Recommendation to Provide Direction to Staff Regarding the Installation and Use of Automated License Plate Readers (ALPR), including Fixed and Mobile Equipment on Alameda Police Department Vehicles. (Police 10031110) [Continued from December 7, 2021]
Therefore, I very respectfully ask that you go ahead and permit APD to acquire a fixed and mobile automated license plate readers. I thank you very much for listening to my remarks. Thank you. Our next speaker. Marilyn Roffman. Good evening, Speaker Rothman. Hello again. I tapped into the same thing a previous. Speaker noticed in the first screen of the presentation. Why would. Anybody need to know whether some car. Hat was a resident. Or not? That has nothing to. Do with crime. Nothing. I find that the. These. Readers are totally. Detrimental to public privacy and will actually increase the police imprint, which I am against. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Michael Robert Long. Good evening. Speaker one This one. And you hear me? Yes, we can. Hi. Thank you, Mayor and council members. This past October, the presidents of 50 of our highways across Alameda met with this police chief. We asked him to address the unease that many in our nearly 7000 homeowner households felt about the crime happening all around our island community. Given that you have capped the storm ranks at 50 and 88 excuse me, more than a few presidents support the idea that to keep Alameda safe, the use of the technologies such as license plate readers is crucial. With some homeowners talking about moving to a safer city, we are at a tipping point. This is especially true here in Bay Farm, where increased auto steps have directly affected the number of our neighbors. With the support of my Board of Directors and as President of the 201 households in the Costa Brava Highway, I support implementing the Chief's plan to deploy Alpers with the caveat that the shelf life of that data collected and its access are strictly controlled, as he has discussed. Thank you very much. Thank you. Let's see, we have yes, we have 12 minutes left. Okay. Let's get to our public speakers and then council. We need to take a housekeeping vote. And I want to commend all the public figures you're doing brilliantly at staying within your time limit. So thank you. Who's next? In a hurry. Koski welcomes Speaker Rakowski. I thank you. I am concerned. Yes, we are an island, and that is a strategic point. But we are not at war with our neighbors. And setting up license plate readers at the entrances and exits to the island give off a message of unwelcome that could have a negative impact on our residents and our businesses and our community and our values. This is an expensive proposal with questionable value, and I am also concerned that while it is being pitched to. Us to be able to solve. Dramatic missing persons and strong robberies, things of that sort that in fact caught up in the license plate, readers will be struggling folks with unpaid parking tickets or with their vehicle registration behind in these hard times. And I'm not seeing protections built into the policy that the goal is that this is being. Sold. For our community towards actually going to be how this program would be utilized, especially given sort of recent experiences with the mobile license plate readers. So a lot of questions and I am looking forward to a more complete analysis on privacy coming back to council. Thank you. Thank you. Our next speaker. Melody Montgomery. Hey. Good evening. Speaker Montgomery. Good evening. Thank you for having me. First of all, thank you for Jennifer. To Jennifer, for all her words, she just spoke. I agree with everything she just said. A Alpers don't stop crime. They're not a they're not anything that stop crimes. And as you'll see the analysis, look more and look deeper into it, you'll find the same numbers that we found. They make it makes citizens feel like they're watching. Like are we living in an oral society where Big Brother is just going to. Have eyes on all the time? We're leaving the island. We're coming back to the island. We're leaving the island or coming back to the island. It's not a comfortable feeling, and it's not. Some place that you makes you feel like home. Typically, these things have also been placed in targeted neighborhoods where we'll be placed the east side, the west side. I think you already know. Citizens. Alameda do not need to be monitored like that. I'm going to respond to something, things that the chief said about knowing when stolen. Vehicles are on our island. But then he said that we wouldn't they wouldn't be using the information unless a crime was done first. So there was confusion just in his presentation about how the data will be used and where it would be used. Yeah. So I think we need a deeper policy and we need to know. More about that. That it's already confusing. So once again, these do not prevent crime. And so I'm asking you just to say no. Just say no to a alpers. Thank you. Thank your next speaker. Laura. Katrina. Did you speak to Katrina? Then I couldn't find the mute button. You found it? I found it. I also want to encourage a on the Alpers. I know in the