Heated Debate Over Surveillance Technology at Village Board Meeting

Temperatures were steamy inside and out for the Scarsdale Village Board meeting on Tuesday night June 24, 2025. The Board’s decision to sign a contract with Flock Safety to install license plate readers, cameras and drone technology continued to drive debate with many asking the Board to pause the plan.

At the outset of the meeting, the Mayor made some general announcements.

-Two additional resolutions for the appointment of police officers were added to the agenda.

-He referenced events abroad and said, “International events are being monitored.”

-About the heat wave, he discussed two power outages and said that 56 were without power in Greenacres and 42 in Crane Berkeley. He asked residents who lose power during this heat wave to report it on the Con Edison app.

Turning to the ongoing discussion about a contract with Flock Technology he said, "I want to once again clarify just a few things about the project before we continue this evening:

-These cameras cannot see into your homes, nor do they collect information about who lives in your home.
-The Village of Scarsdale has negotiated to have sole ownership of our data and the vendor is not allowed to sell it for any reason.
-No facial recognition. It is not part of our tech package and is prohibited by our policies.
-There is absolutely no intent for any residential private property to be covered by the cameras.
-We will not be sharing this data automatically through the system with any other departments or municipalities. Board consent would be required to change that.
-Any use by our department will be subject to police policies and regular audits as per the policies.
-Our PD is making the location decisions for these cameras and the village will either be installing or supervising the installation of the cameras.

“We appreciate the communications we are receiving and we are reviewing them to ensure that board oversight is consistent."

The Public Comments session was dominated by comments about Flock.

A man from Myrtledale Road said, “I spent the last 20 years in information services. We have lived here for 15 years – we have not felt unsafe for a day…. I don’t trust your ability to control the data. That data can be commandeered in different ways. There are ways that it can be exposed to other branches of government and this cannot be controlled. While you are elected I don’t think you are elected to deal with an issue of this magnitude. Think about your role.
You are defining the front lines of privacy in America.”

Beth Lambert of Chateaux Circle read a lengthy statement that she supplied to Scarsdale10583:

She said, “One of the things I love most about Scarsdale is that here, I feel safe. But let’s be clear: this sense of safety doesn’t happen by accident. It’s the result of years of thoughtful decision-making, the dedication of our mayor, trustees, and countless others who work to foster a vibrant, secure, and thriving community.

Over the years, we’ve seen our trustees and mayors engage in rigorous debates and take the time to consider important issues—whether it’s the preservation of historical homes, property subdivisions, or tree studies. At times, the length of these discussions may seem excessive, but when you step back, you understand why these debates are so crucial. Our community deserves nothing less than careful, thoughtful decision-making.

But now, we are facing something that I believe is truly consequential, and yet there’s been far less debate, far less community input, and an abrupt implementation timeline. This concerns me. This decision—about the use of Flock surveillance cameras—has been made quickly and without the full discussion it demands.

So I ask: Why have the people I trusted to make decisions for the community moved so fast on a plan with such profound implications? Why haven’t they considered how dangerous, controversial, and invasive this decision could be?

Does the committee—or, for that matter, most citizens of Scarsdale—feel unsafe? I don’t think so. In fact, the statistics back up our sense of security. According to the Scarsdale Police Department, crime in our town has consistently remained low over the past decade. In the last 10 years, the rate of violent crime in Scarsdale has been nearly non-existent, with only a handful of reported assaults, and property crimes like burglary and theft have declined by over 30% since 2013. This is remarkable.

So, what exactly are we trying to protect ourselves from? If we’re already living in one of the safest communities in the region, is Flock really the answer? Is installing surveillance cameras and tracking vehicles throughout the town the solution to a problem that doesn’t exist?

Let’s be clear: Flock isn’t about security; it’s about surveillance. Surveillance is a far cry from real safety. Flock cameras don’t prevent crime—they record our movements, track our habits, and log every vehicle that drives through our town. This isn’t protection, it’s monitoring.

