City officials did not respond to requests for comment on the program, which was the subject of a lawsuit late last year over its data collection and use. That's when this stuff started to rise to the surface," Montgomery Steppe said. " was no oversight, there were no parameters given to the department and they had their own internal policies. Objections came as the SDPD wrote the policies for how its officers would use the surveillance footage collected on the smart streetlights. Earlier this year, there was a dust-up in city council as Mayor Kevin Faulconer proposed paying for the program through the city's community parking district budgets, but saw that proposal rejected. Montgomery Steppe said elected officials started hearing "rumblings" in 20 that the San Diego Police Department (SDPD) had started using the cameras primarily as a crime-solving method, rather than for the original purposes of optimizing parking and traffic and tracking air quality. "I think it'll make people feel safer, I think it'll build more trust with law enforcement in using these the right way."Ĭontroversy has dogged San Diego's Smart Streetlights program, powered by CityIQ, for some time. "The impact will be at the very least that we'll have oversight and certain uses will not be allowed," Montgomery Steppe said in an interview. While some police departments have worked to try and assuage residents’ fears about the use of technology in law enforcement, it has prompted legislative action in cities including New York, where the city council voted in June to force the New York Police Department (NYPD) to be more transparent about the tech it is using. The legislation comes as many cities face a reckoning over policing methods, funding and the culture of surveillance, with calls to " defund the police" upending some cities' budgeting processes. Another would establish a nine-member Privacy Advisory Commission (PAC), which would create a use policy for the San Diego City Council to consider and adopt, and would also need to be informed whenever the city is about to partner on a new type of surveillance technology. It also creates requirements on oversight, auditing and reporting. One ordinance sponsored by Montgomery Steppe would set policies governing the current and future use of surveillance technology and set parameters for how it can be used. "Every decision that we make, in this moment, will either build trust with the community or tear it down.” Proposed ordinances The issue is transparency within SDPD," Montgomery Steppe said in a statement. "The issue is not whether surveillance technology can be used as a public safety tool. That new deal was set for discussion last week in the San Diego City Council’s Public Safety and Livable Neighborhoods Committee but was pulled by city staff.Ĭity Councilmember Monica Montgomery Steppe, who is sponsoring the ordinances to regulate surveillance technology in San Diego, said transparency is key, and having police manage the program will not do enough to quell residents’ worries about their privacy or the cameras’ use by law enforcement. Meanwhile, the city’s contract with Ubicquia to manage its smart streetlights expired in June, with the company turning the sensors off pending a new deal but agreeing to keep the cameras on.
They won’t approve funds without legislation, so there’s no choice but to turn them off until Council acts.
I support-and proposed-clear rules for this tech, but the City Council stalled on legislation. Police have used smart street lights to hold violent criminals accountable. The announcement came days after the city suggested the San Diego Police Department (SDPD) take over management of the Smart Streetlights program, a plan that received almost immediate pushback from locals concerned about the impact on civil liberties and the lack of transparency.
San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer announced late last week the city would turn off its smart streetlights pending city council’s approval of an ordinance governing surveillance technology.
0 kommentar(er)
