Trustees Approve New Camera Law by a Vote of 5-1

By CASPAR EWIG
COOPERSTOWN

Cooperstown’s Village Board of Trustees meeting on Monday, March 27 resulted in the approval of a policy for fixed video-only cameras to be installed in four public locations, the continued criticism of the present regulations involving short-term rentals in the village’s zoning law and a short statement by outgoing Trustee MacGuire Benton upon his retirement from the board.

The meeting was well attended by citizens wanting to be heard at the public hearing scheduled for discussion of the installation of cameras along Main and Pioneer streets, but the short-term rental issue raised in last month’s public hearing also persisted. In the public comment session, a number of speakers addressed what they considered to be ambiguities in the present zoning law definitions of “incidental use” as well as “owner occupancy,” and pointed to the absence of language regulating the areas that abut Otsego Lake in order to protect the village’s source of water. At the end of the public comment period, Mayor Ellen Tillapaugh indicated that a number of letters had also been received relative to the short-term rental issue, and that the zoning board was going to continue to look into the issue.

Deputy Mayor Cynthia Falk opened the public hearing on the camera law by stating the scope of the proposal and clarifying that “this is about fixed cameras, not body-worn cameras, not car cameras and not private cameras.” Falk was delighted to see the size of the turnout, she said, because “you may know that there is not consensus among our board members as to what this policy should say and how exactly it should work, so we really want to hear from you and get a sense of what the community is thinking.”

Trustees Joseph Membrino and Dr. Richard Sternberg then gave opening statements from the two opposing sides of the argument.

“I oppose adoption of the policy at this point,” said Membrino, “because to me it is a solution in search of a problem. The policy is also internally inconsistent.”

In his opinion, Membrino said, there was an absence of data showing need. He also expressed concerns that the use of images was limited in some areas of the draft policy, but could be made more generally available to the public through Freedom of Information Act requests.

Sternberg took the opposite view, stating that there is no right to privacy on public roads, and that it is a bit of a conflict to on the one hand oppose public cameras but then rely on private cameras when needed to record a past incident. Sternberg also did not understand the concern for privacy by protestors in a public demonstration.

“If you’re going to petition your government, don’t you want to let them know who you are? In a free society, you have to stand up and be counted,” he reflected.

Subsequent comments from the public concurred that cameras were, on the whole, useful for public safety and to record unlawful acts. Robert DiLorenzo, who works in public safety at the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum, pointed to his own experience regarding the need for evidence to assist with investigations. He said this need outweighed any privacy concern.

The opposing viewpoint was, perhaps, best summed up by Sam Wilcox, who considered installation to imply an assumption of illegal behavior that creates a “psychological damage [which] could outweigh its potential value since such installation relays disrespect…These cameras will not be a welcoming presence in our village.”

Addressing Tony Gentile’s concern that images would be available upon a FOIA request, Police Chief Frank Cavalieri emphasized that the policy and the FOIA request form require the police chief’s approval. He would not approve any request that was not tied to a necessary police investigation, he said. In response to an audience member’s inquiry as to the question of cost, Cavalieri said the cameras would range between $10,000.00-$12,000.00 plus the cost of installation poles.

At the conclusion of the public hearing, Benton stated his concern over the privacy issue as well but, in the end, the vote in favor of the installation of cameras passed 5-1 in favor, with Membrino casting the sole opposing vote.