And here’s where the issue goes deeper: Surveillance has a chilling effect on free speech and democratic participation. When people know they’re being watched, they behave differently. They hesitate to engage in public debates. They’re less likely to attend protests, voice their concerns, or even participate in community activities. Surveillance, by its very nature, undermines our freedom to speak freely and act without fear of reprisal.

Surveillance makes us self-censor, even if we have nothing to hide. And that, in my view, is dangerous for any community. A community that is constantly monitored is a community that slowly loses its sense of freedom.

Then, there’s the question of who will have access to this data, and how long it will be kept. Who decides when and how this information will be used? What happens when this data falls into the wrong hands, or is used for purposes outside of what it was intended? Surveillance systems often become tools of control rather than safety. What starts as a simple tool to track cars can quickly evolve into something far more sinister—a tool for tracking individuals, monitoring their every move, and eroding our basic rights.

We’ve also seen this before, on a larger scale. The more we allow surveillance to become embedded in our daily lives, the more we normalize the loss of privacy and autonomy. The government—and companies—already track us through our phones, our online activity, and even our personal data. Do we really want to invite even more tracking into our communities, where our very movements are captured 24/7?

And let’s not forget about the larger societal implications. We are talking about the federal government funding this system. When Washington is slashing funding for children’s food programs, (she was stopped at this point)

Ethan Shapiro of Wynmor Road said, “The 30-day data containment thing is a private commitment…. Flock is funded by the same people who finance Palantir and Facebook, who preference paying fines over safeguarding data…. This town is home to people of incredible wealth. Flock invites crime instead of fighting it… I am firmly against inviting corporations that we do not oversee into our communities. You are endangering people of our community.”

Commenting a second time later in the meeting he said, “You say this is the best technology? And we are already in a surveillance state what is a few more cameras? Flock is not effective. There is no data to back their claims. Flock is a small start-up. Flock does not have any history when it comes to data protection. We are submitting it to a company that is concerned with their own rapid growth.

What you will end up doing is changing the demographic of our crime. This is an invitation for intrusion and crime.”

Kalilia Shapiro also of Wynmor Road said, “I am in the final stage of a PhD in Computer Science from University College London. I know this board has made a lot of promises. That is not guaranteed. You say there is no chance that they will look into our homes. Texas is suing Flock for doing just that. I grew up with all of my public data online – it was a disaster The amount of data on all of your kids is insane – I know where your kids go to college. We do not behave in a way that we should be treated like prisoners. I know from London that surveillance does not solve crimes. Instead of solving crimes, we will be surveilling our citizens while the data will be stolen. I don’t think this system will protect us. This will make us products. If you want help I can guide you to people who will tell you that this is the wrong decision.”

Deborah Skolnik from Oakstwain Road said, “I publish the Scarsdale Insider. From the start I am not a fan of Flock. A passage in the FAQ from the Mayor explains the lamentable lack of communication from the Village. It is disingenuous and misleading to blame this on the absence of the Inquirer. The Village pretends that there is nothing to read. There are two websites and a print paper. Speaking for myself I would have been happy to print anything about this. You don’t disseminate the information. You use diversionary tactics. Flock is facing serious backlash The Institute for Justice sued on the grounds that license plate readers violate the 4th amendment. Tech Crunch raised concerns about Flock. The ACLU published an article on how to pump the brakes on police departments’ use of Flock.

I know there is a petition with over 400 signatures on it. When does this rising tide become a preponderance? When do we change from rabble to reasonable?

You too will have to live under the yolk of constant surveillance. If a crime occurs in an area of Scarsdale, there may be an assumption that an area is dangerous. They have a vast learning curve in front of them? Tell them you want a longer term to cancel. I spent more than 30 years working in magazine publishing. Sometimes you have to kill your darlings… it doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.”

Anne Hintermeister of Chase Road told the Board, “Like my neighbor, I googled Flock Safety recently and since then my phone has been sending me alerts about articles about the Flock system.

