Privacy vs. Policing: Scarsdale Surveillance Contract With Flock Reflects National Debate

(Written by Scarsdale10583 Publisher Joanne Wallenstein)

“Don’t conflate this discussion with national issues.” That’s a line we’ve heard Scarsdale Mayor Justin Arest say a few times in defense of a controversial decision made by the Village Trustees to sign a contract with Flock Safety, a nationwide company that links local police departments with a national data security network.

Arest makes this statement at a time when mass surveillance systems like Flock’s are being used to target immigrants and citizens, sweeping up people without due process. The Mayor continually asserts that despite evidence to the contrary, Scarsdale’s data would be secure and it would not be shared with outside entities.

But as anyone with a bank account or a credit card knows, data is no longer secure.

And as anyone who reads the news is aware, our democracy is under attack. Lawmakers and judges are being threatened, assaulted and killed, free speech is no longer assured and there seem to be no limits to the power of law enforcement officers to terrorize the public.

How does all of this affect Scarsdale?

The Village is home to many from abroad, some permanent residents and others here on temporary visas. Residents employ housekeepers, gardeners, drivers, handymen and workers – some here legally and others without status. Increased surveillance can only help law enforcement target these people who are an integral part of our community. At a recent public hearing, many residents who hail from India and China, spoke with courage about the fear that surveillance instills.

Others simply don’t like the idea of being watched and tracked. They object to living in a police or surveillance state. The Village has imposed this system upon Scarsdale, without giving residents a choice.

Many are deeply concerned about our loss of personal liberties and threats to democracy. They are writing letters, demonstrating, and contributing to fight for their rights. The last thing they want is to have Scarsdale cooperate with a national network that is being used to target the population, an initiative that is being funded by the federal government, subject to the approval of a grant filed by Scarsdale Village.

To me it’s surprising that after the public outcry the Scarsdale Village Board and Police Department did not back down. Instead, they have dug in their heels, claiming that we need the system to fight crime, though the weekly police blotter is dominated by reports of washed checks, lost dogs and illegal signage. See the data on Scarsdale crime below. The Mayor says the adoption process for the contract was transparent and even blames their lack of communication on the loss of the Scarsdale Inquirer. Somehow the Village had time in March to solicit the support for the initiative from senators, assemblymen, clergy, and the school district but never found the opportunity to inform the public.

The data shows that Flock is a solution in search of a problem.

But now the reasons for the when, why, and how this poor decision was made seem beside the point. The Board failed to assess public attitudes before signing the contract and are turning a deaf ear to constituents’ reactions after the deal was done.

The fact is that a seven-year, $1.8mm contract has been signed and the Village is moving forward with the purchase of cameras, license plate readers and drones, training for officers and the hardware and software to support the system.

At a recent meeting, a resident called for the Village to hold this decision to a public referendum but the Village Attorney said this was not within Village code. So there will be no vote.

The only means to change this seems to be a public campaign to demand that the Mayor immediately cancel the contract with Flock. As each day goes by, we have fewer options available to halt the erosion of our democracy. This is one thing you can do on a local level to protect our Village. Despite the Mayor’s claim, the Flock contract here has everything to do with the national scenario.

To voice your opinion, email the Mayor at [email protected] and the Board of Trustees at [email protected] and tell them to “Stop Flock.”

Commenting on the contract, Myra Saul said, "Thank you for the comprehensive editorial regarding the new surveillance system in Scarsdale. The system is not in anyone’s interest at this time. What is most distressing is the insistence of our elected officials that there is nothing to see here. Every single iota of any consequence is usually discussed in minute detail (sometimes inordinately so) in our community. Why not here? Why the rush? Truly disappointing."

Nancy Alderman said, "No matter what one’s politics are, it has to be acknowledged that the way the United States is now being governed is very different than ever before. The President has been ruling by decree. This was not the way the founders of our country had planned for us. Now we see the same behavior being used by our local officials ruling our village.

We have always felt we had a voice in local school and government here. Until now.

Add to this mess, tension and fear of immigrants and the lack of security for data protection.

The mayor and board acted too quickly. Why? Please explain.

Justice Louis Brandeis said, “Sunlight is the best disinfectant.”

We depend on fact finding journalists to give the information.

Yes, The Scarsdale Inquirer is no more. Neither do subway tokens exist. There are new ways to pay the fare and still ride the subway. There are new ways to get the news. Thank you, Joanne Wallenstein for keeping us informed.

Mr. Mayor, don’t blame the lack of a print newspaper. Find a way to keep the citizens of Scarsdale informed.  Why are you afraid of transparency?

The idea of our village government sneaking in secret surveillance equipment is doubly dirty and offensive."

Miriam Popp wrote, "Thank you for informing us of this significant and frightening issue.

Maybe it is time to start electing mayors and trustees who will better reflect the will of the community.

Contrast the apparent reluctance to obtain a full community vetting of this matter with the numerous emails we are all getting to comment on youth sports. If this can be done for youth sports, surely it can be done on surveillance. In fact, it seems like Scarsdale debates ever minute issue ad nauseam and for months and years. One has to wonder why this is being pushed through at lightening speed."