The Flossmoor Village Board tabled a request for cameras around the Heather Hill detention basin at its Sept. 15 meeting after trustees couldn’t reach a consensus on next steps.

The basin, next to Heather Hill School, was constructed to help relieve flooding in the downtown area. Residents are concerned about safety around the basin, but trustees aren’t sure the concerns warrant security cameras.

To help with the decision on appropriate safeguards, village attorneys Kathleen Orr and Joseph Miller looked into the use of cameras in detention basins using the Intergovernmental Risk Management Agency (IRMA), a self-funded government insurance pool that covers Flossmoor needs, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

The village sent IRMA pictures of the basin, the fence around it and prior incidents at the basin. A memo from Orr and Miller informed trustees that IRMA investigated EPA guidelines and case laws dealing with regulations recommending cameras but found none. 

IRMA did not recommend cameras but did recommend installing a no-trespassing sign near the basin. 

Neither the incident history nor the times water was in the basin were found to be a cause for concern or liability. IRMA emphasized the concern of unwatched cameras for surveillance, saying that would cause increased liability for the village. 

Trustee Gary Daggett said the cameras are not a dead issue but permanently on pause until something changes. His main points were the village not do anything unless School District 161 wants cameras, and he believes there is no need for cameras if the basin is functioning properly. 

Trustee Jim Mitros was concerned about the liability the village would face. He argued nothing was found in other practices that show any legal need for cameras. 

“We don’t create additional liability for the village when we have an attorney that says there’s no need for that,” Mitros said. 

Trustee Carolyn Rodgers felt the board was bringing up varied reasons why the cameras aren’t needed when it’s the community members requesting them. 

She said the board represents both the village and the residents and they can’t drop one concern for the other. 

“This is what the residents are asking for,” Rodgers said. “To have a conversation about it, we owe them the due diligence to do that.”