Today’s article was about Austin Texas discontinuing its Flock contract at the end of this month. Apparently Austin had one of the best and most restrictive policies regarding use of Flock. However, a city audit revealed systematic compliance failures with the city resolution allowing Flock. While the program was credited with supplying information leading to arrests, the City Council stopped it because of the threats to privacy.

That’s the problem with Flock. Once the surveillance equipment is installed it can be misused. The data it collects are stored and controlled by Flock, integrated with other data and subject to Flock’s AI- enhanced analyses. Systems get hacked, contract provisions and village policies that limit use of data or equipment can be revised or simply not followed for a lot of reasons. And the data is subject to subpoenas. Austin’s experience shows these concerns are not farfetched.

There’s no law enforcement problem in Scarsdale that justifies installing a mass surveillance system run by a private company that could be used to monitor, store and analyze information about residents’ comings and goings. The FAQ didn’t show that we need Flock Safety. In fact, the Scarsdale police do an amazing job of protecting the village. It is no accident that they have been recognized for 30 years by their CALEA designation, which they got without resorting to mass surveillance. There is no crime wave in Scarsdale. The police solve the fairly limited number of what are mostly property crimes with equipment they already own. We are not dealing with national security threats, gang warfare or the like.

I’m here to night to ask you: I end by asking you. What is the rush? Residents have had very little time to consider Flock. The work session was 2 weeks ago. There is no emergency. Public confidence in the village government and in the police department is priceless. Defer installing the surveillance equipment and take some more time with this.

Since I have one more minute- I would like to say how nice the Sunday morning Farmer’s market is. Good vendors, good music. A nice opportunity to see neighbors and welcome bicyclists riding on the parkway. Keep doing things like that!”

Ronee Bank of Fenimore Road said she has lived here for over 50 years. She said, “I support the other speakers. I found it odd that a Board of Trustees had to rush a large surveillance plan secretly. Why was there not an invitation for public discussion? This automatically invites suspicion. What was in it for anybody? The surveillance plan that will track all village citizens seems outrageous. Most of the crimes are identity theft, fraud and larceny. Do drones and cameras aid in the resolution of these crimes?”

She urged the board to “Hire a knowledgeable consultant to advise us about future action. This should not have been done in haste and in secrecy?”

Jeff Blatt of Walworth Avenue said, “You were not elected to count votes on a petition – you are elected to exercise your judgement. Confirm and disconfirm your beliefs through discussion. Continue to talk to the public. Don’t just count votes on a petition.”

Blatt continued, “I think the argument that is safe here is weak. I went to school in Hanover, New Hampshire. We didn’t lock the doors – and 20 years later two professors were murdered. The fact that information is readily available favors surveillance. We live in a surveillance environment. It doesn’t bother me. Some of these arguments are weak. I am open minded about using technology to solve a problem we might have. On balance I am for the surveillance equipment.

Joe Lawrence of Walworth Avenue said he is a Volunteer Firefighter in Company 1. He said, “I think you should listen to what you are hearing. I think you should address the sidewalks. I am not totally against cameras at schools. But looking for crime is a different ball game. I have had a camera for 25 years – I have never had to review the footage. The police department does a wonderful job. There is a lot of data breaching. You can’t guarantee that the information will be protected. You would have to yield to demands from other government entities. Why not ask the public to vote on this matter? This is an important topic.”

A Madison Road resident said she has lived here for 10 years. She said, “I think we have an effective police force and an engaged community. We have a very diverse community – it is one of our assets. Because of the current political climate we are alienating foreign born residents and their parents – they feel like they are at risk. Many won’t come here for that reason.
The data is not safe. In this current climate putting a system in place is a terrible idea – please put it on pause.”

Nik Singhal of Mamaroneck Road said there are 400 signatures on the petition. Everyone cares about safety. People are not anti-safety or anti-police. The board has ignored these concerns. I would ask you to appreciate what you are getting the village into.

You said data cannot be sold – but it can be hacked

CrowdStrike, a cybersecurity technology company, was hacked itself. There are inconsistencies between what the board says and what the police say. The data can only be shared if there is a subpoena. The cameras will record faces. But Flock supresses it – it is a false assurance. Think about the question of mass surveillance which is of questionable legality. I think this is a very serious topic. Take a pause.”

