|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
On the heels of an announcement of the long-awaited Belle Haven police substation, the Menlo Park council found itself mulling over privacy rights versus surveillance.
Facebook recently volunteered to help fund the substation, and followed through by guaranteeing to cover $2,750 in monthly rent and to pay for renovations to make the facility — to be located in a strip mall at 871 Hamilton Ave. off Willow Road — a place where residents want to drop by.
“It’s amazing generosity,” Vice Mayor Ray Mueller noted, and thanked the social media company for stepping up.
The council unanimously approved a three-year renewable lease for the new substation on June 4. The police department expects to get access to the site by mid-June and estimated that remodeling would take about three months.
How much it will cost the city to staff the site remains to be determined, according to the staff report, but the police department expects to staff it at least part time during regular hours and also have officers rotate through while on patrol.
It’s been about 10 years since Menlo Park first announced its intent to open a substation in the Belle Haven neighborhood. The current location at Newbridge Avenue fell short of expectations in both staffing and hours of operation; plans to build a new facility on Ivy Drive fell through due to construction conflicts and the loss of the city’s redevelopment agency.
Privacy rights
With revived interest in expanding Menlo Park’s law enforcement facilities comes a look at how to widen the police department’s technological capabilities as well. In addition to extending East Palo Alto’s ShotSpotter gunfire detection system to cover Belle Haven and eventually adding surveillance cameras in key sites around the city, Police Chief Robert Jonsen plans to deploy up to three mobile automated license plate readers.
The department recently borrowed one plate reader from Daly City to monitor a funeral, Chief Jonsen told the council on June 4, and has also asked San Mateo County to loan its five units out as needed.
The mobile automated license plate readers, used by East Palo Alto as well as the county and other local jurisdictions, run hundreds of plates a minute within a 360-degree arc.
While the council hopes to see the readers up and running in Menlo Park sooner rather than later, with Councilwoman Kirsten Keith expressing concern that the summer could see a spike in crime, it also wants to settle the issue of what happens to the collected data. Vice Mayor Ray Mueller asked that the council first establish a privacy policy before police deploy the readers within the city.
Chief Jonsen said that captured data is retained within a database in San Francisco, which also stores information from other jurisdictions. Councilwoman Keith said that the sheriff told her the county’s policy is to keep the data for a year, then purge it. The chief said that a one-year retention policy is considered best practice.
The American Civil Liberties Union has been monitoring data collection by law enforcement; it recommends keeping the information for as short a period as possible and limiting access. Tiburon, for example, stores the data from automated license plate readers for only 30 days unless it relates to a specific criminal investigation.
Mayor Peter Ohtaki asked that staff present a report on privacy policy during a July council meeting.
Well, gosh, when are the other ‘hoods in MP going to get these “technological advances”? After all, the wealthier are always leaving their windows open for their 5k$ handbags & expensive jewelry to be stolen. Aren’t they *entitled* to some surveillance? Since people like to complain about property crimes on a par with crimes against persons, don’t they “warrant” equal assistance in fighting crime?
Rights to privacy has to do within ones home. When in public, driving on public roads, with vehicles that are registered to the state, I would like to know which license plate was fleeing a crime scene, a hit and run, or doing their side shows. If there is no statute of limitations on murder…keep it for as long as possible. Most law abiding citizens have not much to hide.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Any questions?
WWDD:
the Supreme court has repeatedly ruled that no one has any expectation of privacy when in public.
Any questions?
Good point, MV, so let’s see the wealthier neighborhoods get their privacy violated as much as Belle Haven!
Reality is: The most serious crimes in Menlo Park occur East of Middlefield Road at off-peak times. Freeway proximity and higher density are major factors.
The majority of criminals enter and flee the area using any of just 8 intersections. Just 4 to 10 properly aimed, inconspicuous, high definition cameras could capture images of the majority of suspects. Plate readers enhance that.
The cost savings of a single major case prosecution pays for it all. Start East, then add cameras West. Easy to imagine many crooks will avoid Menlo Park.
Huge benefit. Huge deterrent. Best money the City could ever spend. Why is innovating technology-leading Menlo Park willfully choosing to lag behind every urban area in the World?
Do the whole city, east and west. And fly drones overhead, constantly, never know when it will be needed. Maybe three, just to have a back up. Get that new (not infrared) see thru wall and roof technology too. Probably should fingerprint and dna swab every resident just to be sure.
Most of all, keep the ‘rules’ on all of it very vague and hidden.
Man, I have some suspicious neighbors over here. They do the weirdest stuff. They need to be watched constantly!
Come on Councilwoman Kirsten Keith, privacy with license plate information? Are you kidding? Help the cops catch the bad guys. Don’t up throw roadblocks.
Almmy Al – I think you’re on to something.
The drones can be used not only for monitoring, but for enforcement and punishment as well. Sure, it will be a minor nuisance when a heat-seeking missile “lays down the law” – a bit of noise – but that’s the cost of security.
This is what we actually need – Domino’s Tests Flying Pizza Delivery Drones: http://menlopark-atherton.patch.com/groups/editors-picks/p/dominos-tests-flying-pizza-delivery-drones_4fe92488
What privacy rights do you have on a public street????? NONE. The police can run a license plate at any time just because…….
While police officers can run your license plates anytime on a public street, storing the information indicating where the plate was run, and at what time, creates a information database monitoring where you are during the day. Because the information is collected on a public database, if the City proceeded without a privacy policy, individuals and corporations could attempt to gain access to information specific to individuals in our community with a public records act request. My understanding is that the City Council isn’t attempting to stop the police from running license plates, or using license plate readers, it is just trying to make certain the information is only used that for legitimate public safety purposes.
Do the coppers need a reason to run a plate? In Menlo, of course, & Palo Alto, they’re famous for pulling someone over for driving while brown/black.
And sheesh, really, deleting my totally relevant post about Domino’s testing to deliver pizzas via drones? Ridiculous – almost as ridiculous as the idea itself!
Who cares what the sheriff or police chief think about best practices, I’m with Long Time Menlo Man. Council members need to stop echoing the advice of professionals, and simply follow the advice posted on town square, without question. Hell, who cares if the advice is even legal.
Plate safe not subject to a records request.