Mar 29, 2007 Posted | 0 comments

UPDATE: Cooperstown Central School Approves Surveillance Cameras

I examined last Tuesday the Cooperstown Central School District’s decision to implement surveillance cameras to monitor school grounds. At that week’s meeting, the Board of Education adopted the policy [click here and scroll down to download/view the policy].

A quick review of the issue:

• The Crier’s article quotes Principal Gary Kuch and the elected Board as saying cameras are in place to deter vandalism. No report of the cost or frequency of vandalism was presented.
• “It’s not the ‘Big Brother is watching you’ thing, it’s really about watching other people who come into the school,” said high school principal Gary Kuch. The Board then explained that cameras will also include blanket indoor coverage of public areas within the building. This is at direct odds with the reasons given for needing the cameras. As I wrote in my last post on the issue, “If students aren’t the target, there’s no reason CCTV should be used indoors during the day. Turn it on from 3pm - 7am, turn it on outside, turn it on during the summers and vacation periods.”
• “He [Kuch] said the footage would only be held for a few days before being deleted.” That simply isn’t enough time for the footage to be an asset. There is no comprehensive plan for the storage and use of the footage.
• There is no behavioral data to support the need for a CCTV system inside the school buildings.
• There is still no budget for the project that includes the following: Cameras and installation, storage/media [and necessary hardware], planned and unplanned maintenance, signage and public notification costs, training sessions for users, cost of staff time to maintain storage of footage, etc.

Even so, the measure was passed.

The approved policy explains that the District-wide Safety Committee will meet and make recommendations to the Superintendent regarding the details of the policy. Superintendent McPhail will then, at her sole discretion, make recommendations to the Board. These parties will make the following considerations:

1. Demonstrated need at specific locations;
2. Appropriateness and effectiveness of the proposal;
3. The use of traditional, “less-intrusive means” of achieving a safe school;
4. Right to privacy for students and staff;
5. A budget of all necessary expenses.

There is no data to show the necessity of cameras at any location; the proposal and admissions by administration and the Board outline inappropriate, ineffective use; the school continues to avoid effective disciplinary measures [including proper oversight of guests] that would render the camera issue moot; they have no cost [or cost-benefit] estimates. They do, however, have a handle on the privacy issues, but that’s because hundreds of other schools have already done the legwork.

They’ve got a lot of work to do.