Problematic Blind Crossing Traffic Signs Removed Again
By Justin Salisbury
(Editor’s Note: Justin Salisbury is a long-time Federationist and an active member of our Metro chapter.)
Sometimes, people follow good intentions that are driven by misperceptions about blindness. These good intentions can lead them to do things that are not actually good for blind people. Last summer, I learned that there were some traffic signs near the intersection of Franklin Avenue and Lyndale Avenue in Minneapolis. These traffic signs warned everyone who could read them that blind people might be crossing in that area. These are the same kinds of signs that might warn drivers that deer might be crossing in a certain area. We do this because deer are incapable of understanding traffic laws. Signs like these also exist to warn drivers the children might be crossing in a certain area. Children and Deer may have limited abilities to understand traffic laws and make good street crossing decisions, so it makes sense to have traffic signs warning drivers about them. Blindness does not impair a person's ability to make good street crossing decisions, so the same logic is not appropriate for blind people. One of the traffic signs had graffiti on it where the artist translated the sign to read “Sheep Crossing,” which played into the harmful metaphor of blind sheep simply following each other without intelligent thought.
In the Metro chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of Minnesota, we decided to do something about this. First, I did some work to research the issue, and I found out that Peggy Chong had published an article in the Braille Monitor in 1996 about a very similar incident of blind crossing traffic signs. Ironically, this article had chronicled the work of our very same Metro Chapter years before. Signs similar to these had been placed in the area near the NFB of Minnesota headquarters, and our chapter got them removed. This article became excellent evidence of the change that we needed to make once more.
We took some time to talk about it within the chapter and strategize about the best way to take this on. Each year, the Neighborhood & Community Relations department of the City of Minneapolis puts on a Community Connections Conference (CCC), where many leaders in the City of Minneapolis are present to meet the community. Some of our members attended the CCC, and I was pleased to be able to talk with representatives of the City Council and Department of Public Works. Thanks to the connections we made at the CCC, we were able to have those traffic signs removed about two weeks after the conference, in late February, 2025.
This time, our advocacy efforts did not face serious opposition. It was really just a matter of finding the right people. Once we did, the need seemed obvious to them, and we got it done. While talking about this initiative with people I have met in the Twin Cities, I heard one line of thinking that these signs would be particularly good for newly blind people, especially since these signs were placed at the intersection nearest to where Vision Loss Resources used to be located. I actually think they could be more harmful to newly blind people. I think that what we did to remove those signs may be more helpful to newly blind people than for those of us who have known the National Federation of the Blind for a long time. Those signs sent a message that blind people cannot be responsible for making good decisions when crossing streets. They also implied that a blind person is not safe crossing a street anywhere that there is not a blind crossing sign. Blind people who believe that would live a very limited life. Newly blind people, as well as sighted people who see these signs, could believe these messages about blindness and draw many negative conclusions based on those messages. Removing those signs was good for everyone. This is a great example of what the National Federation of the Blind does for blind people.
