Senate Bill 645, titled the Protect Our Schools Act, would direct the North Carolina Department of Transportation to identify “school walk zones” within school zones where pedestrian traffic is heavy enough to make existing speed limits unsafe. For those designated areas, the bill requires lower speed limits than those otherwise allowed in state law, with a floor of 20 miles per hour, and requires that the limits be posted and enforced only on school days. The bill also creates a new definition of “school walk zone” in the motor vehicle statutes and ties those zones to annual consultation between DOT and public and nonpublic schools.
The bill increases penalties for unsafe driving in school zones and school walk zones. A driver exceeding a posted school-zone or school-walk-zone speed limit would commit an infraction and owe a $250 penalty, and driving without due care in a way that injures a minor would be a Class 3 misdemeanor. The bill also revises pedestrian right-of-way provisions to add similar penalties when a violation in these zones injures a minor. In addition, it establishes the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Fund within DOT and appropriates $10 million in nonrecurring Highway Fund money for pedestrian safety assessments, infrastructure improvements, crosswalk guard training, and public awareness efforts.
The bill’s impact would be to expand state traffic safety law by creating a new category of school-adjacent pedestrian protection, authorizing mandatory lower speeds in designated school walk zones, and increasing criminal and civil consequences for violations involving minors. It would also create a new dedicated funding stream for pedestrian safety initiatives and direct DOT to spend those funds on school-area improvements and education. The measure would affect drivers, schools, local transportation authorities, and DOT, while also potentially changing how school routes and crossings are evaluated statewide.
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials, there is no documented debate or formal vote history to gauge sentiment. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears strongly safety-oriented and designed to protect children and pedestrians near schools. The absence of recorded opposition or amendments in the supplied context means no specific support or criticism can be attributed to legislators or stakeholders from the available record.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the mandatory nature of the lower speed limits, the enforcement burden on DOT and local authorities, and the new penalties for drivers, including the $250 fine and misdemeanor exposure when a minor is injured. Another possible issue is the $10 million appropriation from the Highway Fund, which may draw scrutiny over spending priorities. Supporters would likely emphasize child safety, traffic calming, and pedestrian protection, while critics may focus on implementation costs, signage and enforcement logistics, and the impact on motorists.
The bill would amend North Carolina traffic and pedestrian safety statutes, including definitions and speed-limit provisions in Chapter 20, by adding “school walk zone” as a new statutory term and requiring DOT to designate such zones annually. It would impose lower posted speed limits in those zones, authorize enforcement only on school days, and create new penalties for speeding and unsafe driving that injures a minor. It would also establish the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Fund within DOT and appropriate $10 million from the Highway Fund for school-area pedestrian safety projects, guard training, and public awareness campaigns.
The overall sentiment suggested by the bill text is favorable toward pedestrian and school safety, with the legislation framed as a protective measure for children and school communities. No committee discussion or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of partisan division, stakeholder opposition, or negotiated compromise. On its face, the bill appears to be a public-safety initiative intended to reduce speeding and injuries near schools.
Likely areas of contention include whether DOT should be required to designate school walk zones and set lower speed limits statewide, how those zones would be identified and enforced, and whether the $250 penalty and misdemeanor provisions are appropriately strict. The $10 million Highway Fund appropriation may also be debated as a budgetary priority. Drivers and some local governments could object to added enforcement and signage obligations, while school safety advocates would likely support the stronger protections and dedicated funding.