This entry was posted in Lancaster Courts, Lancaster Newspapers, Police. Bookmark the permalink.


    The nadir came earlier this year, when several of the high-tech surveillance cameras deployed around the City of Lancaster were in need of repair — and the Lancaster Community Safety Coalition didn’t have the money to get them fixed.
    And so for weeks, said CSC managing director Wes Farmer, those cameras were out of service; the all-seeing eyes mounted on telephone poles around town saw nothing, recorded nothing.
    They’re fixed now, Farmer said.
    And officials hope the CSC’s budget problems are fixed, too.
The opening from yesterday’s front page article by Gil Smart,Lancaster city camera coalition refocuses,” (click here).
    Who is watching you now (see ‘DAVID GREINER, THAT‘S WHO!” immediately below)? And who is watching them? We have a private company asking for donations so they can watch us? When, exactly, were the cameras “out of service?” Why weren’t we told sooner? If they try to use evidence from any of these cameras in court, the defense lawyers are going to have a field day.
    This is extremely scary! Who is watching us and why? Does the public have any say in this at all?  Whose cameras are they?  Did Gil Smart understand a word he wrote?
Please check back later today.

About Becky

Becky Holzinger 209 E. Duval Street Phila., PA 19144 Phone: (215) 350-5849

5 Responses to WHO’S WATCHING YOU?

  1. anonymous2 says:

    I myself am deeply shocked at the level of paranoia and mistrust displayed here, people! Just because minimum wage people we never heard of who might have criminal records or questionable associates, hired by a private company we know nothing about, who are monitored by no one from the police dept., are watching our every move with the permission of God only knows who, you guys are upset? Gee. Doesn’t take much does it?

  2. Looking at you says:

    Anybody remember that we were told the cameras can’t look in the windows of homes. Because they use some special blocking technology. I call bull sh#% on this claim. In fact, they can and do see inside homes.

  3. huh? says:

    But isn’t the department basically subsidizing a ‘spy agency’ by paying for this project? Everything I’ve read on the subject seems to say, just like Sgt. Schultz, “Ve know nothing. Nothing!!”

    Who gave this group permission to put up the cameras? Who are the people who man the cameras? Who gets the tapes? Do they erase the tapes? Where are the cameras monitors? The police department? Someone’s basement? I’ve lived places where surveilance cameras that businesses put up have nabbed crooks. And most of the time, the police are given the film and the film is released to the community so the community can immediately contact the police if they see someone familiar. I rarely recall, if ever, seeing one of the Lancaster tapes anywhere online in any of the news outlets’ news reports.

    So who is really being surveiled? And why is it just one big honkin’ secret?

  4. Fiscally responsible says:

    Or Artie, the money could have been left with the taxpayers who earned it. Just because the government can, it doesn’t have to take more than it really needs. The city does not need more officers. We need better scheduling, more effective use of officer time. Less time hanging out at the pizza shop on Columbia Ave (take a spin by there some day between 11:30 and 2. It looks like the west branch of the city police station). Many officers spend well in excess of an hour there, not including driving time to get there and then back to their sectors. THANKS to Kate for pointing this out in a post some months ago.

    The DA is “kicking in” $100,000 to the CSC. Do all the county departments have an excess $100,000 just lying around? We know that Scott Martin is asleep at the switch by his failure to realize when he heartily endorsed the train station project that it wouldn’t improve anything other than employee parking. By reducing each department budget by $100,000 we could see a nice reduction in the millage.

  5. Artie See says:

    The CSC is now receiving $100,000 a year from Lancaster City taxpayers; in comparison, the downtown library only receives $50,000. The tax dollars which support the surveillance cameras comes directly from the police department budget, money that could have been used to pay for a full-time patrol officer.

Comments are closed.