Following a trend of increased security at colleges across Connecticut, Public Safety is moving forward with its plans to install surveillance cameras in at least four locations around campus. Like many Public Safety officers in these nearby schools, Public Safety is now indicating that it will reserve the right to install cameras without student knowledge in the future.

According to Director of Public Safety David Meyer, he has met with three possible surveillance camera vendors, and hopes to have the cameras installed shortly after a review of their final proposals. The decision, which was publicized at the end of last semester, sparked concern among students who voted in a recent Wesleyan Student Assembly (WSA) poll. Of the 685 students who participated in the poll, 41 percent disapproved of any kind of surveillance camera use, and 40 percent approved of the cameras only if they are not used to incriminate students.

This wariness is not unique to the University. In recent years, surveillance camera use has become commonplace on several campuses statewide, igniting questions about student privacy and how many cameras are too many.

At Fairfield University in Fairfield CT, where camera surveillance was increased in 2003, the security department placed surveillance notifications at building entrances but refused to tell students of the exact camera locations. In an editorial in The Fairfield Mirror, the newspaper staff wrote:

“In any society, the safety of the populace is vital, especially to those entrusted with the task of preserving that safety,” the editorial read. “But when that safety comes at the risk of invading the basic rights of the populace, in this case Fairfield University students, serious questions are raised.”

While Wesleyan Public Safety is currently sharing the expected locations of the cameras, that may not be the case in the future. When asked whether Public Safety would ever install cameras without notifying students of their locations, Meyer said, “never say never.” He said that part of the camera policy allows for the placement of temporary cameras on campus that would not require student notification.

Inslee Coddington ’10, the WSA representative working with Public Safety on the new camera policy, said that since negotiations are still pending, she could not comment.

At Trinity College in Hartford, The Trinity Tripod reported that 16 new cameras were installed in the fall. In December, Trinity Campus Safety deemed the cameras effective in deterring crime and investigating criminal activity, and announced plans to install about 10 more cameras by the end of 2007.

Although Public Safety currently has plans to install cameras at High Rise, Low Rise, Exley Science Center lobby, in front of the Public Safety building, and possibly on Vine Street, Meyer says that installing more cameras, as Trinity did, is a prospect he would consider if the new cameras are found to be similarly effective.

In a Tripod article, Trinity student Alex Baum ’08 expressed his concerns. “I don’t like the idea of the administration spying on its students,” he said. “Regardless of the reason to install cameras, the end result is being watched.”

Trinity College’s Director of Strategic Projects, David Andres, admitted that, during certain hours, the cameras are being constantly monitored.

“Members of the Campus Safety professional staff actively monitor the camera system during the timeframes in which crime is statistically more likely to occur,” Andres said in a Tripod article.

At Wesleyan, it is this possibility of regular monitoring, and the possibility of Public Safety using surveillance against students, that have some University students particularly worried. Meyer hopes to allay these fears by reaching a camera use agreement with the WSA. If no agreement can be reached, Meyer says, “We’ll have to re-think how we approach it.”

Some students are far from optimistic. In the WSA poll question regarding surveillance camera installation, one student predicted that student prosecution is inevitable.

“Adding the cameras with contingencies like not using them in SJB cases is silly,” the student wrote. “Once the footage exists you can bet it will be used.”

For now, however, Wesleyan is still far behind other Connecticut colleges when it comes to the number of cameras and how they are enforced. New Britain’s Central Connecticut State University, with a population of 9,700 undergraduates, has over 200 security cameras installed on its campus.

At the University of Hartford, The Informer reported a $250,000 donation in 2003 to replace cameras that had been in use since the 1980s, and to install over 20 new cameras at locations throughout campus. Former Director of Public Safety at the University of Hartford, Michael Czerepuszko, also openly admitted in a 2004 article that Public Safety would use the camera footage as evidence to bring charges against any students caught performing illegal activities. A different former UHart Director of Public Safety, Judy Carlson, touted the system’s abilities in 2003.

“It’s state-of-the-art and expandable,” she said. “It’s unlimited.”

As Public Safety at Wesleyan considers vendors with similarly limitless options, students may worry about the future of cameras on campus. Meyer, though, claims that not all students are so apprehensive about the camera installations, mentioning that some students he discussed the issue with expressed surprise that there weren’t already cameras on campus.

“In my talking with students,” Meyer said, “I got a much different feel than what that [WSA] poll showed. The University has a responsibility to provide safety and security.”

At Quinnipiac University in Hamden, hate crimes on campus in the fall of 2007 had one student, Ashley Balogh, calling for increased use of security cameras in The Quinnipiac Chronicle.

“If we installed cameras in dormitory hallways, stairwells, and other public places, these incidents will definitely be minimized and probably prevented,” she wrote in an opinion piece.

Some Wesleyan students, like Balogh, express approval of cameras, as long as they are used to help students rather than charge them.

“I think that as long as the cameras are used to prevent robberies and violence the idea is fine,” one student wrote in response to the WSA poll. “However, if it were used in any other way I would not approve.”

For those who are still unsure of the effectiveness and usage of cameras around campus, Meyer hopes that input from the WSA and open communication with students will alleviate student anxiety.

“If students can get their questions answered, we won’t have an issue,” he said.