SB 526 — Counties: Construction of Sidewalks and Crosswalks — Safe Alternative Routes to Public Schools
Status (Maryland)
- Introduced: January 23, 2025
- Assigned to: Education, Energy, and the Environment Committee
- Hearing: 2/12 at 1:00 p.m. (per bill information)
- Effective date stated in bill: July 1, 2025
Summary — purpose and intent
- SB 526 requires local school boards and county governments to identify and create “safe alternative routes” for public school students who are not eligible for school transportation because of distance. The overarching goal is to ensure students can walk, bike, or otherwise travel to school using routes that include sidewalks, crosswalks, footpaths, or bike paths.
Key provisions
- Annual school board report (Education Article §7‑801):
- Each year the county board of education must prepare and publish a report that:
- Identifies, for each public school, areas where students assigned to that school are ineligible for transportation due to distance, and
- Identifies pathways those students could use to travel between home and school using only “safe alternative routes” or a contiguous series of such routes.
- Each report must be posted on the county’s website.
County construction requirement (Local Government §12‑506.1):
- Each year the county governing body must review the school board’s report and construct any sidewalks and crosswalks necessary to create the safe alternative routes identified in the report.
- If meeting the requirement requires altering a road not under county jurisdiction, the county must develop a plan with the entity that controls that road and make reasonable efforts to execute the plan expeditiously.
Definition:
- “Safe alternative route” includes: (1) a road with sidewalks and crosswalks at intersections; (2) a foot path; and (3) a bike path.
Who is affected
- Primary: county boards of education and county governing bodies (all Maryland counties).
- Secondary: local public school students and families, local public works/transportation departments, and county budgets.
- The State’s fiscal exposure is expected to be minimal; costs are borne locally.
Fiscal and implementation impact
- The bill imposes a local government mandate—counties must plan for, design, and construct sidewalks/crosswalks identified in the annual reports.
- The Department of Legislative Services estimates potentially significant local costs. Examples from county responses:
- Baltimore City: estimated at least ~$200,000 annually for staff to prepare the reports.
- Montgomery County: estimated additional costs of about $96.5 million in FY2026 (bulk of construction costs in year one), with smaller recurring maintenance costs thereafter.
- Frederick County example: estimated ~$7.0 million for major sidewalk reconstruction across affected schools, plus ADA compliance and maintenance.
- Counties may meet overall aims in other ways (noted in analysis) such as expanding bus service for affected students or redrawing school boundaries, but the statutory duty is to construct sidewalks/crosswalks as identified.
Procedural/timing notes
- Annual cycle: reports and county reviews are required each year.
- If roads outside county control are implicated, the statute requires planning and reasonable efforts to secure alterations but does not prescribe a binding timeline for successful completion.
- Effective date in the bill: July 1, 2025.
Considerations for stakeholders
- Counties should anticipate upfront capital costs (right‑of‑way acquisition, design, construction, ADA ramps) and ongoing maintenance (e.g., snow/ice removal in colder jurisdictions).
- School systems will need staff or consultants with engineering/transportation expertise to prepare the required reports.
- Coordination with state or municipal road authorities will be necessary where routes cross non‑county jurisdictions.
