License plate readers can be beneficial if used judiciously
Chicago’s recent progress on public safety is real. After years of volatility, violent crime fell sharply in 2024 and continued trending downward in 2025. That progress reflects sustained investment, smarter strategies and a growing recognition that public safety and economic stability are deeply connected.
Amid that momentum, one public safety tool — license plate readers — has become a subject of contention. Questions about privacy, data use and oversight are fair. Any technology that supports law enforcement must earn public trust through transparency and clear rules.
For small businesses across Chicago, public safety is key to ensuring employees feel safe commuting, customers are willing to visit neighborhood commercial corridors and entrepreneurs choose to invest locally. License plate readers are an important tool for law enforcement to combat retail crime, recover stolen vehicles, investigate violent crimes, disrupt drug trafficking and solve cases faster, reducing repeat offenses and improving safety for everyone.
License plate readers are widely used by law enforcement agencies across the state. They capture still images of vehicles traveling on public roads, similar to what any passerby can observe. They do not track people, use facial recognition or monitor where individuals shop, worship, or seek health care. The limited vehicle data collected is owned by the agencies that use it and is deleted after 30 days, unless tied to an active investigation.
Like many technologies, early implementation revealed the need for stronger guardrails, particularly among agency-to-agency data sharing. In response, policies have been tightened and data-sharing practices have been clarified to ensure that information collected by Illinois law enforcement can’t be shared with federal agencies.
These improvements matter, particularly for communities of color that have historically experienced disproportionate surveillance. Strong access controls, audit logs and comprehensive use policies are essential to maintain public confidence.
The choice in our communities is not between privacy and public safety. To achieve both, we must continue strengthening oversight without unduly restricting the use of public safety tools that help keep our communities and small businesses safe. That’s how we’ll keep this hard-fought momentum we desperately need to maintain.
Cornel Darden Jr., board chairman, Greater Chicagoland Black Chamber of Commerce
Not so fast, Mayor Johnson
Chicago taxpayers deserve more than another shrug and a “I know what’s best” response to one of the worst financial deals in our city’s history. The 2008 parking meter lease remains a textbook example of short‑term thinking with long‑term consequences — locking us into a 75‑year private windfall that still drains our streets and our wallets.
Mayor Brandon Johnson’s decision to walk away from a repurchase feels like a betrayal of transparency. If the city’s financial house is as shaky as recent missteps suggest, why should Chicagoans trust this conclusion was soundly reached? Chicago deserves to see the analysis.
The administration and City Council should publish a clear, detailed report outlining every feasible option: a full or partial buyback, contract reforms, or at a minimum, a tougher negotiating stance that uses the city’s veto power over any future sale of the concession. These are not radical ideas — they’re common‑sense steps to recover leverage in a deal that has cost us billions.
Imagine if City Hall had admitted its limits and enlisted independent, Chicago-based advisers with real experience in billion-dollar infrastructure finance and leveraged buyouts. Using the city’s consent rights strategically could delay or condition any ownership transfer until fairer terms are secured. If a buyback proves unrealistic, that leverage might still be Chicago’s most valuable card.
Even modest improvements could yield far more long‑term value than gimmicky revenue ideas like car‑wrap ads, banner sales and video gaming terminals. It’s well past time to stop accepting the parking meter fiasco as untouchable. A serious, transparent review could transform a historic mistake into a chance for fiscal leadership —and restore a measure of trust to the citizens who will pay for the 2008 blunder for another 57 years.
John Mjoseth, Lincoln Park
Attack on Smithsonian is attack on democracy
The Trump administration’s threat to withhold federal funding from the Smithsonian Institution unless it submits its exhibits to ideological review — which its officials did — is not simply an attack on museums; it is an attack on democracy.
Museums exist to educate, challenge and inform. They are not instruments of political power, nor should they be forced to conform to a government-approved version of history. Yet this administration demanded precisely that — that our nation’s most respected cultural institutions abandon honest scholarship in favor of a sanitized, politically convenient narrative.
The administration has been especially vocal in its discomfort with exhibits examining slavery, racial inequality and the long struggle for civil and human rights, particularly at the National Museum of African American History and Culture. These stories are not "anti-American." They are American. They reflect both our failures and our capacity to confront them, learn from them and move forward.
Threatening to defund museums unless they present only a narrowly defined “positive” version of history is not patriotism. It is censorship. And history shows that when governments begin policing truth, the damage does not stop at cultural institutions.
As a legislator and as chair of the Illinois House Committee on Museums, Arts, Culture, and Entertainment, I know that museums are not luxuries. They are civic infrastructure. They support education, tourism, workforce development and lifelong learning. More importantly, they help us understand who we are and how we got here.
So what must be done?
First, Congress must act. Federal funding for cultural institutions must be protected by clear safeguards that prohibit political interference in curatorial decisions. Oversight is appropriate; ideological control is not.
Second, states must step up. Illinois has long invested in museums and cultural institutions because we understand their role in democracy and economic vitality. States can strengthen funding partnerships, reinforce academic freedom and shield institutions from political retaliation.
