Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 02 July 2025

Created: 02 July 2025

Last Updated: 02 July 2025

Hits: 931

Here is an email from Scarsdale Mayor Justin Arest sent to the community on Friday June 27, 2025.

Dear Scarsdale Community,

I am writing to update you on recent efforts to secure a federal grant to increase the Village’s budgeted funding for the Police Department’s planned public safety technology upgrades. The Village was just notified that our application for this funding through Senator Gillibrand’s office was not successful at this time.

As a result, the installation of additional license plate readers, live-view cameras, and the deployment of a drone as a first responder will be postponed. The Police Department has been asked to return to the Board of Trustees at a public work session in September to present a revised plan that does not include federal grant funding. Following that discussion, the Board will determine how best to proceed.

We remain committed to an open and transparent process and to responsibly meeting the safety needs of our community. Thank you for your continued engagement.

Sincerely,
Justin Arest
Mayor

Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 25 June 2025

Created: 25 June 2025

Last Updated: 26 June 2025

Hits: 1685

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.

Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 11 June 2025

Created: 11 June 2025

Last Updated: 12 June 2025

Hits: 3958

A long-awaited public workshop on community surveillance was held on Tuesday June 10, 2025, and the community had a lot to say.

As background, on April 8, 2025, the Scarsdale Village Board hastily passed a resolution to adopt a seven-year agreement with the surveillance firm Flock Safety without public notice The agreement calls for enhanced public safety equipment including cameras, license plate readers and drones, all operated in concert with Flock’s national database. The resolution and the signed Flock contract, dated April 29, 2025, were later added to the meeting agenda.

At the meeting on Tuesday, some new facts emerged:

-- No Request for Proposal (RFP) for the security contract was issued and no competitive bids were solicited for the $1.8mm contract that was awarded to Flock Safety.

-- A Congressional grant application for the funds to pay for the equipment appears to have been in the works for some time, and letters of endorsement for the grant monies were solicited from the Scarsdale Public Schools, State Assemblywoman Amy Paulin, State Senator Shelley Mayer, Congressman George Latimer, County Executive Ken Jenkins, the Scarsdale Business Alliance and several clergymen in March, 2025. Some of these letters are addressed to US Senators Kristen Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer. This was all done when the public was in the dark, and as of now the monies have not come through.

The Mayor originally said that absent the grant, the Village would not proceed. However, now it appears that $200,000 of taxpayer money will ostensibly be used to launch the program in July. The Mayor indicated that Flock would hold off on invoicing the Village for the balance of the program until the grant is awarded.

The work session on Tuesday drew a crowd of 30-40 people to Village Hall with more commenting via Zoom. In the audience were some familiar faces of those who often follow the business of the Scarsdale along with many who rarely visit Village Hall. In the crowd were many foreign born residents who have first-hand experience with living in autocratic environments.

Mayor Defends the Process and the Program

The Mayor opened the meeting with assertions about the need for the equipment and claims that the process for purchasing it had been transparent.

Though crime rate has remained low in Scarsdale, the Mayor said, “We are at a crucial moment. We can become a target…. The best way is to remain vigilant. We need to have the tools before a tragedy occurs.”

He continued with a review of what he says was a transparent process. He said, “Public safety will always be a priority… We have followed a transparent process. We reviewed it in January and applied for a grant. … We also had a public work session and the Board decided to vote on it as an add-on item that night ….. We have the ability to terminate the contract within the next six months. There was nothing secret about the vote. It was a unanimous decision to add this to our agenda.”

He read a comment from former Village Trustee Sameer Ahuja to address concerns about the security of the data.

And defending the use of Flock Safety for security breaches he said, “We will have restrictions on the use of the data. Just because other communities use it differently does not mean we will use it that way. He assured the public that the Village manages much sensitive data and warned against conflating the situation in Scarsdale with national events.

About the Flock contract he said they will not use facial recognition technology and only maintain the data for 30 days unless it is requested by another entity. He said the drone will only be used for emergencies and said that the Village negotiated a $1.4mm discount on the contract which now starts on July 1, 2025.

