District 97 has proclaimed itself to be desperately in need of money. However, this does not seem to have slowed its desire to commit to new expenditures, such as the installation and maintenance of security cameras at the middle schools. I don't question the importance of having secure schools. Whether cameras, regardless of expense, will improve security is, however, a question we all should be asking.
As a parent of a student at Gwendolyn Brooks, I do not perceive the school to be a dangerous place. Before spending tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars, the district should identify the specific problems or dangers, along with specific expectations for the difference cameras will make.
Having listened to a number of discussions about the security cameras, I have heard some of the issues that get bandied about. But I haven't heard how cameras will help. They won't prevent hostile intruders, unless the district spends even more money to have someone sit and watch the video feeds continuously. And the cameras will not stop kids from being harassed, picked on or having their lunch money taken from them in the bathrooms or gym locker rooms, because there won't be any cameras in those places. That leaves prevention of bad behavior on the stairways and theft from hall lockers. As to the stairways, the city of Chicago is finding that the installation of cameras at dangerous intersections has not resulted in a decrease in accidents. And while cameras may make it possible to see someone doing something they shouldn't, they rarely make it possible to identify that person. Oddly enough, people doing naughty things don't turn toward the cameras, smile and mouth their names.
Of greatest concern is the district's failure to clearly identify and quantify the problem that cameras would supposedly solve, eliminating the possibility of considering other solutions. If theft from the hall lockers is a problem, why not consider improving the locks on those lockers? As to the stairwell behavior, I thought the district's Positive Behavioral Intervention Program was showing great benefits. Shouldn't the district first identify a baseline from which it can assess the impact of the cameras? Make no mistake, cameras are not a one-time expense. At a minimum they will require maintenance and periodic upgrades. And what will it cost to have staff spend hours of time viewing videotape trying to determine when something was taken from a locker?
Before we take on the expense of cameras in our middle schools, we need to have the problem clearly defined and quantified, set measurable goals and commit to getting rid of the cameras if no benefit is realized. Otherwise, we have nothing more than a costly knee-jerk reaction that may help explain why the district is having trouble with its finances. Spending money is easy. But money alone does not solve problems. It is time for taxpayers to insist that District 97 demonstrate how the money being spent is translating into benefits for our students.
Kimberly Werner has lived in Oak Park for 17 years and has two children: a senior at OPRF and an eighth grader at Gwendolyn Brooks. She has served on multiple school-related organizations, including currently being on the District 200 Citizens Council.
