When William Peskin joined the police force in 1998, there were nine officers. Now the police chief is the only full-time law enforcement officer left. He said concerns grew after accidents around the elementary school; village officials looked into traffic cameras and became convinced that they were the most practical way to make the village safer.
Cameras at the village limits and in the school zone dramatically curtailed speeding once citations started going out, Peskin said. From 20,000 speeders clocked in a two-week trial period last summer, the number soon dropped to a quarter of that.
Former county prosecutor Mike Allen filed a lawsuit against the town. Among the plaintiffs: the Rev. Chau Pham, who said church attendance dropped by a third after that Sunday when so many congregants â¿¿ including him â¿¿ were ticketed; David Downs, owner of St. Bernard Polishing for 25 years, who said long-time customers had vowed to shop elsewhere because they had been ticketed; and a Habitat for Humanity worker who was cited four times.
"Elmwood Place is engaging in nothing more than a high-tech game of three-card monte," Judge Robert P. Ruehlman wrote March 7 in a colorful opinion that has heartened camera foes across the country. "It is a scam that the motorists can't win."The judge said the village was on pace to assess $2 million in six months (the village's annual budget is $1.3 million). Maryland-based Optotraffic, owner and operator of the photo enforcement system in return for 40 percent of revenue, had already reaped $500,000 in about four months. Used words such as "scheme," ''sham," ''stacked," and "total disregard for due process," Ruehlman declared the village's photo-enforcement ordinance invalid and unenforceable. Elmwood Place is appealing, and believes it has the law on its side. "It's unfortunate that the judge doesn't see it as a safety issue," Peskin said.