In rules of the road in general, providing for obedience to school crossing guards; and imposing penalties.
Summary
HB 1587 would add a new section to Pennsylvania’s Vehicle Code requiring drivers to obey the directions of school crossing guards when approaching a crosswalk or other roadway area controlled by a guard. If a guard directs a vehicle to stop, the driver must stop within the specified distance and remain stopped until the guard signals the vehicle to proceed. The bill is aimed at improving safety for children traveling to and from school by giving crossing guards clear authority over traffic at school crossings.
The bill also creates a penalty for violations. A driver who fails to obey a school crossing guard would commit a summary offense and be subject to a $250 fine plus a $35 surcharge. The surcharge would be deposited into the School Bus Safety Grant Program Account. The measure would take effect 180 days after enactment.
Impact
HB 1587 would amend Title 75 of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes by adding a new traffic rule specifically governing driver conduct around school crossing guards. It would expand the legal duties of motorists in school zones and crosswalks, create an enforceable offense for noncompliance, and direct surcharge revenue to the School Bus Safety Grant Program Account. The bill would affect drivers, school districts, municipalities, and school crossing guards by formalizing guard authority and strengthening penalties for unsafe driving near schools.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a straightforward school-safety proposal with no recorded committee debate or votes in the provided materials. The sponsorship list suggests broad interest among House members, and the bill’s purpose is presented in a protective, child-safety-oriented way. No opposition or amendments are reflected in the available record.
Contention
There is no committee transcript or vote history provided, so no specific points of contention are documented. Potential areas of debate, if any arise later, would likely concern the scope of authority given to school crossing guards, the clarity of when drivers must stop, and whether the $250 fine and surcharge are proportionate. Another possible issue is enforcement consistency across municipalities and school districts.
In licensing of drivers, further providing for schedule of convictions and points; in rules of the road in general, further providing for meeting or overtaking school bus; and imposing penalties.
In commercial drivers, further providing for disqualification; in general provisions relating to operation of vehicles, further providing for obedience to traffic-control devices; and imposing penalties.
In general provisions relating to operation of vehicles, further providing for obedience to authorized persons directing traffic and providing for drivers in organized motorcycle processions; and, in rules of the road in general, further providing for following too closely.
In general provisions relating to operation of vehicles, further providing for obedience to authorized persons directing traffic and providing for drivers in organized motorcycle processions; and, in rules of the road in general, further providing for following too closely.
In licensing of drivers, further providing for schedule of convictions and points; in rules of the road in general, further providing for meeting or overtaking school bus; in other required equipment, further providing for general requirements for other vehicles transporting school children; and making editorial changes.
In general provisions, further providing for definitions; in general provisions relating to operation of vehicles, further providing for traffic-control signals and for pedestrian-control signals; in special vehicles and pedestrians, further providing for right-of-way of pedestrians in crosswalks; and imposing penalties.