Hold Public Meetings on Scarsdale Surveillance System

I vehemently oppose the use of mass surveillance and drones in our village. These are unnecessary, dangerous instrusions of the police state into our town and there is absolutely zero factual reason why they would be necessary.

LPRs have been noteworthy in their use to apprehend a burglary ring that was targeting Scarsdale and neighboring communities. It was an effective use of technology for criminal investigation. However, it did not prevent these crimes, just their potential continuation from this ring. With my acknowledgement of the role of these tools in public safety, I also express concern for their potential for misuse. I find it curious that at a time that the U.S. executive branch has made a public show of cost cutting, funding the installation of this technology in Scarsdale is nonetheless being considered. One has to ask why? The Scarsdale community is home to a significant percentage of non-U.S. native residents. Given the present temperature of discourse about immigration, I do not want my neighbors to be given even more reason to be concerned for their safety and futures. The Scarsdale community is also a significant employer of domestic workers and laborers who may also be feeling concern over the current rhetoric regarding immigrants. Irrespective of your views on legal and undocumented workers, we have already seen examples of those with legal status not receiving due process before being deported. Perhaps we need to pause. There are genuine reasons for concern over public safety and I know many Scarsdale residents who feel particularly vulnerable. However this technology will not prevent what fear can imagine but it does have the potential to amplify an already tense circumstance for many who live and work in Scarsdale every day.

This is an invasion of privacy

I was surprised that such a big step In implementing surveillance measures in a time when trust in the Federal government is at an all time low (for me and many others I know) without fully exploring this and allowing folks in town to know and give feedback. The possibility that the data could be shared with a private company that may be working with the Federal government, FBI, ICE. It does not look good, even if the intentions were innocent.

Scarsdale residents expect to be informed of decisions which affect us and an open dialogue is important.

As a 18 yr resident of Scarsdale, I deeply object to our village being turned to a police state. We don’t need our privacy invaded in the name of safety. This is not south of Chicago

Yes to public hearing

It is essential that the community have an opportunity to express their concerns.

No excuse for the lack of meaningful detail on posted agenda.

As far as I understand systems such as this provide no meaningful deterrent. For me the cost outweighs any small benefit. We are not a high crime community.

Had other residents and I been notified about Scarsdale Village's plan to implement this new surveillance system, we could have attended the meeting which was not properly placed in the public meetings agenda. Scarsdale Village officials and trustees would benefit a lot from hearing our different perspectives about safety, privacy, and personal freedoms. Transparency is critical to good governance and for trust in government.

To whom it may concern: Regarding the Village contract with Flock Safety and the acceptance of federal grants to pay for said contract: The fact that the BoT merely said something would be discussed about “security” during the public meeting, rather than being more specific, makes it seem like you were not interested in the public’s input. The fact that the current Federal Government would be footing the bill doesn’t give me confidence, either, that this won’t be used for tracking people, arresting them, and not giving them due process. We are currently seeing a dramatic uptick in the Federal Government abusing its power, and financial support, to influence private and public institutions in ways that go against the foundations of our Constitution. Given the widely available information about Flock, vs other companies that provide similar services, I am against the Village contracting with them, in particular, and with any other security firm unless there is a more open and public discussion amongst taxpayers and residents. Our civil liberties depend on it.

This initiative seems very rushed and was poorly noticed to the public, which has yet to be provided any information about the grant for which Scarsdale applied or the proposed contract with Flock Safety. We need to slow our roll here. There is no rush, nor should there be on something so important.