A Bergen County judge recently upheld the denial of an OPRA request for building surveillance camera recordings, taken within the Weehawken police station, on the basis of the security exemption. Blaettler v. Twp. of Weehawken.

The requestor asked for the videos from the cameras covering the “report area next to the police desk.” The judge agreed with Weehawken’s position that the videos were confidential under OPRA’s exemptions for security and safety. He relied on certifications from members of the police department which demonstrated the safety and security risks entailed in disclosing this area of the police station, including exposing building security shortfalls and revealing sensitive information on a computer terminal.

The judge also denied plaintiff’s common law claim for access to the videos, holding that the safety and security risks outweighed plaintiff’s disclosure interest.

It appears that the Township’s successful defense in this case may be attributable to the Appellate Division’s May 2015 opinion in Gilleran v. Bloomfield Twp. As I pointed out in this post on Gilleran, the Appellate Division recognized the security concerns inherent in releasing footage from video surveillance cameras, and explained what type of evidence is needed to support the withholding of such records. Consistent with what the court said in Gilleran, Weehawken provided appropriate, specific evidence showing the risks involved in disclosure.