safer streets for all users, especially the most vulnerable, is constant.” 

The statement explained, “systemic safety involves implementing safety measures that account for human error and injury tolerance. This includes enhancing separation and visibility, reducing user speeds through thoughtful road design and environmental modifications, minimizing conflicts at intersections.”

Another statement shared with NBC 7 on behalf of San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria said, “Mayor Gloria’s first four budgets invested tens of millions of dollars in making our streets and pedestrian infrastructure safer and more accessible for all travelers, including pedestrians and cyclists.”

“His first four budgets created a total of 385 miles of bike lanes, including 101 miles of Class IV (separated) lanes. This is well over double the 168 miles of lanes created in the four years prior,” the statement continued.

The city also added that infrastructure quality will remain a priority in upcoming budgets and they will continue to work alongside groups like Circulate San Diego to make streets safer.

The loss of a loved one

“A protected bike lane would have saved Kevin’s life,” Nancy Cavanaugh-Wilson told NBC 7 as she held a framed photo of her husband, Kevin Wilson, riding his bike.

Wilson died on Jan. 20, 2020, after being hit by a car while on his morning ride. Cavanaugh-Wilson said he was an “avid cyclist” and had been on a bike since he was a young boy. She said she would worry about him every time he left home to go for a ride, despite how well “he knew the rules of the road.”

“This was out of his hands, you know,” Cavanaugh-Wilson, as she recalled being told he was hit by a driver from behind, said. “He didn’t stand a chance.”

Despite how difficult it is to relive that day, she said she does not want anyone to have to go through the same thing. 

“We need people to be aware, and we need the city to improve what needs to be done to make our roads safer,” she said. She is now an advocate with Families for Safe Streets San Diego. While she said she knows the goal of zero traffic-related deaths on city streets is a lofty one, she said it is a motivator. 

“I don’t know if it’s ever going to happen, but we need that goal,” Cavanaugh-Wilson said. “Whatever it takes.”

A new Louisiana requirement that the Ten Commandments be displayed in every public classroom by Jan. 1 was temporarily blocked Tuesday by a federal judge who said the law is “unconstitutional on its face.”

U.S. District Judge John W. deGravelles in Baton Rouge said the law had an “overtly religious” purpose, and rejected state officials’ claims that the government can mandate the posting of the Ten Commandments because they hold historical significance to the foundation of U.S. law. His opinion noted that no other foundational documents — including the Constitution or the Bill of Rights — must be posted.

In granting a preliminary injunction, DeGravelles said opponents of the law are likely to win their ongoing lawsuit against the law. The lawsuit argues that the law violates the First Amendment’s provisions forbidding the government from establishing a religion or blocking the free exercise of religion. They had argued that the poster-sized display of the Ten Commandments would isolate students, especially those who are not Christian.

DeGravelles said the law amounts to unconstitutional religious government coercion of students: “As Plaintiffs highlight, by law, parents must send their minor children to school and ensure attendance during regular school hours at least 177 days per year.”

Proponents say that the measure is not solely religious, but that it has historical significance to the foundation of U.S. law.

Plaintiffs in the case were a group of parents of Louisiana public school children.

The new law in Louisiana, a reliably Republican state that is ensconced in the Bible Belt, was passed by the state’s GOP-dominated Legislature earlier this year. The Associated Press sought comment Tuesday morning from Gov. Jeff Landry and Attorney General Elizabeth Murrill, both Republicans and supporters of the law.

The legislation, which has been touted by Republicans including President-elect Donald Trump, is one of the latest pushes by conservatives to incorporate religion into classrooms — from Florida legislation allowing school districts to have volunteer chaplains to counsel students to Oklahoma’s top education official ordering public schools to incorporate the Bible into lessons.

In recent years, similar bills requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in classrooms have been proposed in other states including Texas, Oklahoma and Utah. However, none have gone into effect due to threats of legal battles over the constitutionality of such measures.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a similar Kentucky law was unconstitutional in 1980 and violated the First Amendment establishment, which says Congress can “make no law respecting an establishment of religion.” The high court found that the law had no secular purpose but rather served a plainly religious purpose.