Police Chief Vows to Maintain Community Trust

Scarsdale Police Chief Steve DelBene, who assumed the role in Janauay, said “This is not new technology. We have been using cameras and LPR’s for years. He said, “These technologies are not about broad surveillance.” He said they will “operate under oversight and be auditable,” adding, “These are proven tools that allow us to act more effectively. Most communities are already using this technology.”

He then recounted a long list of incidents that occurred in New Canaan, CT, a similarly sized community where Flock tools were used to find a car involved in a hit and run, to locate stolen vehicles and to chase a stolen vehicle out of the community. It was also used to find the person who stole golf clubs from the New Canaan Country Club, to solve a robbery at CVS and to catch a husband stalking his ex-wife using a car tracker.

He said, “We recognize the importance of community trust and look forward to maintaining that trust.”

The Village Attorney called the contract with Flock “one of their most stringent policies.” Flock cannot release data without the consent of the Village. Disclosure is only pursuant to a subpoena or a court order.” You can read the General Orders about the use of the data here:

Lots to Say

Many people came to the mic to speak during a lengthy public comments session. Charles Seife of 40 Montrose read said he was a former NSA employee. He said, “The system is extremely dangerous because it is nonspecific. It is passively gathered data collected on everyone. It is persistent and allows for retroactive surveillance. It tracks through time. This is the hallmark of mass surveillance and it seldom provides crime reduction or improvement in the quality of life.”

He continued, “I don’t have the time to enumerate the problems with mass surveillance. Read the indictment of Kilmar Abrego Garcia. His arrest was made possible by the system in St. Louis. They assure us that the data will be eliminated but somehow the government used the data to arrest him. It is a weapon that is pointed squarely at us.”

Nik Singhal of 217 Mamaroneck Road said, “Anyone who thinks that these are not tools of mass surveillance is fooled. The political environment is polarized. The government is going after people who are not aligned with their agenda. You can be targeted for your past and your beliefs. If you think it’s crazy look what happened in Russia and Germany. By approving this we just invited the government to track everyone 24-7. I think these privacy policies are not relevant – they are one subpoena away. The 30-day policy has virtually no meaning. If residents fall victim to the abuse of power – would you be personally accountable? Does the Village have the wherewithal to defend itself? I have no idea where the cameras will be placed – closer to some homes than others. It’s discriminatory to have some homes get more surveillance than others. If the magnitude of the concern is not obvious – the number who signed a petition opposing it is more than the number of people who voted for the trustees.”

Alissa Baum, former President of the League of Women Voters of Scarsdale and now Co-Chair of the Scarsdale Democratic Town Committee said, “I want to make clear that I value and respect our police department and know that our officers are dedicated to protecting us. I also believe that our mayor and village trustees have the best of intentions and are not embracing this technology for nefarious purposes.

That said, the surveillance equipment you intend to purchase will collect a vast amount of information about the everyday whereabouts and activities of law-abiding citizens. It does constitute an invasion of privacy and raises the risk that information collected can be used in discriminatory or otherwise improper ways.

I do see that you have attempted to draft policies that provide some appropriate protections—30-day data retention limits and the like.

However, it may be impossible to draft protections that are sufficient. I recently had the opportunity to see Spencer Reynolds, a former senior counsel at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and now a scholar at the Brennan Center, speak about the issue of surveillance technology in communities. He explained that local governments may not necessarily be able to prevent the sharing of information it collects with other government agencies (even if such information is wholly unrelated to criminal activity). Private companies like Flock may sell the information they collect to third parties, and in that instance, the government is free to purchase that information from such third parties without a warrant. This is known as the “data broker loophole.” That loophole has been used to get information about citizens’ movements, habits, and even religious beliefs.

I, like many in our community, am highly concerned about President Trump’s use of executive power, especially as we witness the immigration crackdown in Los Angeles. It is not difficult to imagine the information gathered by systems such as these being used to intimidate or discredit political opponents by disclosing lawful, but potentially unpopular or embarrassing behaviors or associations.