Sanyukat Bansal from Crossway asked, “Do any of us have an option to opt out of Flock? Can we opt out of constant surveillance? I feel like I will be stalked. Where can I go to file a complaint against stalking?”

Robert Berg of Carriage House Lane said, “The Board’s decision is reprehensible from a civil liberties perspective. Under these dire circumstances the Board has entered a pact with the devil. There is potential for the misuse of data.”

He turned to the lack of an RFP for the Flock Contract and said that NYS law requires giving “contracts to the lowest bidder after advertising bids for things more than $20,000. This pertains to equipment, materials, supplies, labor or construction.”

He said, “In certain circumstance you can waive this but this does not qualify for exception to competitive bidding. We will have to buy Flock drones, Flock LPRS and Flock cameras. This is a no-bid contract. This is unfathomable to me. There are lawyers on this Board. You can still back out of this illegal deal or people can bring an Article 78… It’s illegal, immoral and reprehensible and I urge you to stop it now.”

Christa Skouby of Circle Road said, “This Board is here to serve the Village. I can’t believe something so essential is being handled like this. This is not community building. It is divisive.
How would you feel if someone was standing behind you? No one needs this. These times are highly stressful. This is much more stress than anybody needs.”

Tina Wexler of Oak Way said, “I agree with the concerns that were shared. I am concerned how data will be used despite the contract. The laws governing usage of data are unclear. There are concerns about ICE and concerns about how people of color who are passing through this town will be treated. I think the citizens of this town deserved to be asked about their priorities… their property – or their own safety? I don’t think the fact that surveillance is already happening is a good argument to pursue this.”

The Village Attorney defended the securing of the contract without an RFP, saying “The Flock contract qualified for sole sourcing based on certain unique attributes they offer which was not offered by other vendors. There was nothing illegal.”

The Mayor replied, “We are not ignoring concerns. There is an FAQ. We have had many public meetings on this. We wanted to wait until June until all the details were finalized. We are continuing to have public input. We have made changes to our policy because of them. We discussed cameras in Chase Park. There was a demonstration recently and videos were posted. We are cognizant of that. The Post Office installed a new system. There are other ways that people can track us. The goal here is not surveillance. It is not monitoring. It is to notify us if a stolen car comes into town. The system shares data with other police departments – but we will not use it. If a neighboring police department wants information for a specific investigation the Police Chief has the discretion to share it.

He said the Village had decided to purchase this after a fugitive ran through town and there was a South American theft gang who targeted affluent communities, concentrating on Chinese and Indian families. He said, “These people install cameras. These are the reasons the Chief wants this. This is a group who is elected. There is no corruption here.”

Trustee Jeremy Gans said, “The point of public comment is to foster discussion. We take what you say to heart. There currently are LPRs and cameras and drones have been used during emergencies. They already exist. This is not a first step in bringing this stuff to Scarsdale. This is the world we live in. Scarsdale doesn’t have the ability to secure and control the data. I believe the policies reflect community values.”

Trustee Ken Mazer said, “I have heard that Scarsdale is safe. From a violent crime basis Scarsdale is safe. But in terms of property crime we rank among the top in Westchester.”

Trustee Jason Kofman said, “We have more burglaries than other Westchester communities. He quoted statistics that said from 2017 to 2022 there were 22 burglaries per year. He said, “The technology will give the police department a head start. I am coming down on the side of public safety.”

However, Elizabeth Lawrence of Walworth Avenue challenged Kofman’s crime statistics. She checked two sources and found that Scarsdale is among the safest communities in Westchester.

Trustee Dara Gruenberg said she has been reviewing social media to record misinformation. She said, “The cameras will not be pointed at the houses. There have been accusations that the board is corrupt and there are threats against us. We obviously are in a scary political climate.”

