Archive: News

After a special meeting last week to allow the public to express concerns about the installation of security cameras in the Lansing schools, Superintendent Stephen Grimm presented a compilation Monday of 23 questions asked along with the district's answers.  In stark contrast to the last two Board Of Education meetings that saw many people questioning the decision to use cameras or expressing concerns about the policy governing the use of the cameras and recordings, the only community input on the topic came from school board member Christine Iacobucci.

Iacobucci read a statement in which she said that security cameras are the most controversial method of providing school security.  She said the district should have solicited feedback from site-based teams, the PTSO, teachers, staff, and students in 2009 when the project was being formulated.  She said that schools need to be more closely monitored and supervised by caring adults to make them safe places.

"Last week someone mentioned that I have been an opponent of cameras in our district, Iacobucci said.  "This is true.  And while I have many data driven reasons for my opposition, perhaps the biggest one has to do with our kids.  Lansing used to have the culture of a friendly, welcoming, caring community that provided academic excellence.  Sadly, I believe that's changing.  A mistake has been made and I wish we could do this over again."

But Grimm said that the cameras, in concert with a trusting, caring community, would help administrators resolve security issues by bearing silent witness in public areas.  He said that he had posted qualitative and quantitative data on the district Web site supporting the use of cameras, and discussed privacy issues and how they would be handled.  (Click here to view the whole list of questions and answers Grimm read at Monday's meeting.)  One community member asked whether cameras would create a false sense of security.

"Based on experience we have seen that it creates a sense of security that when combined with a culture of trust that is supported by good choices and positive social relationships, will improve overall safety, security, and focus," Grimm replied.

Grimm has stated that cameras would not go online until a policy for their use is approved by the board. 

Grimm reported Monday that there is about $170,000 left in the capital project that could be used to replace some ceilings in the high school, add additional cameras, an outdoor message center, and pay for an emergency generator that would provide power for the school's computer network and kitchen in case of emergencies.

He identified the locations of two exterior and four interior cameras in the Middle School and High School, and three interior and three exterior cameras at the Elementary School.  These are also posted on the school Web site in a powerpoint, which also lists locations of additional cameras if the board approves the additional expenses.

"Against the advice of our lawyer and the security professionals I'm going to tell everybody exactly where the cameras are," he said.  "That's what we do, tell everybody everything."

Iacobucci said she would prefer the money be spent on facilities for the music department on the grounds that it has had its space reduced and did not receive additional requested space in a failed capital project.  Grimm and board member Glenn Swanson noted that new work would require additional approval by the state if it is not deemed within the scope of the project originally approved by voters.  Grimm said that her suggestion would be taken into consideration when formulating the next capital project.

One of the issues Iacobucci has raised is whether or not the policy was presented according to board policy at a first reading on November 14th.  Normally the policy committee would create a draft to be presented and accepted by the school board.  In this case the first reading was presented before the policy committee could meet, because of schedule conflicts.

Committee chair Aziza Benson said that presenting it would get it before the public sooner so the public could respond and offer input to the committee.  Most committee members agreed with that course of action, but Iacobucci said she had not been asked.  Monday School Board President Anne Drake and Grimm noted that the committee is made up of Benson, Grimm, Drake, and Iacobucci, all of whom were present at a school board meeting when it was discussed.

Board approval of the first reading does not imply that the policy is final, but is required before a second reading.  At that point if the draft is accepted by the board they can vote it into policy.  With the influx of community input at the first reading, the board forgot to approve the reading, which they finally did Monday 6-1 with Iacobucci voting no.  The next step is for the policy committee to create a final draft.  If approved that will clear the way for administrators to turn on the cameras that have already been installed.

v7i46