I wonder, in a community with such a low crime rate, whether this surveillance equipment is necessary or will provide sufficient benefit to justify the risks of disclosing the private information of law-abiding citizens.

Public servants—like the mayor and the trustees—need to understand that their roles are not just to get things done, but to have a dialogue with the community, especially this community which prides itself as thoughtful, informed, and caring. The process here did not meet the portrait that the administration and that we as a community want to portray.

Let’s slow down and make sure this is an avenue worth pursuing.”

Michael Otten said, “We are living through a difficult time. I do not have the same confidence about all branches of government.” He advocated for “two safe spaces without cameras in Scarsdale – one in Chase Park and another at the train station so that freedom of speech and assembly will be not be limited.” He said, “A resident did not attend a recent rally because he was concerned. Police officers can use observation to monitor crowds. This (the cameras) will inhibit free speech and assembly.”

Mayra Kirkendall Rodriguez said, “What your remarks tell me more than anything is that surveillance technology in Scarsdale is officially a fait accompli. Before April 8, The Village Board or manager did NOT announce beforehand that you were placing a surveillance technology vote on the agenda.

On April 8, this Board, voted in secret to have a contract with Flock Safety, a tech company riddled with violations, a lawsuit hanging over it, and a record of sharing private data with the federal government and immigration authorities. Flock Safety has been barred from doing business in some towns in Texas. Let that sink in. Texas, a state with a long tradition of supporting police and soldiers has towns that have found that Flock is a serial violator of rules.

There was no urgency to vote for this technology. I now have discovered that in early March someone, either within Village Hall or the Police asked several members of the clergy, a cabinet member of the Scarsdale School District and state representatives and senators to write to Senators Schumer and Gillibrand in support of drones, cameras, and license plate readers. The aforementioned parties used a template and wrote the same letter and sent it out to Senators Gillibrand and Schumer Most of those people do not even live in Scarsdale and yet, they knew before we the taxpayers did, what you were up to.

Board of Trustees, you are comprised of all white people and not once did you think to reach out to our amazingly diverse community to ask us what we thought. You can say you’re transparent but that does not make it so.”

Cynthia Roberts said, “Your efforts at transparency were not effective. We are all listening. Are you in touch with what’s going on in our minds? Reach out and make agendas transparent.” About the discount on the Flock contract she said, “Your story reminds me of a husband who comes home and tells his wife he got a deal on a state-of-the-art pool cover. She says, “Honey that’s great but we don’t have a pool.”

Jeannie Mackler said, “I am very fearful. I think we should have a referendum on this system. The only time we had a crime was when two checks were stolen from the mailbox.”

Chelsea Wang said, “I am a US citizen and I am a minority. I am very concerned about mass surveillance on me and my family. My family did not move here to live under surveillance.”

Deborah Skolnik said, “I am a 23-year Scarsdale resident. This is unnecessary and alarming. I have had my data stolen all over the place. I get many notifications about data breaches. Even if Flock has our best interest at heart, I think that my data might get out there. We live in an era of brilliant criminality – there is not much we can do to deter criminals. I think there is no harm in admitting this was a mistake and stopping it.”

A doctor who lives on Palmer Avenue said, “I have lived here for 18 years and never had an issue here. My kids walk and come home late and I never give it a thought. How much crime do we have here that we need such a big gun? I am a doctor. When people have a disease we start with the minimum treatment possible to minimize the side effects.” She referenced North Korea and China and said, “Think about a human being breathing down our neck every time we walk out. Do you want to live like that? Do I want my son surveilled going to see his girlfriend? Let’s think this through first.”

Diksha Mutabarry said, “I don’t hear any real justification on why we require this and why we require this now. The crime data speaks to a very safe Village. We are living in troubling times. It would have been proper to offer the community an opportunity to weigh in. This should have taken place two months ago. Moving forward it creates mistrust. There is a sizable population of people of color. Many of us are living in a state of fear.”