past there was an article that came out last year that APD was surveilling our community, using facial recognition, disregarding counsel's direction, and that was with the Clearview technology. And the article broke through like a national news cycle. And that's not something that I think the Alameda needs to be known for. Right. So I, I have doubts about the use of the use. And I could see there being poor judgment and misuse of this really sensitive information. Additionally, the Electronic Frontier Foundation says that this data and it makes sense campaign in an intimate picture of the driver's life. And so it can be used to target drivers who visit sensitive places like health centers, immigration clinics, funerals, protests, etc., etc., religious houses of worship. And so, again, I want to also understand what is this going to be used for? I think that they're what I've heard in other speakers, like there's fears about crime and there's this people are revealing they're experiencing more crime to the point that other speakers have made. Like, I don't believe that this is going to change the clearance rate of what APD is able to solve. And it's a reactive measure. It's not a proactive measure. And so I would recommend that we spend the money, the 500 to $700000, to reduce the root causes of what maybe some of these crimes are. Instead of using that money to surveil the community and create a state where we're being watched, because, again, to the point that I think Miss Montgomery made it, it doesn't feel like a place that I want to be. Thank you. Thank you. At this time, I know we've got one more public speaker, Madam Clerk. However, it's 1055, and we do need to take that vote. So could we please. So, Counsel, we have to be able to consider any new items after 11 p.m.. We have to have a motion councilor and that's why it's got his hand up. I'm mean here, all the remaining items up until midnight and take another vote of midnight if we want to go for that. And this takes four votes to pass. Do we have a second to that? Councilmember de SAG. Going to midnight is your. Okay. You said it. Okay, madam, quickly. We have a real cover. Please disappear everyday. Shall I? Not quite. Sorry. Her expense account? No. You moved on my screen. Not right. Hi, Vela. I may, as Ashcroft know, that motion fails to do. Do we have a motion to perhaps. Get through. The regular calendar? Or anything else. Councilmember Harry Spencer. I'd like to finish this item. Well, we will finish this item. This is about whether we take another item after 11. So we don't have a motion to take another item after 11. Councilmember de SAC. Well, you know, seven A is a police matter. I'd love to take seven A as well. So that's my emotion. Okay to finish seven? Yeah. Okay. Anyone want to second Councilmember Jason's motion? Seeing no hands up and then no further motions. Madam Clerk, this means that we will complete this item. Correct. Subtract 660 and then. And we'll hear nothing further that requires vote. Correct. So you would just you've already heard same in their communications would be just sections nine and 11 that you would hear. Correct. All right. Okay. So back to our public speakers. Madam Clerk, I think, is even stranger. Yes. Yes. And and Speaker Graber has reappeared. So let's try and get her to we will welcome Speaker Estrela. Yes. Some of the speakers were figuring that maybe the PR was going to be at some fixed jail locations like at bridges. And this agenda item is just putting a L PR on police vehicles. So just to clarify that. But that's that's what you folks said earlier. The regarding the local resident box that eight years ago at 530 in the morning I was on my bicycle riding past a car that was broken into. So I called the Almeda Police and gave them the license plate. And about an hour later, they showed up and said, Oh, it was for a local resident and it was for that address. So they were able to contact the the owner of the residents there about the the car being broken into. So I just saying that that may be a way that the local resident box is used. I have no idea. But it sounds like that's more in the case filing the portion rather than an immediate return on an inquiry on the license plate. That's my $0.02. Thank you. Thank you. It just so as not to confuse the public. I do want to note that this is this item is a recommendation to provide directly to staff regarding the installation use of automated license plate readers, including fixed and mobile equipment on Alameda Police Department. Vehicles in the staff report lists out the actual fix the proposed fixed locations. Okay. Our next speaker is. Are you like her neighbor? She just disappeared. How does that happen? No. She's back. She's not. There you are. Welcome. Yay! You're unmuted. Hi. Good evening. I just want to say that I'm I'm really disappointed that it appears the council's not going to be taking action on this tonight. I think this has been going on for over three years. The council needs to face up and make a decision on this. I hope once you get this report from Mr. Cohen about allaying the privacy concerns that the council will move ahead and vote for