Louisiana’s legislation, which applies to all public K-12 schools and state-funded university classrooms, requires the Ten Commandments to be displayed on a poster or framed document at least 11 inches by 14 inches (28 by 36 centimeters) where the text is the central focus and “printed in a large, easily readable font.”

Each poster must be paired with the four-paragraph “context statement” describing how the Ten Commandments “were a prominent part of American public education for almost three centuries.”

Tens of thousands of posters would likely be needed to satisfy the new law.

Proponents say schools are not required to spend public money on the posters, and instead that they can be bought using donations or that groups and organizations will donate the actual posters.

• A Dutch court on Tuesday dismissed a landmark climate ruling against Shell, after the oil giant was ordered to drastically reduce its global carbon emissions back in 2021.
• The outcome marks the latest twist in a precedent-setting case that could have far-reaching implications for the future of climate litigation.
• In May 2021, The Hague district court ruled that Shell must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 45% from 2019 levels by 2030.

A Dutch court on Tuesday dismissed a landmark climate ruling against Shell, after the oil giant was ordered to drastically reduce its global carbon emissions back in 2021.

The outcome, which comes during the opening days of the COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan, marks the latest twist in a precedent-setting case that could have far-reaching implications for the future of climate litigation.

The appeals court in The Hague said that while Shell is required to reduce its carbon emissions, it could not determine the extent of these cuts. The case against Shell, therefore, was dismissed entirely.

In May 2021, The Hague district court ruled that Shell must reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 45% from 2019 levels by 2030.

The verdict, which came when Shell had its headquarters in The Hague, also said the company was responsible for all emissions across its value chain, including those from the products they sell — known as Scope 3 emissions.

It was the first time in history that a company was found to have been legally obliged to align its policies with the Paris Agreement, a framework which seeks to avoid the worst of what the climate crisis has in store by limiting the average global temperature increase to between 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius.

The ruling was regarded as a watershed moment in the climate battle and sparked a wave of lawsuits against other fossil fuel companies.

The case was brought against Shell in 2019 by Milieudefensie, an environmental campaign group and the Dutch branch of Friends of the Earth, alongside six other bodies and more than 17,000 Dutch citizens.

An appeal against Tuesday’s outcome could still be brought before the Netherlands’ Supreme Court, although Milieudefensie has not said whether it plans to launch an appeal.

“The court of appeal denied the claims of Milieudefensie because the court was unable to establish that the social standard of care entails an obligation for Shell to reduce its CO2 emissions by 45%, or some other percentage,” the court said in a statement.

What’s more, the court said it deemed an obligation for Shell to sharply reduce its Scope 3 emissions by a particular percentage as “ineffective” because other companies could step in to take over that trade and “this would consequently not result in a reduction in CO2 emissions.”

Shell welcomed the decision to overturn the 2021 verdict.

“We are pleased with the court’s decision, which we believe is the right one for the global energy transition, the Netherlands and our company,” Shell CEO Wael Sawan said in a statement.

“Our target to become a net-zero emissions energy business by 2050 remains at the heart of Shell’s strategy and is transforming our business,” he added.

Shares of London-listed Shell were trading slightly lower on the news.

A setback for the climate movement

Shell appealed the 2021 decision and subsequently moved its headquarters to the U.K., a relocation that was criticized for being partly motivated by the courtroom defeat. The Hague district court ruling had only been legally binding in the Netherlands.

In appeal hearings held earlier this year, the British oil major argued that the case had no legal basis.

Shell’s lawyers said demands for companies to curb greenhouse gas emissions could not be made by courts, but only by governments, Reuters reported. The company also said the court ruling would force it to shrink its business without any benefit to the fight against climate change.

The burning of coal, oil and gas is by far the largest contributor to the climate crisis, accounting for more than three-quarters of global greenhouse gas emissions.

“This ruling affects us deeply,” Donald Pols, director of Milieudefensie, said in a statement.

“It is a setback for us, the climate movement and millions of people around the world who are worried. But anyone who knows us a little knows that we never give up,” Pols said.

“It is encouraging that the judge determines that Shell is responsible for reducing emissions and that companies must also respect human rights. It is a marathon and not a sprint and the race is not yet run,” he added.