Village surveillance cameras spark debate

Village resident Kandy Harris also expressed discomfort with the new surveillance. “I think it’s kind of weird, personally. I’m definitely not looking to do anything nefarious by any stretch of the imagination, but I think it’s a tad on the Big Brother-y side to mount cameras around the village. You want to pay for them to be in your store for security, that’s fine. But the village paying for them to monitor the streets feels a little… claustrophobic to me.”

“It is not about law and order, but rather the semblance of law and order,” said one resident, who theorized that the cameras were meant to curb vandalism and other unruly acts to sanitize the village for tourists and the seasonal residents who make up an increasingly large part of the local economy. That resident wasn’t alone — many Saugertiesians did not want to talk about the issue, and fewer wanted to give their names; which is understandable given that those opposed to surveillance often express distrust in police and politicians. They believe that a name appearing in the local paper will invite reprisals, perhaps an unexplained traffic stop late one night, an increased property assessment or obscure code violation. Bring up that sort of stuff with a local official and they’ll look at you like you have two heads.

Town Supervisor Kelly Myers defends the cameras, saying, “I sometimes give a wave to the camera to say ‘hi’ to the dispatcher working the night shift. They’re not ‘spying’ on people – they’re doing their job, to make sure things are safe. I appreciate the proactive work our police department does to keep people safe and protect our historic business district from vandalism.”

Many business owners within the scope of the cameras’ view are happy to have the additional surveillance. Yet, many expressed concern for what liberties they may be sacrificing for the sake of a little piece of mind.

McKinsey Lackenbacher, co-owner of Marky Marks tattoo parlor on Main St., says, “We think it’s wonderful. We’ve had vandalism before.”

Brianna Surkis, owner of Brianna’s Big Belly Deli on Partition St., says, “I’m for it. I think it’s a pretty good idea. I think it’s good for the security of the village.”

Russ Nasby, owner of Stage Coach Taxi, agrees. “If you’re not doing anything wrong, you got nothing to worry about.” Nasby, who has a 23-year background in law enforcement with New York City and Los Angeles police departments, says, “if my drivers are doing something [criminal] I’d want them to get caught… as much as I don’t like Big Brother watching every move we make, because I don’t.”

Connie Bailey, owner of Hudson Valley Desserts on Main St., says, “It’s nice that I don’t have to worry about graffiti in front of the store.” However, Bailey laments, “Every step of the way we have to decide how much liberty we want to give up for security. After 9/11 we gave up too much.” Ultimately, though, Bailey concedes that local surveillance may not be as invasive as some other post-9/11 security measures. She says, “A camera is not that bad, as long as it’s not pointed in my bedroom.”

Dave Andersen, village resident and co-owner of New Creek Recording on Main St., says he’s also in favor of the cameras – despite a concern about privacy that goes beyond anyone else we spoke with. “Living on the corner that I do, I see/hear a lot of what goes on late at night,” says Andersen. “Personally I’m glad that they have one in place here. Unfortunately it also has a direct line of sight into my bathroom window.”

More beat cops

For some, the use of cameras feels inadequate. Many residents and businesses owners are calling for more beat cop presence in the Saugerties commercial district.

Perri Naccarato, owner of The Computer Guys on Main St., says, “If [a camera] helps people sleep better, I’m for it.” But, he adds, “I think they need more beat cops.” Balsamo agrees: “I think beat cops are the way to go,” he says. “I would prefer police officers to not be bound to their vehicles. How about a full shift where you have to walk the street your whole shift. I see the chief walking the beat more than any other officer. I think [the camera] breeds complacency. ”

Jaimee Moxham, aka Captain Cruella, organizer of the annual Saugerties Village Invasion zombie crawl, argues that cameras cannot replace a strong police presence on the ground, especially during a special event. “I think it’s important they are there. But I don’t want it to be a situation where they just sit in their van or bus and monitor from afar and then send someone out to ‘fix’ a possible situation. They need to be out there, you know, like they used to be back in the day.

“If I walk the streets all night long making sure people and the businesses are happy, along with other countless volunteers who man tables and check-ins, I think they can, too. It’s a matter of seeing them there in the flesh. It makes me feel like they’re there for peace of mind and for safety. I like that. Many other event-goers do too.

“It’s Saugerties pride saying we’re here, we’re progressive, we allow great community events in our town but we’re also here to keep the peace and can do a great job of it.”

In contrast, Connie Bailey says she thinks beat cop presence has actually been “extraordinary” and “efficient” in the commercial district. “They call me at home if the [bakery] door is left unlocked,” she says.

Resident Edward Tommola argues that surveillance cameras are comparable to, and perhaps better than, the physical presence of an officer on the ground. “What’s the cost of a camera, verses a police officer standing near that location?” he asks. “Many communities hire out-of-state companies to view the tapes of such cameras, and issue traffic tickets to violators. It’s not much different than having an officer at every intersection, which is the way it was before traffic lights became popular. And it may mean quicker response of emergency services when necessary.”