Third, museums must hold the line. Transparency should never be confused with submission. History rewritten under threat is not education, it is propaganda.
Finally, the public must speak out. These institutions belong to the people, not to any administration. When funding is weaponized to suppress truth, silence becomes complicity.
America’s story has never been perfect, but it has always been strongest when told honestly. Our children deserve museums that trust them with the truth, not exhibits filtered through political fear.
Defending the Smithsonian is about more than museums. It is about defending the democratic principle that truth does not belong to those in power. It belongs to the people.
State Rep. Kimberly Neely DuBuclet, D-Chicago
Avoid another costly war
President Donald Trump's decision to step back from military action toward Iran — for now — is a wise one, although the latest reports show he hasn't ruled it out. A U.S.–Iran war would impose tremendous costs on Americans while strengthening the most hard-line elements in Tehran. A better path exists — one that requires clarity, not conflict.
The core problem is not the Iranian people. It is the constitutional doctrine of "exporting the revolution," written into the Islamic Republic’s governing charter. Those clauses have fueled proxy conflicts for decades and contributed to regional instability. Speaking honestly about this constitutional issue would do more to support peaceful change inside Iran than any airstrike.
Millions of Iranians have already signaled their desire for reform through protests, civic manifestos and constitutional demands. They do not need U.S. soldiers — they need the U.S. to state the truth. A five-minute presidential statement acknowledging this constitutional doctrine would empower ordinary Iranians more than any war ever could.
Avoiding another Middle East war is wise. Supporting peaceful constitutional change is wiser.
Sohrab ChamanAra, Des Plaines
King’s teachings an antidote to chaos
A way to counter existing political oppression and learn about the teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. is to read his books and visit sites associated with him.
As Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg recently noted, we honor King on the day named after him against the backdrop of a society with civil rights under attack, cruelty disguised as patriotism and the call of historical literacy fading.
King’s thoughts are the best antidote to these trends. His works, including "Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story," "Why We Can’t Wait" and "Strength to Love" provide the best rebuke — and considerable food for thought — in an era of political and moral degeneracy.
Chicagoans who visit the Martin Luther King Jr. Living Memorial and the Dr. King Legacy Apartments on the South Side are rewarded by seeing real historical sites.
And visitors to The King Center in Atlanta — where they can view King’s crypt, tour his childhood home and see Ebenezer Baptist Church — are left with a lasting impression.
Craig Barner, Lincoln Square
Support U.S. foreign aid
Nearly a year after the U.S. dismantled our humanitarian aid system, the results are hard to dispute. America’s influence has declined severely, thousands of lives have been lost, and the economic benefits promised to taxpayers never appeared.
The U.S. Agency for International Development represented 0.3% of the federal budget. That’s one penny out of every three taxpayer dollars. To compare, the Department of Defense represents around 13% of the federal budget. Trying to save money by cutting USAID is like trying to squeeze water out of a rock.
Meanwhile, over 700,000 people — mostly children — have died as a result of our cuts to famine relief, public health and other humanitarian programs.
And with the void the U.S. has left, China is poised to deliver more foreign aid in the coming years. If we don’t provide aid, other nations will ally with China instead of us. This makes cutting foreign aid a tool to unite both sides of the political aisle, as China's gaining influence could be the topic of debates.
As the director of fundraising at the Alliance for American Leadership, I believe in a strong American role in the world. Congress is currently considering a bill that would help restore that role — the National Security, Department of State, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2026. The bill, which was recently passed in the House, enjoys bipartisan support and responsibly modernizes foreign assistance while strengthening national security.
I urge Sens. Dick Durbin and Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., to support this bill. At a time when cutting foreign aid programs allowed China to take a foothold, fighting for foreign aid is critical. Not only is it critical for soft power and national security but also to continue to fund lifesaving programs.
Eleanor Richardson, Lake View East
Trump’s ‘peace'-related tantrum
Neil Steinberg's column, headlined President Trump’s tantrum is no reason to invade Greenland, touches on Donald Trump's ire over never legitimately receiving a Nobel Peace Prize. Trump is like the 10-year-old boy who takes his ball and goes home after being thrown out at second base, except Trump is now holding his breath and stomping his feet for the whole world to see.
The man cannot help but seek vengeance for the most benign perceived slight. What do we expect Trump to do next? If he is willing to threaten military presence on American streets, Trump is already not thinking "purely of peace" in his homeland. Why would he think purely of peace with a foreign land? Trump’s pettiness is infinite.
Terry Takash, Western Springs
Trump still has support in spite of actions
As President Donald Trump adds his name to the Kennedy Center, disfigures the White House with a ballroom, claims he should have won the Nobel Peace Prize, bombs boats off Venezuela, seizes oil tankers, invades Venezuela in violation of international law (how can the U. S. criticize Russia for doing the same thing?) and claims the United States should control Greenland, threatening the long-standing NATO treaty, we see him descend deeper into egomania and megalomania and still have approval ratings hovering around 40%.
Richard Barsanti, Western Springs