City Councilmember Robert Jackson (D-Manhattan), the chair of the Education Committee, admits that Council has not kept abreast of the program. “There are a lot of questions and concerns, especially with today’s technology: this is clearly the subject for an oversight hearing,” Jackson said. Along with Perkins, Brewer and Barron, he's in favor of further scrutiny of IPDVS.
Advocates for Children, a city public education advocacy group of long standing, takes a dim view of IPDVS. “By installing metal detectors, flooding schools with police officers, and now installing video cameras throughout so many schools, school administrators are going to heighten anxiety levels among the student body, and contribute to a feeling of separation and distrust between students and administrators,” said Chris Tan, a staff attorney.
"External oversight is critical – neither the NYPD nor the DOE can be allowed to discuss such activities without having to describe what is actually going on," Tan said.
As for the professional civil libertarians, NYCLU Executive Director Donna Lieberman considers video surveillance a quick-fix substitute for law enforcement that threatens civil liberties. “Thus far, video surveillance in schools is problematic to begin with, but as implemented without the foresight and planning that is essential, it may well be that the problems are exacerbated,” Lieberman said.
Her organization thinks video technology can be used positively to document abuses – such as those against protesters by the NYPD during the 2004 Republican convention. But “this is rather alarming given the history of abuse in other sectors of government of video surveillance footage," she said. “It’s a serious issue and Peter Vallone ought to be addressing the merits of our concerns,” said Lieberman.