Responding to the speakers, Mayor Arest said he would be in favor of reducing the number of days the data is stored. He said, “If we do not receive the grant money we are not contractually obligated to proceed with Flock. We have a six month termination. July 1 is in the contract. If a future board decides they want to get out of the contract they can. I appreciate the fact that we all live here.”

Following the meeting we asked Arest for more information on the timeline and funding and here is what he shared:

"At this time, there is no set timeline for equipment installation. I also do not have any updates on the grant timeline, though I remain hopeful that we’ll have more clarity by early fall. That will be an important discussion for the Board.

As you know, $200,000 was allocated in this year’s budget for the public safety technology upgrade, and those funds remain available as part of the broader conversation.

We are grateful for all the feedback we’ve received, whether in support, concern, or opposition. I do not believe our Police Department would have recommended, nor the Board approved, moving forward with this contract if we did not collectively believe this technology is a vital tool for keeping our community safe.

We have taken significant steps to address privacy concerns through both policy and contract, and we continue to look for ways to enhance those protections without diminishing the safety benefits. Community input directly shaped the drafting of the Police Department’s policies, and we are continuing to be responsive by considering refinements to elements such as board oversight and will continue to consider data retention timing and equipment placement in coordination with the vendor.

Finally, there will be active supervision throughout the installation process to ensure all equipment is deployed according to policy."

The Village Clerk reported that they received 54 emails regarding public safety technology since the last meeting.

In other public comments, Eilon Amidor of 69 Morris Lane said he is a resident and a developer and complained that the land use boards do not understand local laws. He said, “The Planning Board is overwhelmed. They can only take 10 applications at a time. You can’t get into the first month to hear your application. It is now taking 8-9 months to get applications approved. We need to do something about it. There is no reason they can’t hear 22 applications every two weeks. There is no reason why it takes 4 hours to review 10 applications in Scarsdale Village.

Architects and engineers have to produce more paperwork. It is costing the residents more money. Ask the Planning Board to meet twice a month until they catch up with the agenda.”

Elizabeth Lawrence of Walworth Avenue continued to lobby for sidewalks. She said, “I have had three strokes. There is no ramp that leads to this room. I am here to speak to the dreadful state of the sidewalks in town. My physical therapist will not walk on the sidewalk as it is not safe. This upscale village does not provide the village with safe sidewalks. The message is clear – do not live here if you are infirmed. Moms with strollers also feel disenfranchised. Why are you installing a surveillance system without a public meeting? You are fixing a problem that does not exist. Instead of spending $200,000 on surveillance, use it to fix the sidewalks How can you approve this money when we don’t have safe sidewalks. When will you repair these sidewalks? When will our tax dollars provide this essential service? Until we fix the sidewalks, this is not a model village. I insist that you repair these sidewalks now – this is a non-negotiable.”

Mayor Justin Arest said, “Staff is working on a work session on sidewalks.”

Marian Green, Chair of the Council of People with Disabilities said, “Sidewalks serve several functions:

-Pedestrian safety and movement
-Dedicated place for people to walk.
-They create accessible places for people with disabilities

Can Scarsdale say that sidewalks allow for independent living? Sidewalks create a sense of neighborhood. There are economic benefits – well maintained sidewalks increase property values and allow people to move between points a and b. Asphalt has a short life. Poorly maintained asphalt sidewalks force residents onto the street and causes accidents. It is a political liability and a failure to ignore this. A good sidewalk will last twenty years and the surveillance system will be obsolete in three years. We ask for an inventory of sidewalks so that they can be reconstructed with concrete.”

Discussing upcoming events in the Village, Deputy Village Manager Steven Shallo said over 1,100 attendees came to Pet Palooza at Destination Scarsdale on Sunday June 22.

He announced the Fireworks Spectacular on Wednesday July 3 at the Scarsdale Pool, beginning with a band performance at 7:30 pm.

Big Truck Day will be held on July 8 at 10 to 11:30 am at Scarsdale Library with trucks from the Police, Fire and Public Works Departments.

Starting Thursday July 10 and continuing for six Thursday, the Westchester Band will perform free Concerts under the Stars in Chase Park starting at 8 pm.