this. It's not. I'm going to get the bad feeling that there are certain people on the council that just are philosophically against this, regardless of the benefits. That they may provide. To our citizenry. We really need to be thinking of protecting. The residents. Alameda residents, first of all. And I believe that there was a. What do you call it, a survey. On next door. And the survey. You've probably heard about it or seen it. The survey was 84% of the people want the readers. Only 16 are against it. Now, I know tonight the speakers. Were more like 5050, but that does not portray. The general residents of Alameda. Okay. That's my take on it. Thank you very much. Thank you. All right. And we finished our public speakers have smoker, correct? All right. So with that, I will close public comment on item six C and we'll take it back to the. To. The Council. For. Discussion direction. So again, this is we're being asked to provide direction to staff regarding the installation and use of a as Vice Mayor de. I have a couple of concerns. One is I thought that we gave pretty clear direction in the December 2019 meeting about the privacy issue, making sure that we had a privacy policy in place and that we would be following the San Francisco public privacy policy in the interim. And so I just I'm a little worried that we're we're undoing an act of the council. And I thought that that was pretty clear direction that was given. And if our meeting minutes don't reflect the the audio, I mean, I'll go back and pull the audio clips if need be. But I'm just I'm concerned that we're undoing an act of council relative to that. The second thing is, and I'll make this very clear, I've made this clear in pretty much every meeting that we've had on Alpers. And I feel like this is maybe the third or fourth time this has come back while I've been on council , that this has nothing to do with whether or not I trust our current chief. I trust our current chief. I like our current Chief. I will continue to trust until I have reason to not. That said, I am philosophically opposed to Alpers and philosophically opposed to them because the data shows that they are not efficient or effective against crime fighting. And in fact, I think what we do see is that they cost a lot of money. And I you know, I do worry about the kind of placebo effect of spending money on technology that is not going to be as effective as we say it is. I do think that we have given money to our police officers. I've certainly been supportive in that regard of making sure that our police department has funding to fill vacancies and that we are doing everything that we can to not only fill vacancies, but to fill them with quality officers and to give them training and all of the things that we need to to to have a good police force. So I just my concern remains the same, which is that I think that this sort of technology creates a lot of opportunities for abuse of power that I that I do not want to support and I cannot support. And I don't really understand that there is really no data to show that they are a deterrent other than kind of the anecdotal things that we hear. So I am just, you know, my position hasn't changed. I've waited for for data and studies that really show otherwise. My privacy concerns, my concerns about privacy remain. I do want to see staff movement on those policies. I understand that there were issues even relative to our existing mobile. ALPERS There were some with the previous privacy policy that had been proposed and staff was going to work through those issues. And I look forward to that policy coming back and being finalized that we're not kind of stuck in this limbo of using the San Francisco policy in the interim. But that's where I'm at. This is nothing. This is not a statement on whether or not I trust our police chief. I just really do not support this. I think this is a large expenditure and I don't know that we're going to get our money's worth, and I don't know that we're going to see the deterrents that we expect. Thank you. Thank you. I consider her a Spencer. Thank you, Mayor. First of all, I want to thank all the public comments and all of the emails. And I know this is a controversial issue. I want to thank our chief for all of his work. And I want to thank our former chief, Paul Larry, who brought this while I was mayor. And at that time, yeah, well, I wanted to I wanted to quote him to make sure I have it here. So back in looking at an article from February seven, 2018 online, and what he said then is, quote, This is chief power. Larry, if there are people in the room who are concerned that the police department is racially profiling folks, here is the tool that does not do that. It doesn't care what Larry said. It doesn't have the ability to racially profile. And I remember him saying it at the time, and I and I've heard similar comments. You know what what these things can and cannot do. And I do support the chief's recommendation. My understanding, Chief, is your first and even as listed on the staff. Alternative one. I understand that. That's actually your right. Your first ask is direct staff to move forward with the next step