A man from Crossway said, “As a technologist I can understand. But as a resident who values safety and privacy this should have been more transparent. This should go through a clear and public review process. We are a small town – we need to think about the limits on usage of data. Thirty days of data seems long. What is the audit process to prevent misuse? Consider civilian oversight of the data.”

Rober Berg of 19 Carriage House Lane in the Mamaroneck Strip said, “Everything does not pass the smell test. Everything was ass backwards. This should have been done before the vote. There was only a vague agenda item and the board allowed this and voted on it in secret. The hubris of the board is stunning. Now no one is backing off. These are extraordinary times in this country. To count on Flock not to sell this data is ridiculous. We have equipment – we can buy more drones – I have three. I love flying my drones. It’s all the coverage you need. We have LPR’s – why do we need Flock?”

There were a few supporters of the plan. Susan Douglass asked for cameras to be installed on bike racks to prevent bike thefts and her husband said he read a study that showed a significant impact on safety in communities where these systems are installed.

However, skeptics vastly outnumbered supporters. Purmina Srivastava of Secor Road said, “Is there a checklist of Flock Violations? Was that vetted? The contract is already signed. What I heard today was a defense of this contract. There has not been acknowledgement of the concerns that are being exercised. Is this a check the box situation? I urge the board to take concerns of the resident seriously.”

Now What?

At the close of the meeting there was no sign that the Board would reconsider their decision or cancel the contract. They seemed resolved to move forward with the installation of the system, despite community fear and outrage. There does not appear to be a mechanism for the residents to reverse this decision.

Scarsdale Mayor Justin Arest is the first Mayor in Scarsdale’s history to have been nominated and re-elected for a second Mayoral term, which he is now serving. The plan to sign the Flock contract spanned his first and second terms, and therefore a new Mayor did not come in and put fresh eyes on a controversial plan started by the prior board.

The resolution to sign the Flock contract was approved by a vote of 6-1 at the first meeting of the new board, which included two new members.

Watch the meeting here.

Details

Written by: Joanne Wallenstein

Published: 04 June 2025

Created: 04 June 2025

Last Updated: 04 June 2025

Hits: 2076

At a time when, here in the U.S., educational programs are being systematically dismantled, it may give some folks solace to know that students like Max Spencer are taking tangible actions to provide educational tools to the most vulnerable in our larger community. As the son of an immigrant mother, the Scarsdale High School junior has long appreciated the diverse tapestry that makes up our country and the vast opportunities that exist here. Likewise, Max also greatly appreciates the access he has to an incredible education and the supportive community that comes with growing up in Scarsdale. Though grateful for the privileges he enjoys here, Max felt troubled by the socioeconomic disparity that can be found in Westchester and how it can impact a child’s educational experience. After learning that reading aloud to young children is strongly linked to pursuit of higher education and subsequent social mobility, Max started The Inspiration Project, a program that aims to inspire a love (and pursuit) of learning in children by providing free children’s books to families in need.

We recently sat down with Max to learn more about The Inspiration Project and how he hopes this important work will make a difference.

Q: Can you tell us more about your project?

A: I have been doing childrens' book drives within our larger community and donating the collected books to specific underserved populations. I have started within Scarsdale and have collected many books due to our community's generosity, but I plan to expand much further. I'd like to collect childrens' books that are no longer needed (refreshing library content, children growing too old for the books, etc.) and deliver them to community groups where this specific item (childrens' books) could easily be overlooked. There are many people who are working hard with more basic needs, so books are something that wouldn't necessarily be prioritized, but it could have a significant impact on their kids' futures. I have already provided books to 914 Cards and Hearts and Home for Refugees.

I'm targeting refugee and underserved immigrant populations to the extent that I can. I have an interest in working specifically with immigrant communities because of my own family story and experiences growing up. I'd like to donate books to specific refugee and immigrant centered organizations, but I've collected more books than these communities want to take right now, so I've expanded donation options to a few local child-oriented community organizations who have a greater need for childrens' books. I’ve also connected with Too Small to Fail, a program with The Clinton Foundation focused on childhood literacy, and am hoping to work with them this summer to find appropriate community partners to further my goals and theirs.

