Castro ponders controversial plan to install surveillance camera network – The San Francisco Examiner

A community group in Castro funded by a billionaire tech investor faces a denial for seeking to install a network of surveillance cameras to fight crime in the historically LGBTQ neighborhood.

The Castro Upper Market Community Benefit District, a public-private partnership of local businesses and landowners, plans to install the camera network with a $ 695,000 donation from Chris Larsen, co-founder of tech company Ripple and a major political donor in San Francisco. .

The group’s executive director, Andrea Aiello, argues that the cameras would help solve and prevent crime by making it easier for police to obtain video footage. At a community meeting on Tuesday night, she said the area already had 224 cameras, but the devices were owned and operated by individuals.

“This is important for effective and efficient crime prevention because law enforcement only has to go to one location to get the footage,” Aiello said. She said the cameras would be placed on private property, with some placed at major intersections along the upper street of the market, which are hot spots for crime.

But the proposal raises privacy concerns for members of a community that has experienced discrimination and violence from police in the past. Organizations such as the democratic Harvey Milk and Alice B. Toklas LQBTQ clubs and the LGBTQ cultural district of Castro are opposed.

Stephen Torres, a member of the Cultural District Advisory Board, said in an interview on Wednesday that there was concern about people who might not openly share their LGBTQ identities visiting the Castro from other cities or countries and being registered without the knowledge. He also said there was a history of the LGBTQ community “targeted by law enforcement from time to time.”

“It doesn’t mean anything about the current direction of San Francisco right now, it’s just a reality and a historical fact that it has happened,” Torres said. “So to allow access to this type of information to any type of law enforcement, especially given the history of our community, I think a lot of people would take a break.”

Larsen is the same donor who has helped fund surveillance networks run by quasi-public groups in other neighborhoods, including Tenderloin and Union Square. One such network came under scrutiny last summer when the Union Square business improvement district allowed police access to real-time cameras to monitor protests and looting. following the murder of George Floyd by the police.

The live access issue sparked a lawsuit against the American Civil Liberties Union and the Electronic Frontier Foundation last October, alleging police violated a city ordinance banning them from using new technology. supervisory board without the prior approval of the supervisory board. The problem is that surveillance could make protesters less likely to exercise their First Amendment rights and take to the streets.

The Castro district already has at least 224 surveillance cameras, like this one outside of businesses near Market and Castro streets, but they are privately owned and operated. (Jordi Molina / Special to SF Examiner)

At the community meeting on Tuesday night, Aiello said Castro’s CBD was considering political guidelines that would prevent law enforcement from accessing its cameras in real time. The images would also be kept for a maximum of 30 days and could only be viewed for evidentiary purposes if a crime is reported.

“We have learned so much about the importance of confidentiality and how to develop controls and procedures that actually ensure confidentiality and do not put it at risk,” said Aiello.

But in an interview on Wednesday, EFF political analyst Matthew Guariglia questioned whether politics can really limit police access.

“First Amendment protected activities can easily be brought under police surveillance for no reason other than the ability to do so,” Guariglia said. “San Francisco already has a law on books that has also prevented this type of behavior and still hasn’t stopped them.”

Guariglia said he would be “more comfortable” with the cameras if police needed a warrant to access the footage each time, which included directions on how the video could be used. He also questioned the premise that the new network would stop crimes, when the area is already “covered with cameras”.

“If that doesn’t prevent crime, what makes them think more cameras will?” Said Guariglia. “I don’t think there’s a lot of evidence that someone who is desperate enough to commit a crime is going to see a camera and stop.”

Supporters of the cameras say the networks can help prosecutors more easily obtain convictions. Instead of having to call a reluctant resident or trader to testify in a case about the video footage they recorded, prosecutors could call a camera administrator for the community district to the stand.

Tom Ostly, a former deputy district attorney, said cameras can not only help convict but also acquit.

“The cameras are not political, they are not biased, they just show what happened,” Ostly said at the meeting. “As a prosecutor, one of the nightmarish scenarios is actually to prosecute someone who has not done so. Video greatly reduces the risk of this happening. “

Randall Scott, executive director of the Fisherman’s Wharf Community Benefit District, said his group uses more than 40 cameras that have been helpful in solving crime and vehicle crashes. He said his cameras are used under “enormous surveillance” and operate under a less restrictive policy than that proposed.

“These systems have more control than anything else and they don’t have microphones and they only watch public space,” Scott said at the meeting. “It doesn’t matter who you are, what you wear, what type of vehicle you drive. The cameras are only passive, there is no live surveillance. This is our utility. “

The Japantown Community Profit District also has around 120 cameras which officials say helped respond to creepy car break-ins before the pandemic.

The Castro CBD board did not vote on whether or not to accept Larsen’s donation to install the cameras. The Bay Area Reporter previously reported that the vote was delayed due to opposition to the proposal. The council is expected to take up the matter again next month.

In a statement, Larsen said the camera programs are both “driven and maintained” by the community.

“In many ways, technology has contributed to the disparity and the problems we see in San Francisco today,” Larsen said. “As members of the community, I believe it is our duty to help resolve them by reinvesting in the city, securing it and supporting our small businesses.

Bay Area News

If you find our journalism useful and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner Membership Program.
Learn more about

Source link

About Dwaine Pinson

Check Also

Catalytic converter flight ring; school walkouts | NorCal at a glance

SAN FRANCISCO, CA – As the weekend winds down, we’ve rounded up all the stories …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *