Chicago Speed Cameras: Gov. Quinn Expected To OK Rahm Emanuel's Controversial Plan

Though he had reportedly delayed his vote on the controversial Chicago speed camera bill amid a public outcry against it, it appears Democratic Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn has, at last, arrived at a decision on the matter.

According to the Chicago Sun-Times, Quinn is expected to OK the bill Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel has adamantly pushed for in recent months. The governor had until Monday to veto the measure, but if he does nothing, the proposal (Senate Bill 965) will become law July 1.

Under the measure, the city will install red-light cameras near many of the city's busiest intersections that will identify, and automatically ticket, motorists recorded traveling above the speed limit in so-called "safety zones" within one-eighth of a mile of schools and public parks. The fines could top $100 per infraction, and the "safety zones" would reportedly cover 66 percent of the city.

While the governor reviewed the legislation, The Expired Meter reported last week that his office received a public response vocally opposed to it -- specifically, more than 90 percent of those who contacted his office about the bill said they were not in favor of it. Those numbers are similar to The Huffington Post poll numbers on a recent story, where approximately 87 percent of respondents opposed the plan.

"Public response is one of those (factors involved in the decision) and the Governor always wants to do what's in the best interest of the people of Illinois," Annie Thompson, spokesperson for the Governor's office, told The Expired Meter last week.

Quinn's approval of the bill could come with a caveat, however, as CBS Chicago reported last week that his office still needed to "put the finishing touches on that particular piece of legislation." While the governor admitted that the public response has not been good to the bill, he said he was not "sure that's a scientific sampling of all the people of Illinois."

The mayor, meanwhile, has downplayed the cameras' role as a moneymaker for the city and maintained that his principal priority is "the safety of our children," NBC Chicago reported.

Last November, the state legislature approved Emanuel's red-light camera plan after the mayor lobbied heavily for it by citing two incidents where Chicago children were injured or killed in collisions -- two accidents that occurred at intersections that would not be covered under Emanuel's plan.

WATCH the mayor discuss the measure and urge the governor to approve it last week:

Comments

[Aloysious Farquart]

08:09 AM on 03/01/2012

"The Expired Meter reported..."...?!

[Romano54]

03:26 PM on 02/07/2012

Where was Chicago on Forbes' "Most Miserable Cities" list? Number 6 and trying hard!

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/02/06/chicago-yet-again-makes-forbes-most-miserable-cities-list/

This and the speed cameras are going to have tourists coming in drives! Something is terribly wrong with this city.

[Ed James]

07:35 PM on 02/06/2012

And stop trollin' ChiGuy.

[Ed James]

07:34 PM on 02/06/2012

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety". - Benjamin Franklin

[cosmax]

03:35 PM on 02/06/2012

Make sure these cameras are there to slow down speeding drivers and not to be revenue raisers. Here in Scotland they are painted with very bright yellow stripes over black so you can see them from a good distance and slow down if necessary. This ensures that the safety element is absolutely paramount

[EdCorey1971]

03:29 PM on 02/06/2012

At first Redlight cameras were supposed to be placed at particularly busy and dangerous intersections. Now they are all over the city. (Hummmm???) Now these speeding cameras are supposed to be placed where parks and schools are located to protect children. (Hummmm???)

When speed cameras end up all over the city and on the expressways even those that think this is a good idea with shake their fist at the man.

[DawnK]

12:48 PM on 02/06/2012

This is total BS. I cannot wait to vote against Emmanuel and possible Quinn. This is crap. THe city is just making more money ripping off the citizens of this city. I for one am tired of it. Rahm needs to stop giving sweetheart deals to his CEO buddies and maybe get the parking meters back. That would be a nice start to generating some revenue.

[PalaceOfWisdom]

12:41 PM on 02/06/2012

90% of the people say "NO!" and a measure passes anyway. I see local and state governments are just as responsive to citizens as at the federal level. Also like the feds, they only need to toss out the word "security" or "safety" to justify themselves.

More representative government, less 1984.

[ChiGuy]

12:02 PM on 02/06/2012

Personally, I could not care less whether this idea arose out of a desire to raise revenue or not. The fact of the matter is that the additional layer of safety measures for people, primarily children, at parks and in school zones, is a welcome side benefit. If you obey the law, you should have no problem with this.

[Jacob Black]

12:53 PM on 02/06/2012

"If you obey the law, you should have no problem with this."

This is the rationalization for every action taken by a police/surveillance state in history.

[ChiGuy]

02:50 PM on 02/07/2012

Oh please....Are the jackboots about to break down my door, too? LOL!!!
Spare me the fear mongering nonsense.
That simple statement is also the truth stated by law enforcement, and judges, and juries in our justice system since the beginning of our justice system.

Nice try.

[Chicago1771]

12:56 PM on 02/06/2012

Let me guess you don't drive and you are trying to justify your vote.

[ChiGuy]

02:49 PM on 02/07/2012

That's the problem, 1771, you guess when you should ask.

Yes, I drive. I drive a lot. And I drive kinda crazy.
Know what?....I've gotten plenty of moving violations in my day....and I deserved every single one of them.

If you can't obey the law either don't drive, or be willing to pay the price. Period.

[MrOnePercent2012]

11:28 AM on 02/06/2012

I think this is a great idea. The only people who would oppose it are those who insist on driving dangerously.

[Jacob Black]

11:51 AM on 02/06/2012

Yeah, who wouldn't want to live in a total surveillance society which bases its enforcement mechanisms on revenue generation rather than public safety?

[ChiGuy]

12:04 PM on 02/06/2012

So, the cameras will provide no additional safety? None whatsoever? Personally, even if it's just saves one or two it's worth the effort.

[DawnK]

12:46 PM on 02/06/2012

That's not true. I don't think that I should be watched every where I go. That is a total infringement on my freedom. Also, someone going over the speed limit by 1mph will get a ticket. How is that really fair? Aren't the speed bumps that are everywhere and ruining the alignment on my car enough safety for children in this city? When I was young my mother told me not to go in the street. Why don't parents watch their kids and teach them not to run in moving traffic.

[MrOnePercent2012]

12:55 PM on 02/06/2012

My guess is you speed a lot. And I don't mean just one mile over the limit either.

[Elizabeth Lutrell]

10:55 AM on 02/06/2012

Well, between the tolls going up, the obscene parking fees, and now this, hopefully people will avoid going to Chicago in droves, and they can reap the benefits in terms of millions of dollars in lost revenue. Suburbanites, vote with you wallets. With a little luck, they will find that turning the city into a giant ATM/police state will not work so well.

[John MC]

11:28 AM on 02/06/2012

I don't know, some of these suburbs seem like police state to me. What you can and can't put in front of your house, no parking on streets at night, police sitting at intersections just waiting for someone to break the law because they have nothing better to do.

[ChiGuy]

11:44 AM on 02/06/2012

Police state?? LOL!! Hyperbolize much?

[Thinker225]

10:52 AM on 02/06/2012

This law will not make the roads safer. If 66% of the city is covered with speed cameras are you as a motorist going to be watching your speedometer or the road? People don't want tickets, so they are going to be watching their speedometer and not watching pedestrians or traffic. Thanks Big Brother!

[ChiGuy]

11:49 AM on 02/06/2012

I don't know about you, but I can watch my speed while also paying attention to my surroundings. Additionally, I had enough driving experience by the time I was 17 to be able to gauge appropriate speed for my surroundings without staring at my speedometer. In fact, I suspect that's what most drivers do on a regular basis. If you have to continuously "watch" your speedometer when driving, I hope I'm never in traffic with you.

[jh61]

12:27 PM on 02/06/2012

Think back to driver's ed. You can watch your speedometer and the road.

[mikey09]

10:18 AM on 02/06/2012

Its all abt money, I read that some cities that have the red light camera's also send tickets for running the red light if your front tires go over the white line when you stop, and guess what, its law, so pony up the hundreds.

[The 5 Percent]

09:13 AM on 02/06/2012

According to a Tribune article on 11-9-11 "Of the 251 pedestrian deaths in the city between 2005 and 2009, fewer than half occured in the "safety zones" and less than one-quarter of those involved speeding." This is a pure money grab. Quinn does not have the stones to stand up to Emanuel and protect the people of Chicago from this dictator!!

[ChiGuy]

11:54 AM on 02/06/2012

So, the other 125 or so pedestrian deaths don't count? Or the 31 or so which DID involve speeding? (After all, they ARE an insignificant minority, aren't they?) Protect the people?? Do you mean from others willfully breaking speed limit laws? Hmmm.....I see.

[The 5 Percent]

12:58 PM on 02/06/2012

My point is that Emanuel has grossly exaggerrated the safety hazard in these areas. You dont see that? 1 death is too many, to be sure, but speed humps would prevent the speeding much better than cameras and tickets. Potentially a driver can speed and run someone over and the cameras cannot prevent that. Speed humps can. You are blind if you do not see that this is a money grab.

[Vrano]

08:38 AM on 02/06/2012

Totaliarism, brought to you by the Democratic Party.

[MrOnePercent2012]

11:29 AM on 02/06/2012

Obey the law, pal. Then you'll have no problem.

[ChiGuy]

11:56 AM on 02/06/2012

Yes, because everyone should have the absolute freedom to drive however they want, wherever and whenever that want, right? Speed limits: What an oppressive concept.

[Clive42]

12:33 PM on 02/06/2012

Its oppressive to get a ticket in the mail, that you cannot fight, issued to you by a machine ChiGuy. I like rahm, but this is a bad move.