Chicago Reader

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Practice What I Preach

Posted by Ben Joravsky on Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:32 PM

If you're skeptical about Chicago's traffic control policies, you ought to read the story in today's Tribune about the controversy over cameras at red lights out in Schaumburg -- it'll give you some perspective.

When the Schaumburg officials decided to install cameras, they claimed they were doing so in order to cut down on traffic accidents by forcing motorists to obey the law. But when they picked a site for the first set of cameras, they chose an intersection where there were lots of traffic violations but not a whole lot of accidents.

As you might imagine, the traffic-violation cash flowed in, as the cameras caught lots of motorists turning right on red without coming to a full stop. Angry motorists accused officials of misleading the public, forcing Schaumburg's leaders to back down and remove the cameras.

Imagine that! I can't think of anything short of armed insurrection (or at least a court order) that would force Mayor Daley to reverse his stand on, say, the parking meter lease deal.

Anyway, I'm sort of sympathetic to Schaumburg's officials on this one. As I read it, the motorists are pissed off because the cameras are making them follow a law they don't want to follow. But instead of coming right out and saying "We don't want to have to come to a complete stop before turning right on red," they've come up with mumbo jumbo about being misled.

They're doing the same thing Schaumburgs officials are -- covering up their real motivations with a flimsy facade.

Schaumburgians better stay away from Chicago. I can't remember the last time officials around here ever gave their real reason for doing what they do.

Tags: , , , ,

Comments (4) RSS

Showing 1-4 of 4

Add a comment

Generic user icon

as much as i hate most of the city's ridiculous revenue-generating schemes, red light cameras are something i support. i've even been nabbed by one once. but it was fair -- i was in the wrong. drivers should be penalized accordingly for running red lights, as it's an act that not only put other drivers directly at risk, but worsens the already-crippled traffic flow.

Posted by mark on July 15, 2009 at 2:57 PM | Report this comment
Generic user icon

I got news for you.The city wil soon scan cars for insurance verification.The company called insurenet will soon be in operation 30% of the money they collect they will keep. The city projects to make at least 100 million on this new scam. www.InsurNet.com

Posted by Hey Ben on July 15, 2009 at 2:59 PM | Report this comment
Generic user icon

I didn't know you very such a status quo freak. Red light cameras will cause more not less accidents. The city has reduced yellow light timers to generate more revenue. A light goes from Green to Red in almost a nono-second. People slam on their brakes at the mere sight of the yellow light. The intersection of 76th and Stoney Island,I have seen many pile ups due to your belove cameras. The city is probabily violating D.O.T federal laws,by reducing the yellow light below 3-6 seconds, in order to generate revenue. Also the light were purchased through shaddy middlemen like victor Reyes and Al Ronan.Mark the old adage is what you don't know can kill.

Posted by Hey Mark on July 15, 2009 at 3:10 PM | Report this comment
Generic user icon

"Imagine that! I can't think of anything short of armed insurrection (or at least a court order) that would force Mayor Daley to reverse his stand on, say, the parking meter lease deal." I'm not so sure even a court order would be enough in Chicago. Don't forget the city's disregard for the Shakman Decree and the federal court order in the CHA's Gautreaux case. Or Mayor Daley's violation of federal law in tearing up Meigs Field. We'll have to stick to armed insurrection. Welcome to Daleyland. http://welcometodaleyland.blogspot.com/

Posted by citizen yip on July 15, 2009 at 3:49 PM | Report this comment

Add a comment

Latest in The Blog

Author Archives

  • Funds and Games: Chicago 2016's "Stewardship Report"

    A new donor report claims transparency but obscures details on who’s paying for the Olympic bid. And then there's the question of why they're paying.
    • Sep 10, 2009
  • Ready, Set, (Property Tax) Hike

    How will Daley balance the 2010 budget? Prepare for higher property taxes—but not till after the 2016 Olympics are sited.
    • Sep 3, 2009
  • Olympic Compromise

    The City Council authorizes the mayor to spend as much money as he wants as long as he tells them about it afterward.
    • Sep 10, 2009
  • More»

Recent Comments

  • Re: Compare and Contrast

    • @MikeB

      I agree. Good work on that.

      Still sounds like a vocoder to…

    • on November 6, 2009
  • Re: Don't Mess With Big Joe

    • Out of curiosity, Fedup Dem...Hypothetically, If an incumbent were to have filed a petition with…

    • on November 6, 2009
  • Re: Matthew Shipp on His Own

    • Ray N., that's not nitpicking--that's correcting. I was wrong. In addition to Symbol Systems I…

    • on November 6, 2009

©2009 Creative Loafing Media
All Rights Reserved.