Oakland police seeks expansion of automated camera network, incorporation of private cameras

By Katie Nielsen

Should the Oakland Police Department invest in more surveillance cameras and expand its video network to include private cameras? That was the question that was supposed to come before the Public Safety Committee at its regularly scheduled meeting on Tuesday afternoon, but that meeting was canceled due to the lack of a quorum.

It’s been a controversial issue ever since the City of Oakland partnered with Flock cameras two years ago. Both those in support and in opposition held rallies outside City Hall Tuesday afternoon, rallies that were planned well ahead of the meeting being canceled.

Longtime Oakland business owner Richard Santana has run Café Santana on MacArthur Boulevard in the Laurel neighorhood for more than a decade, and says he has had to change the way he does business because of crime.

“None of the local businesses around here carry cash because we are always worried that someone’s going to come in here and rob us or take from our customers, so customers don’t carry cash,” Santana said.

He’s concerned because his shop has been broken into four times over the past 12 years – most recently about a year and a half ago – despite a pile of cameras right above the door.

That’s why he supports the change in policy the city’s Public Safety Committee was supposed to vote on during the meeting on Tuesday – allowing Oakland Police to not only expand the use of Flock cameras, but also monitor them in real time. The cameras scan license plates and alert police to help track down stolen or wanted cars or those suspected of being used in a crime. OPD also wants to integrate privately owned cameras into its system.

“If used correctly and they can catch criminals in the act, and get them off the street, that benefits the community, it benefits the neighborhood, it benefits the city, it benefits us all as a whole,” Santana said.

Privacy issues are a main concern brought up every time the council discusses the Flock cameras. Privacy advocates worry about the possibility of sharing data with other agencies – including federal agencies like U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

“I think that certain guidelines, restrictions need to be in place to prohibit any of that stuff happening,” Santana said.

But Cat Brooks with the Anti-Police Terror Project says if the change is made, no amount of guidelines will protect Oakland residents from living in a surveillance state.

“So my daughter, she leaves the house, she goes to the lake, she goes to the café … all of those movements are being gathered without her consent and stored in a database that they want us to believe is going to be deleted every 30 days. Says who?” Brooks said. 

Brooks added that the $2.25 million price tag for the cameras is money that should be used for violence prevention measures.

“You should be angry that you’re being lied to, and you should start demanding resources and services that are actually going to keep your business, your families, and the rest of Oakland safe,” Brooks said.

The Public Safety Committee is scheduled to take up the issue at its next regularly scheduled meeting on November 18.