As an additional step within this project, I also hope to write and illustrate my own childrens' book this summer, publish it, and donate all sales proceeds to immigrant-oriented organizations. My book will be fictional, but will be inspired by stories of actual immigrants I know within my community.

Q: What inspired you to want to do this sort of work?

A: One of the biggest drivers of real economic change for individuals is pursuing higher education. There are many systemic barriers to this within underserved communities which need to be addressed, but one of them is having the motivation and desire to educate oneself through college. I got interested in this specific topic, because I do think there are communities where motivation is high, and others where motivation is low. So I began to research what drives motivation to pursue higher education, and I came across a presentation from the University of Chicago which cited early childhood literacy as one of the biggest components to the pursuit of future educational goals. Most parents love their children and want them to have good lives, but one of the things that might be different is the actual access to children's books. I can't address this problem on a large scale, but I do have the ability to put a few more childrens' books in a few more families' hands here in the NY area, and that is what my project is centered on. In a nutshell, this project combines my strong interest in immigration and immigrant populations and my desire for increased social mobility through access to education.

Q: Why is this work important to you? Is it personal for you?

A: As I mentioned above, my own family story and early childhood experiences are what inspired me to pursue this specific project, which is targeted towards immigrant communities in the NY area. I am the grandson of both immigrants and "natives" to America. My mom's parents came here in the 1970s and she was a first generation Indian American. My dad's family has lived in America for hundreds of years and many generations. But both sides of my family have a very strong respect for the concept of America as a place of hope for better life, no matter where you originate. This concept is under attack right now, which makes me feel even more inspired to work with immigrant populations, but I've always felt this way about immigration and America. Additionally, my first babysitter was a "Dreamer" - her family brought her here from Cote d'Ivoire when she was 2, and they were undocumented. She grew up as American as anyone else, but there were so many things withheld from her because of a situation over which she had no control. I was very close to her, and am still in touch with her, and although I didn't know much about her story when I was 4, I have learned it over the years and it has also been a big part of why I have this specific interest in immigration in America.

Q: How do you hope children and communities will benefit?

A: I think that while America does have real barriers to pursuing socioeconomic growth, it is still probably the country with the most access to opportunity. This is a concept that was also very much a part of what I was taught growing up. There are many things that aren't yet working perfectly in our country, but people generally are able to create real change in their lives in a more significant way than many other countries. I imagine that this is ultimately why so many people from around the world continue to want to immigrate here - they want to change their lives and know that it is possible in America. However, I do think people need to have that internal motivation to push themselves outside of the world they know, and this is why I decided to focus on early childhood reading. If early childhood reading can help kids want to pursue higher education, this will go a long way in helping them on the path to changing their socioeconomic outcomes. So I want to put books' in young kids' hands, and hope that that translates to an internalized belief system and desire for education.

Q: Do you hope to continue this sort of work in your future?

A: Yes. For now, my goal is small - I want to collect and distribute 3,000 books before I graduate (I've already collected just under 1,000 and have been pledged 400-500 more). I'm also hoping to raise at least $3,000 with the sale of my children's book on immigrant stories in my community. But I am very interested in pursuing some sort of continued work addressing these concepts of economic empowerment and immigration. I've already researched and written a paper on the economic impact of immigration in America (and Japan- it was a compare and contrast paper), and I'm in the process of getting it published. I'd like to take my research a step further this summer, if I have time and can find some sponsorship for it. I am very interested in immigration patterns, barriers, and motivations, and ideally I'll be able to continue this type of study once I get to college. I don't yet know how I can make an impact in this area with a career, but hopefully that will come to me as I get closer towards having a career.

Q: How can others get involved or help?

A: This is the most important question. If you are reading this and have children's books you'd like to donate, I will come and pick them up whenever is convenient to you, and I'll find a good home for them. Please email me theinspirationproject25@gmail.com and I'll respond right away to get your books picked up and donated. If you'd like to get involved and help in any other way as well, please reach out. I'm just one person doing this, and the more people involved, the more impact we can have.