Executive director Joseph R. Morales Sr. says the Lancaster Community Safety Coalition is committed to operating transparently.

But he won't reveal the names of his camera-monitoring staff, saying he fears they would become targets for unwanted attention or even criminal retaliation.

When hiring camera operators, Morales says, he looks for people dedicated to making the city the best — the safest — it can be.

Candidates must have at least a high-school diploma. Security experience is preferred.

"The monitoring staff is not just people off the street, with no clearances, no background checks or controls," Morales says.

The coalition conducts state-level criminal background checks on prospective employees, who must also pass an initial drug test and random follow-up screenings, he says.

Morales, a former educator and administrator, has spoken openly of conquering his own addiction to cocaine and heroin more than 20 years ago.

A criminal history does not automatically disqualify a job candidate, he says. But it does trigger more questions.

Morales, who wrote his master's thesis on ethics in nonprofit groups, says the roughly 20 hours of staff training cover such topics as racial profiling and confidentiality. A manual of coalition policies and procedures is required reading.

"We talk at length about ethics, accountability, responsibility, the trust the community places in us to do this work," Morales says.

Currently no volunteers monitor the cameras. But Morales hopes to soon recruit them, using the same vetting and training methods.

Anyone who misuses the cameras or violates the coalition's confidentiality or racial-profiling policies would be immediately terminated, Morales says.

"That's clearly the Achilles heel of an organization like this," says Dale Witmer, who headed the coalition from 2005 to 2008.

"You really have to earn the public trust every day, with how you behave."

EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: What Lancaster's street security cameras show

Map of existing and proposed camera deployment (PDF)

Background check

So who exactly is watching the cameras?

According to biographical information supplied by the coalition, all but two monitoring staff members live in the city.

The six men and two women monitoring the cameras earlier this month range in age from 18 to 51. Two work other security jobs.

Monitoring supervisor David W. Greiner, of East Chestnut Street, is a former machinist who has lived in the city for all of his 51 years.

"We really are a group of people who care deeply about the city and want to see it succeed," says Greiner, past president of the Lancaster Council of Neighborhoods.

"There's a lot at stake here."

Despite the coalition's reluctance to name staff, this newspaper was able to identify and conduct its own background checks on five of the seven camera operators.

The research turned up nothing questionable on four of the five, and the newspaper is withholding their names to protect them from potential threats or reprisals.

One camera operator does have a questionable legal background, not discovered during the coalition's hiring process. (She was terminated after this newspaper inquired about her background. See sidebar.)

Greiner's staff includes:

• A McCaskey graduate and grandmother of eight who has lived in Lancaster for 50 years. She served on the Weed & Seed committee for community policing and as a Lancaster Council of Neighborhoods block captain for more than 10 years.

• A 49-year-old Lititz man and Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer who was pursuing a fire-fighting career before suffering a spinal injury in 1986.

• A 21-year-old male McCaskey graduate who has lived in the city for 18 years.

• An 18-year-old male McCaskey grad now studying finance at Temple University.

• A 23-year-old man with a bachelor of science degree from York College, who has lived in the city for 18 years.

• A 28-year-old Elizabethtown man who works another security job.

Answering the critics

Critics of the cameras have raised concerns ranging from invasion of privacy to a potential conflict of interest between Morales' roles with the coalition and city council.

The three-month-old Lancaster Coalition for Sensible Security, with a core membership of about two dozen, has publicly protested the cameras and hosted town-hall-style meetings.

"There are a lot of people upset about (the cameras)," says opponent Charlie Crystle, of West Chestnut Street. "... The more people know about it, the more uncomfortable they are with it, because of the way it is handled."

Crystle, a software entrepreneur who has spoken out against the cameras for more than four years, says they should be turned off until the coalition establishes clear framework for accountability and oversight.

Particularly troubling, he says, is the lack of transparency and potential for abuse of the cameras.

"It's starting to get messy, and it's unfortunate," Crystle says of the recent controversy. "The city still has time to get together and talk about this in a constructive way."

But Morales and others say public uproar over the cameras was largely nonexistent until a Los Angeles Times article on the coalition appeared in June, and even now involves only a small number of people.

Though critics charge that the cameras went up with little community input, Morales says the coalition has involved residents since the beginning.

Beginning in 2001 Lancaster Crime Commission hearings, he says, city residents asked that neighbors, not police or the government, monitor the cameras.

"Now they're saying they don't trust their neighbors," he says, with obvious frustration.

In Feb. 2003, the crime commission's full 20-page report, which outlined plans for a video-surveillance program, landed on the doorsteps of nearly 89,000 county households, tucked inside the daily newspaper.

A 2005 Franklin & Marshall College poll of 412 city residents found that 74 percent supported the use of cameras mounted in public spaces to control crime.

"There have been lots of opportunities to weigh in on this," says Lancaster Alliance president Jack Howell, also a coalition board member.

Last spring, the coalition mailed more than 15,000 postcards, inviting residents to four community meetings on the camera project's expansion.

Only a few dozen people showed up.

The coalition's attention to public opinion continues, says board chair Lisa Fairman, regional human resources manager for CoreSource Inc.

Cameras only go in neighborhoods with resident support, she says. The coalition informs residents and solicits opinions by passing out fliers, conducting surveys and speaking to groups.

Watching the watchers

Unlike similar surveillance programs in other cities, the coalition operates independently of any police or government oversight or control. No legislation governs its work.

The project's nonprofit, community-driven nature is unprecedented, Morales says.

"It's difficult being a pioneer in any effort," he says, adding that he would welcome additional guidance.

Morales and Fairman say the coalition is ultimately accountable to the community but offered few specifics on exactly how.

The coalition has provided updates to county commissioners and city council, Morales says.

Morales joined the coalition in 2007, before his election to council. He says he would abstain from any council vote involving the coalition.

Earlier this month, Morales stepped down as chair of council's public safety committee. He says he doesn't believe a conflict of interest exists, but he wanted to avoid even the appearance of one.

The coalition plans to begin issuing an annual community report. Residents also can sign up on at LancasterCSC.org to receive a monthly newsletter.

Morales is drafting guidelines for public tours of the monitoring center, seeking to quench community curiosity while upholding confidentiality.

Lancaster Mayor Rick Gray, after reviewing coalition policies, offered several recommendations late last week, including opening board meetings to the public, examining hiring and training procedures, and developing more specific policies concerning distribution of video tapes.

"I told the people from the CSC that if there is any abuse ... we'll deal with it appropriately, and they'll lose me on it as a supporter," Gray says.

But so far, the mayor and city police say they've heard no specific complaints &tstr; only requests from residents who want cameras in their neighborhoods.

It's been five years since the first camera went up.

Since then, Howell says, no one has raised a single allegation of abuse, or even a rumor.