The High Country is no different--now Boone wants to apply for a grant to install video surveillance cameras in the downtown area to help deter criminal activity, as the Boone Police Chief told Town Council at their December 20th meeting.
Ironically, the Boone Police Chief told the Town Council that "the Charlotte Police Department reported that surveillance doesn’t act as a considerable deterrent" according to the Watauga Democrat.
Also according to the article in the Democrat, "[t]he cameras are not monitored full-time, but rather are motion-activated. The footage would be viewed from a remote location..."
A few obvious questions seem to have not been asked at the meeting:
1) If this type of surveillance is not effective, then exactly why is the Town of Boone applying for the grant?
2) Who will be monitoring the cameras at these remote locations? What will they do with the footage? How will the footage be stored in order to safeguard privacy rights? Will the individuals monitoring the cameras be sworn police officers--or employees of private contractors who are not bound by privacy laws?
One Council member (Liz Aycock) did ask questions about the impact of these cameras on privacy rights--which was very encouraging.
Here's the whole article, from the Watauga Democrat:
A Boone Police Department grant request broached the topic of civil liberties at the December meeting of the Boone Town Council.
Chief Bill Post presented the request at the Dec. 20 meeting, saying a grant of $16,987.50 through the N.C. Governors Crime Commission with a 25 percent match from the town would fund the purchase of three surveillance cameras and signaling equipment.
Post said the cameras would be mounted in various areas throughout town, initially in the downtown area, in response to increased vandalism, graffiti and car break-ins. An area of particular concern, he said, is the alley behind the Boone Fire Department.
The cameras are not monitored full-time, but rather are motion-activated. The footage would be viewed from a remote location, and Post said he’d ideally like to see camera uplinks to patrol cars, as well.
Council member Janet Pepin noted that most surveillance cameras serve as a deterrent and also as potential evidence for a crime, but Post said otherwise, in that the Charlotte Police Department reported that surveillance doesn’t act as a considerable deterrent.
Mayor pro tem Lynne Mason asked if there were a particular impetus for the request.
“Given the issues downtown and the graffiti downtown … it’s just out of hand,” Post replied, also adding that a recent rash or car break-ins raised concern, though not all occurred in the downtown area.
Liz Aycock, in her first meeting as a Boone Town Council member, asked a string of questions involving crime downtown, first if there had been an increase of crime in the downtown area, to which Post gave a ballpark figure of a 10 percent increase.
Aycock asked what time of day criminal activity is most prevalent downtown, and Post replied that instances increase when the bars let out, usually around 2 a.m.
Aycock asked if there were a police officer on duty downtown at all times, and Post said no, in that hours vary. When the regular beat officer is not present, other patrol officers assume those responsibilities.
Post noted that several months ago, he’d spoken with council members about a request for an undercover police officer that would target hot spots as they arise.
“While I believe the safety of Boone residents is of the utmost importance, I have concerns about the privacy rights of citizens,” Aycock said, before referring to a resolution from May 2004, in which the town council affirmed the “principles and federalism and civil liberties,” in that the town supports protecting such liberties, one being the right to privacy.
While Aycock said she would have no problem with a 24-hour police presence downtown, if necessary, she objected to unnecessary video surveillance.
“In my opinion, video surveillance should only be used when all other law enforcement means have been tried and have failed,” she said. “The benefits must substantially outweigh the reduction of privacy that is at risk when a video surveillance system is in place. The citizens of Boone should have the right to walk around town without being recorded and monitored.”
Aycock observed that the town does not have any policy concerning how and when video surveillance could be used and said a comprehensive policy should be written on the matter.
The citizens of Boone should also have a say in the matter, she continued, requesting that the item be added for discussion at the February 2008 quarterly public hearing.
Post said he shared Aycock’s concerns and that he included in his request a nine-month period to develop a program to purchase the cameras, meaning council approval would only allow him to proceed with the grant requests.
Council member Rennie Brantz moved to approve the request, and Stephen Phillips, also in his first meeting as a Boone Town Council member, seconded. The motion carried unanimously.
Post then presented a second grant request, this for the purchase of “Toughbook” style laptops and mounts to be used in patrol vehicles. The grant would amount to $9,000 plus a 25 percent match from the town.
Aycock moved to approve the request, Mason seconded, and the motion carried unanimously.
No comments:
Post a Comment