In wake of scandal, red-light cameras on the hot seat

River Forest to review program as Senate leader pushes for 'full review'

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter

By Bob Uphues

Riverside-Brookfield Landmark Editor

The future of red-light cameras in Illinois appears to be in some doubt in the wake of former state Sen. Martin Sandoval pleading guilty to accepting $70,000 bribes from a red-light camera company official in exchange for protecting the interests of the red-light camera industry in the Illinois General Assembly.

Sandoval remains free on bond and is cooperating with federal investigators in what appears to be a wide-ranging corruption probe involving local politicians and large contributors, including the red-light camera company SafeSpeed LLC, and lobbyists.

SafeSpeed LLC operates red-light cameras in more than two dozen municipalities in northern Illinois, including River Forest, North Riverside and Berwyn, generating millions of dollars in fines, predominantly from people failing to make a complete stop before turning right.

At least one town that has partnered with SafeSpeed in recent years, Oak Lawn, has pulled the plug on the devices. Cameras in that southwest suburb went dead on Jan. 1, after the village board voted not to renew its contract with SafeSpeed, and Tinley Park's village board signaled in December that it may follow suit.

In light of the Sandoval case, officials in River Forest may soon reconsider its three red-light cameras -- one at Harlem and North avenues and two at Lake Street and Harlem Avenue.

"The village of River Forest is monitoring and reviewing the information surrounding the ongoing federal investigations related to the red light camera bribery scheme. We support efforts to eliminate corruption," said Village Administrator Eric Palm in an email response to an inquiry from Wednesday Journal.

"I anticipate discussing this item with the village board at a future meeting."

Should River Forest choose to end its red-light camera program, it would eliminate a revenue stream that's used to fund capital projects.

Over the past five years, River Forest has collected more than $4 million in red-light camera fines, according to village budget documents.

New state Senate President Don Harmon (D-Oak Park), meanwhile, is calling for a "full review of the red-light program in Illinois" after the latest revelations involving Sandoval.

"What I read in the [Sandoval] plea agreement is disgusting," Harmon said in an email to Wednesday Journal. "These cameras were meant to protect the public from irresponsible drivers. Running a red light is incredibly reckless and dangerous. That public safety goal, unfortunately, appears to have been lost.

"There is legislation already pending in the Senate for a review of red-light cameras, and I plan to talk to my colleagues to see how to best address this troubling issue."

Harmon was referencing two bills pending in the Illinois House and one in the Illinois Senate introduced last fall and still awaiting committee assignments. All three would outlaw red-light cameras and reportedly have bipartisan support.

North Riverside Mayor Hubert Hermanek Jr. said that village is not planning to reconsider its red-light cameras, which also are operated by SafeSpeed and have raked in more than $10 million for the village since 2014.

The revenue, which helps fund the village's police and fire pension obligations – at about $3 million annually -- is just too important, said Hermanek.

"We are not reconsidering our view on our red light cameras, as our village abides by the law of its implementation, and should not suffer due to the improper conduct of others," Hermanek said. "Also, non-home rule villages are strapped as to revenue sources. Maybe the state can readdress the necessity of home rule vs. non-home rule, as well as meaningful pension reform, which may alleviate the dependence on revenues from red lights."

Email: Twitter: @RBLandmark

Love the Journal?

Become our partner in independent community journalism

Thanks for turning to Wednesday Journal and We love our thousands of digital-only readers. Now though we're asking you to partner up in paying for our reporters and photographers who report this news. It had to happen, right?

On the plus side, we're giving you a simple way, and a better reason, to join in. We're now a non-profit -- Growing Community Media -- so your donation is tax deductible. And signing up for a monthly donation, or making a one-time donation, is fast and easy.

No threats from us. The news will be here. No paywalls or article countdowns. We're counting on an exquisite mix of civic enlightenment and mild shaming. Sort of like public radio.

Claim your bragging rights. Become a digital member.

Donate Now

Reader Comments

7 Comments - Add Your Comment

Note: This page requires you to login with Facebook to comment.

Comment Policy

Gregg Kuenster from River Forest CPA  

Posted: February 3rd, 2020 6:03 PM

1 I anticipate discussing this item. 2 The check is in the mail. 3 You know how I feel about you. Also Known As ... Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Barbara Purington  

Posted: February 2nd, 2020 3:42 PM

That a State Senator accepted a bribe in exchange for protecting the interest of red-light camera industry in the General Assembly makes me see red. Lock Sandoval up and throw away the key. Or make him pick up garbage along the sides of the Eisenhower, between Western and Central Ave. The cameras are highway robbery. I will avoid North Riverside from now on since it depends on this source of revenue. By the way, who establishes the amount of these fines? For many, many people , retirees, single parents, the working poor living on fixed incomes or tight budgets, $100 buys a lot of groceries. The red-light system is outrageous, out of control and needs to be dismantled.

Robert A. Bell  

Posted: February 1st, 2020 5:42 PM

I was a victim of a red light camera right turn on red violation. I made a right turn safely at a non-peak hour. I appeared to protest the $100 fine which to me is completely unrelated to the nature of the violation. I consider it a trap and scam. Most of those caught by the camera are middle and low income people who can not afford the exorbitant fine let alone the $100 penalties added for non-payment. The millions of dollars collected in this manner amount to robbery as far as I am concerned. All of these cameras should be removed.

Terry Stanton  

Posted: January 31st, 2020 8:38 PM

It's disgraceful that our own towns are using traps and trickery to extract money from their own residents, using the spurious claim of safety. They are in an unholy alliance with a vendor that instructs them how to maximize revenue from cameras and takes a big cut. Find an honest way to fund the government. You should be embarrassed to collect money in this way.

Ellen Edwards from Oak Park  

Posted: January 31st, 2020 8:07 PM

River Forest's camera at Lake and Harlem has been a cash scam from Day 1 and the appeal process a kangaroo court. It has never been about safety. Get rid of the cameras there and refund everyone who has been ticketed.

David Rechs  

Posted: January 31st, 2020 6:44 PM

The least dangerous traffic "offense" should not be a significant form of "tax" revenue for any government body. The ease of prosecution should also not be a determining factor.

Mark Graham from Oak Park  

Posted: January 31st, 2020 5:00 PM

Is is true over 90 percent of tickets are for slow rolling right turns on red? Get rid of those violations unless there is a pedestrian or approaching car. The cameras are for public safety, not to be a cash machine.

Facebook Connect

Answer Book 2019

To view the full print edition of the Wednesday Journal 2019 Answer Book, please click here.

Quick Links

Sign-up to get the latest news updates for Oak Park and River Forest.

MultimediaContact us
Submit Letter To The Editor
Place a Classified Ad