ST. LOUIS As more St. Louis neighborhoods seek to install surveillance cameras for the sake of public safety and crime prevention, some residents are concerned about protecting privacy. <\/p>\n
Members of Privacy Watch STL and the ACLU are supporting a city proposal sponsored by Alderman Terry Kennedy, 18th Ward, that would require city entities to publicly present plans to the Board of Alderman outlining the acquisition, use and funding of surveillance technology. <\/p>\n
Privacy Watch began working with the ACLU last year to address the use of street cameras . <\/p>\n
Under Board Bill 66 introduced June 16, street cameras, body cameras, automatic license plate readers and biometric surveillance technology, including facial and voice recognition programs, would receive public scrutiny before board approval. <\/p>\n
Technologies that have been used in St. Louis in the past include a cellphone tracking device, license plate readers, and a gunshot tracker called ShotSpotter. <\/p>\n
Kennedy said Friday his measure is intended to begin a conversation about surveillance equipment approval processes and uses. It would require entities such as the Police Department, Streets Department and even neighborhood associations to explain how long information would be saved and why a particular area was being monitored. Individual homeowners are not mentioned in the bill. <\/p>\n
Agencies would have to present data to ensure profiling is not happening as well, he said, and prove that the usage of (surveillance) on those demographics are justified not based on perceived fear. <\/p>\n
The proposal calls for entities that already use surveillance tools such as cameras to present such information to the board within 120 days after the measure is enacted. The proposal is co-sponsored by Alderman John Collins Muhammad, 21st Ward. <\/p>\n
Police said in April that 36 security cameras would be installed in six south St. Louis wards beginning in May. Because of the retroactive component of Kennedys measure, those cameras could be reviewed by the board. <\/p>\n
The Post-Dispatch reported in March that there are 500 cameras throughout the city connected to the Real Time Crime Center. Police credit the cameras in hundreds of arrests and charges and the recovery of dozens of illegal firearms and stolen vehicles. <\/p>\n
Critics condemn the thousands of dollars spent on cameras in St. Louis communities. For example, in 2010, the 21st Ward installed about $600,000 worth of equipment. Although critics admit that cameras may reduce property crimes, they say the technology has little effect on reducing violent and drug crimes. <\/p>\n
Allison Reilly, St. Louis Amnesty Internationals representative to the privacy group, said members not only want to educate the public but also stop the overextension of surveillance. <\/p>\n
Proponents of Kennedys plan say they worry about government infringement on peoples privacy and civil rights and how data acquired by police departments and regional centers could aid the federal government. <\/p>\n
St. Louis resident Alicia Hernandez said shes concerned about the issue because of the number of immigrants who could be targeted. <\/p>\n
Hernandez said she filed an open records request to learn about cameras that leaders in her ward planned to install. <\/p>\n
Im worried about Trumps initiatives, Hernandez said of U.S. President Donald Trumps actions against immigrants. <\/p>\n
Hernandez and others say they worry that surveillance tools, not limited to cameras, disproportionately target communities of color, immigrant communities and marginalized religious groups. <\/p>\n
Police spokeswoman Schron Jackson said Friday that cameras are deployed in high-crime areas or during major events at the direction of district commanders. <\/p>\n
The department does not reveal exact locations of cameras for security reasons, though a map depicting city cameras shows many situated downtown and along the central corridor to the Central West End and Delmar Loop area. <\/p>\n
At this time , there is no formal approval process for the placement of cameras, Jackson said. <\/p>\n
The department said most cameras are owned by private groups, with some by the Streets Department. <\/p>\n
After a series of shootings in the Shaw neighborhood, for example, the nonprofit Shaw Security Initiative raised more than $20,000 through GoFundMe for street cameras at four different corners. The Shaw Neighborhood Improvement Association contributed $11,000 of ward money to the project. <\/p>\n
The first camera could be installed at Shaw and Klemm avenues by the end of June. The intersection has greatly concerned residents because of crimes near there, including the 2014 shooting of VonDerrit Myers Jr. <\/p>\n
Two cameras to be installed at the corners of Shaw Avenue and 39th Street and Magnolia and Tower Grove avenues will be powered by solar energy with a battery backup system that could run the camera up to three days under heavy cloud cover, according to the security initiatives website. <\/p>\n
A fourth camera, paid with ward funds, would be installed by the city at the corner of Magnolia and Grand Boulevard. There is already a camera at Shaw and Grand. <\/p>\n
Each camera system costs $6,400. Additional bills include a $200 fee and a monthly bill of $179 for AT&T cellular service for three years, the Shaw Security Initiative reports. <\/p>\n
The cameras, which will record continuously, will use a cellular connection to transmit information to the citys Real Time Crime Center. Security group co-leader Larry Weinles said the system would only be used to connect the crime center to the cameras and would not be used to intercept cellphone signals in the area. <\/p>\n
Other options, such as fiber optic cables and a router, proved to be too expensive or not secure. <\/p>\n
The crime center will be able to access real time and recorded video. Recorded information will be stored in the camera for 96 hours, the community security group reports. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Originally posted here: <\/p>\n
Surveillance technology could come under board scrutiny if city measure passes - STLtoday.com<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" ST. LOUIS As more St Continue reading