(Page 2 of 2)

Some examples of redacted information include:

City Limits Magazine


Summer 2008:
Civil Liberties in Today's New York

NYC Homeland Security Funding Request, Fiscal Year 2007

NYC Homeland Security Funding Request, Fiscal Year 2008

NYC Homeland Security Funding Request, Fiscal Year 2009

News Topics
Justice
Government
Author
Ali Winston
Ali Winston
About | RSS
  • A two-page breakdown of NYPD spending under Homeland Security grant funding for 2007 itemizes specific projects, including the Lower Manhattan Security Initiative. However, all funding requests and awards are blacked out. The first page is devoid of information save the grand award total of $135,426,000.

  • Contract and management specifics for the LMSI and MMSI, including potential and current problems with installation, are completely redacted from the FY07, FY08 and FY 09 investment justification documents.

  • Specifics concerning the sharing of law enforcement information with the private sector are redacted, as in “Given the importance of information sharing with private industry, the City established systems appropriate for the dissemination of private information to (REDACTED). These systems include (REDACTED). This investment supports these initiatives by ensuring that information is gathered and shared in virtually real-time.”

    NYPD did not respond to an emailed request for comment on Ring of Steel's rollout, current numbers of cameras or arrests attributed to video surveillance.

    The grant documents also claim NYPD has taken extensive measures to address civil liberties concerns about widespread video surveillance. According to one document, NYPD worked "with community leaders, city officials and the private sector to address civil rights concerns involving the installation of cameras."

    Chris Dunn, the associate legal director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, disputes this account. "I don't know of any meetings with community groups about the Ring of Steel," says Dunn. "They certainly haven't met with us."

    In early 2009, NYPD released a set of proposed privacy guidelines for public comment. A finalized copy has not been made available to the public.

    "Civil liberties is a loser in New York City," said Prof. Eugene O'Donnell, a former NYPD and lecturer at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice. "The department's line is, if you're anti cameras, you're pro-crime and pro-terrorist. Individually, it all makes sense. When you add it up, however, you have an unfree society."

    Numerous studies of public surveillance cameras in the United States and the United Kingdom have shown cameras to have at best a minimal impact on deterring crime, although images recorded by cameras have been used to apprehend perpetrators. The deterrence effect of cameras on terrorists is even harder to detect. Camera footage has been used to identify terrorists after the fact--including some of the September 11 hijackers--but some terrorists do not want to elude identification (and don't intend to survive their own attacks). Cameras could help police to detect an attack in progress. But while the grant documents cite the London video cameras as a model for the Ring of Steel, London's massive video surveillance network did not prevent the 7-11 bombings in 2005.

    Councilman Peter Vallone, the head of the Public Safety Committee, supports all video monitoring programs. "Cameras are more important now than ever," says Vallone. "They deter crimes just through the fact that they're there – anyone who says otherwise is completely wrong."