Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Darwish uses Newman’s “pro-Israel” contributions against her
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
Posted in:
* Sen. Mattie Hunter has introduced a bill to ban almost all red-light cameras in the state, including for home-rule units. Here’s Neal Earley at the Sun-Times…
“It’s clear that the red-light camera program has been sustained and expanded by corruption,” state Sen. Mattie Hunter Hunter said in a statement. “Traffic laws should be driven by safety, not bribery, shakedowns or the need to boost revenue.” […]
A spokesman for SafeSpeed said the Legislature should reform the red-light camera program, not end it.
“The legislature’s response to the news of Martin Sandoval’s corruption should not be to terminate red-light camera programs, which have been proven to save lives and increase public safety,” said Dennis Culloton, a spokesman for SafeSpeed. “Instead, SafeSpeed fully supports legislation that would reform the industry and ensure the highest levels of ethics by officials and businesses.” […]
“It’s becoming increasingly clear that we need a full review of the red-light camera program in Illinois,” Harmon said in a statement. “I plan to talk to my colleagues to see how to best address this issue.”
If SafeSpeed wants to survive, it needs to work with credible reformers and get behind some real changes, like prohibiting people who work for state and local governments from its sales team.
As I suggested to subscribers several days ago, if everyone marketing red-light cameras to local governments were required to register as lobbyists, then they couldn’t, by law, be paid on commission, and we’d have the added benefit of knowing exactly who they all are.
* Also, IDOT has way too much lee-way in deciding where the cameras can be placed…
IDOT’s policy has always stated cameras “should be installed only where a safety problem … has been documented.”
But IDOT says the word “should” gives it wiggle room.
“It does not say ’shall’ or ‘will’ be installed only where a safety problem has been documented, but ’should,’” IDOT spokesman Guy Tridgell said in an email.
Agency officials said approvals are done on a case-by-case basis and that crashes are just one factor. IDOT policies allow a permit if a mayor and police chief write letters stating there is a “perceived safety problem due to red light running,” even if there were few crashes there.
Truly reform or you may find yourself out of business.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 4:27 pm
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Darwish uses Newman’s “pro-Israel” contributions against her
Next Post: *** LIVE COVERAGE ***
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
= Truly reform or you may find yourself out of business. =
With the feds sniffing around, “out of business” might be SafeSpeed’s best-case scenario.
Comment by cover Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 4:32 pm
Agreed. Stop paying by commission and stop being paid by commission. Register your lobbyists. Change the camera placement language to “shall” and if a camera is rejected in a certain location by IDOT or another body, too bad. Reasons for rejection or acceptance must be documented and FOIAable. If you can’t survive within those parameters, go away.
Comment by Ron Burgundy Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 4:36 pm
Retired public officials and police should also be prohibited from working for these companies.
Comment by DuPage Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 4:50 pm
Tip of the iceberg.
We “should” look into all IDOT policies and I’ll bet we “shall” find many slippery-language practices benefiting the few.
Comment by ROXXAANNNNEEE Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 5:04 pm
To legitimize red light cameras, tickets should be run through the court system and reported to the Secretary of State and insurance companies. Cases should be heard by disinterested judges, not “magistrates” whose pay is dependent upon the success of the red light camera program.
Comment by Anyone Remember Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 5:45 pm
Send all those corrupt business owners and politicians to JAIL where they belong.
Comment by Corruption in Illinois Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 6:14 pm
Perhaps but ending the program completely as many of these bills want to do is shortsighted. Ending incentives, etc I can see.
Comment by low level Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 6:25 pm
I recently paid a red light camera ticket when visiting Park Ridge. I wish I hadn’t paid it now because I didn’t think I ran a red light there.
I got a red light ticket in St. Louis a few years ago and ended up getting a rebate check because their system was defective.
Not paying anymore red light camera tickets.
Comment by justacitizen Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 6:32 pm
== Stop paying by commission and stop being paid by commission. Register your lobbyists.==
If lobbyist registration is required for red light camera salespersons, won’t all others salespersons for other products and services also have to register and also stop receiving commissions?
Comment by W. Loman Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 6:43 pm
== To legitimize red light cameras, tickets should be run through the court system and reported to the Secretary of State and insurance companies. Cases should be heard by disinterested judges..”
The same could be said of parking tickets and running tollbooths. But those aren’t moving violations either, which is why they aren’t required to go to court.
Comment by anon2 Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 7:06 pm
===“shall” find many slippery-language practices benefiting the few. ===
The benefit of slippery language in law writing isn’t always underhanded. It can be done to allow the administration of the law flexibility when flexibility might be needed. One of the other issues though is it sounds like the safety problem just needs to be documented. That likewise doesn’t seem like a significant hurdle.
It is very difficult to write legislation that is impervious to ill-intended public officials.
Comment by Candy Dogood Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 7:11 pm
“The hardest thing for me was leaving the life. I still love the life. We were treated like movie stars with muscle. We had it all just for the asking.”
Comment by Precinct Captain Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 7:44 pm
Reduce slow-right-turn-on-red fines to $25.
Comment by Ares Thursday, Feb 6, 20 @ 11:32 pm
The cameras shouldn’t generate revenue for private companies or individuals, period. If these cameras should exist at all, they should be owned by the public.
Comment by Excitable Boy Friday, Feb 7, 20 @ 9:07 am
Shouldn’t we just change the “right turn on red” law to require you to yield, instead of come to a complete stop?
Comment by Thomas Paine Friday, Feb 7, 20 @ 9:33 am