Use this search box to find articles that have run in our newspapers over the last several years.
Date: 3/30/2022
SPRINGFIELD – A flyer passed around schools claimed information about the school department’s surveillance of students. The School Committee addressed the “misleading” flyer and the district’s security measures during their March 17 meeting.
The point of discussion started in June 2021 when Springfield Public Schools and the Police Department entered an agreement that allows police to access school camera footage in real-time. Sarno described the measure as a means of proactive protection, with school shootings occurring at a more frequent rate throughout the country.
“I think a lot of things did derive off the tragedy of Sandy Hook … we hardened our buildings, we upped our technology and we’ve been able to do real-time crime analysis [in response to the increase of mass shootings],” said Sarno.
Others expressed concerns about the decision, with a flyer circulating around schools stating that students are under a constant state of surveillance. Sarno emphatically denounced the flyer’s claims, sharing that the cameras are only accessed by the Police Department during emergency situations. The police did not access the cameras since the agreement was in place, while the cameras themselves are only present in hallways and exteriors, according to Sarno.
“We are trying to keep our students, our teachers and staff safe. The proof is in the pudding, nothing has occurred here in the city of Springfield,” said Sarno. School Committee Vice President Christopher Collins asserted that claims about the school system’s surveillance are “absolutely not true,” with permission being required before the police accesses cameras.
School Committee At-Large Member LaTonia Naylor said she understands why cameras are present in schools, but the School Committee member stressed that the contract’s language should be reviewed. “I wanted to ask if we could please revisit that in subcommittee … There’s a lot of people that understand why we have cameras in the school and they don’t disagree with having cameras in the school, but there is some language in that contract that a lot of people are questioning,” said Naylor.
School Committee At-Large member Denise Hurst agreed with Naylor’s sentiments, stating that the initial decision to implement cameras felt rushed. “There was no opportunity for us to have a real in-depth conversation about what this policy truly meant and how it affects people,” said Hurst.
Sarno explained that the contract includes safeguarded language to protect the school’s safety measures from public knowledge. The mayor also stressed that misinformation about the camera program also comes with political motivations from detractors.
“I am getting sick and tired of certain groups … that flyer was absolutely wrong. You have groups that have an agenda they are trying to drive … this is about the fact,” said Sarno.
Despite his stance against detractors, Sarno said he’s willing to review the subject matter again in a future meeting to clarify language and answer questions from citizens.
The School Committee will meet again on March 31.