Judge Jennifer Grant reduces or dismisses most photo-enforcement penalties in Lake Forest Park mitigation calendar

Judge Jennifer Grant presided over a Feb. 24 mitigation calendar in Lake Forest Park Municipal Court and reduced fines for the majority of motorists who appeared to contest or mitigate photo-enforced speeding citations in designated school walk-zone areas.

The calendar, which the judge identified at the start as a mitigation calendar, drew dozens of defendants. Grant described the school-walk-zone enforcement and offered reduced penalties in many cases after hearing explanations, medical or financial hardship claims, or driving-condition details. She also dismissed several matters after defendants — while under oath — said they were not the driver on the date of the notice. One contested case was continued to a prosecutor calendar with the officer subpoenaed.

Grant explained the scope of the enforcement at the hearing: “It was just the designated school walk zone area, that is enforced 24/7, in Lake Forest Park on that roadway.” She also noted the state’s recent changes to photo enforcement rules: “Last year, the legislature revamped the photo enforcement statute,” which has expanded enforcement options and prompted questions from several defendants about signage and timing.

Most motorists who asked to mitigate were offered reduced penalties rather than the original charge amount shown on their notices. Examples of outcomes announced in court include reductions to $75 for multiple cases (including Geneva Norton and several first-time matters), a reduction to $100 for a driver identified as Lynn Katz after the judge said she would “take $45 off,” and a final $40 reduction for Mary McCullough after the judge considered her status as a senior on Social Security. Several other reductions were entered: $85 reductions in multiple matters, a $50 reduction for a defendant who described recent financial hardship, and a $175 reduction in one case involving a flashing-school-beacon period.

The court also handled cases where the registered owner said they had not been the driver. After being placed under oath and stating they were not the driver, the judge dismissed citations for at least four registered owners who said they were not driving on the date in question. In one case the court staff confirmed an attempted online payment had been rejected; the judge instructed the defendant that the outstanding reduced amount would be reissued via mailed invoice.

Not all matters were finalized. The contested matter for Stanley Tazuma — where the sergeant who issued the citation had been subpoenaed — was continued to the court’s prosecutor calendar so that the city prosecutor and the officer could both be present. The hearing was rescheduled to April 7, 2025, at 2:30 p.m., after Tazuma waived the shorter speedy-hearing window in March.

A non-speeding citation for a transit/HOV-lane violation was also addressed. The officer-issued HOV/transit-lane citation contested by Anthony Miller was mitigated in court to a $100 penalty after Miller described the circumstances that led him briefly to enter the transit lane and then reenter general traffic to avoid a collision.

The court concluded the afternoon calendar by finding a small number of failures-to-appear (FTAs) as defaults where notices had been mailed and not returned undeliverable; those matters were entered as violations committed by default and penalties imposed per the court’s routine practice for FTAs.

Judge Grant and court staff told defendants they would mail updated invoices describing the reduced penalties and payment options; the judge repeated that paying by check avoids third-party credit-card fees. Several defendants were told they may be eligible to pay in installments when reductions still represent a financial burden. The court adjourned after completing the scheduled matters.