in implementation of fixed airports and revamping and expanding the Mobile Dale PR program. So in your professional opinion, is that your primary ask of counsel tonight? Yes, that's correct. Right. So I would that would be my motion to move forward in that. And Chief, could you explain so in regards to what does that actually look like to move forward? You mean would you all be coming back? Would you be coming back at some point in the near future? What does your timeline look like? Good achieve Joshi. Sir, I was trying to get off it so I would take guided direction from from council on on next steps. But what I my my recommendation is that we move forward with being able to install the equipment, the camera, the clippers at the at the fixed locations that are that are designated and in the staff report. May I? You may continue. Cancer. Cancer. Thank you. And so do you need additional funding and approval? Because I know back in the day we approved, I believe, 500,000. When Chief Larry was here. So I think that cost with sickness it would would be significantly less. As I've done more recent research, I think I don't have exact dollar amount, but I think it would be somewhere. There are 13 locations where we want to where we would install the cameras. And each camera is $2,750 a year for the first year, and then it drops down to $2,500 a year per camera. So if we have 13 locations and we installed one at each location, it's I think it's around 35 or $36,000. And then regards you. Have this work ahead. Thank you. And in regards to the mobile units. So the mobile units, they are a about $200 per vehicle per month. All right. Thank you very much, Chief. So I have made a motion there was discussion regarding this privacy program or just I'm not really sure what a privacy impact report that the prior counsel had requested, I believe I'm not really sure, but it looks like I've heard from attorneys saying that they think it's the work that's already been discussed satisfies it. However, I am happy to someone that as part of the A friendly amendment, I'm happy to entertain what that looks like. I'm not really sure what it is so far, but I did make a motion to move his first request. Thank you. We can have a fifth. There's a second for that and then we'll have discussion. I will let you know that I'm not supporting that motion and I'm guessing that you don't have three votes. I could be wrong. But Councilmember Desai, did you want to speak at this time or should I. Be more than happy to speak? The necessity of license plate readers has been expressed by various councils and and police chiefs and and residents over a long period of time. I recall attending a meeting with Council member Lina Tam. I believe it was in 2013. It could have been 2014 and and Chief Noonan could have been the police chief at the time. I can't quite remember if it was 2014 or 2013. And it was a meeting held at Bayport in the west end of town. And, you know, mentioned was made up of the the use of license plate readers. And as a result, you know, we did have a discussion about that in city council. And over the years, certainly when and that was when Mary Gilmer was mayor and then certainly when Trish. Councilmember Herrera Spencer was mayor. We certainly had that conversation then as well. I think the time of license plate readers, whether there are fixed or placed on on mobile vehicles. I think the time has come in the period of time between 2013, 2014 and today, the way in which crime is occurring. Throughout, you know, the United States, but but including here in the Bay Area, including here in Alameda, is so vastly different and more sophisticated, especially in the turn in the use of social media. I mean, work up until recently, we were at our wit's end, you know, trying to deter or stop capture, you know, people who were doing these wild drag races over at Alameda Point. And clearly, certainly in parts of east end of town, there is crime that's going on and it's crime of a sophisticated nature. Just only recently, there was like, I don't know what you call it, bum mass of people who had broken into a medical marijuana place on the east end of town. And then they coordinated it to break it on the west end of town. And the very same night and on the very same night that they broke in on the west end of town, they came back one hour later and I heard them breaking into. And I think we're at a point in time where we not only have to, you know, finally fulfill the vacated position, unfilled positions in our police department that we're beginning to fill. And there was a great event last week, by the way, in the hiring of three new police officers. But we not only need to fill those unfilled positions and provide the officers with the proper training, but we also need to give them the tools. And that's all. LPR Cars are automated license plate readers. They're just tools to help our police. You know, improve the way in which they either deter crime or if crime happens, capture the people who perpetrate crimes. They're not perfect tools. And I don't think we're at a point where we can wait seven more years in hopes of finding the perfect tool, to be sure.