Memo

To: Professor Jeffrey Jordan

From: Kevin Phelps

Date: 02/22/2021

Re: Summary of Recommendations for Surveillance Technology

USD LEPSL Course 530 Assignment 6.1

Surveillance techniques have been a part of law enforcement since their start. Many

technological items are created and developed for leisure or workload-bearing purposes but can

have useful law enforcement investigative potential. However, technology used to support law

enforcement with surveillance may infringe on a citizen's privacy. Consequently, we must ensure

each new technology employed as a means of surveillance gets appropriately reviewed to protect

our citizens' privacy.

We have recently learned the streetlights installed by the City of Anytown are equipped

with optical sensors for monitoring multiple civic issues. This video footage is stored and

collected at an offsite location and reviewed later by the street light company. These streetlights

provide a constant video recording of some of the city's public areas. Although the police

department did not implement these lights and recording systems, the department can use them

while impacting the citizens they record. 

privacy issues exist with these types of technology. These cameras record only what other people

would see if they were in the same public place. However, some of these cameras may exist in

positions that cover public areas and can see video footage of nearby things, which might

otherwise be private. Likewise, developments in biometric facial recognition software have been

attached to similar cameras. This software allows a visual surveillance device to automatically

identify people recorded by the camera using preestablished databases. It can also sort video

footage by race, height, gender, hairstyles, and clothing. The software will track people matching

the desired input of elements movements throughout the public camera system. 

Currently, no laws are governing the use of this technology within the state, county, or

municipality. However, this technology is becoming more popular and widespread. Therefore,

some jurisdictions have already taken legislative action to ban or regulate the use facial

recognition software. Although we cannot precisely say how the state legislators and city council

will react to this technology, we can take proactive efforts to help us understand. Initially, we can

evaluate cities such as San Diego, which have already created city ordinances on implementing

and using surveillance equipment (Figueroa, 2020). 

We should also consider how other states have responded to the news of the technology.

For example, California banned the use of facial recognition software (Bill Text - Ab-1215 Law

Enforcement: Facial Recognition and Other Biometric SURVEILLANCE., n.d.). To better

prepare ourselves for any response from local and state government leaders and legislators, we

can prepare ourselves for the different possible reactions based on those of other states. Such as

the Baltimore Police Departments' surveillance camera systems. When BPD implemented the

new camera infrastructure, they target public areas with higher crime rates. Subsequently, a vast

2
majority of the deployed cameras were in indigenous and African American majority

communities, leading many community members to feel like the cameras were placed as a

systematic racism tool to oppress further or over police the minority communities (Todd,

2020). By explaining beforehand how we will use the surveillance tools and how we will be

picking the areas they are deployed, we can hope to prevent similar allegations.

After considering the feedback we may receive from governing entities, we can develop

our plan to engage the public with this system. As with most policing aspects, the best way to

handle the public response is transparency, proactivity, and engagement. As Captain Jordan

explained from the San Diego Police Department, the best practice is to address the community

before implementing new technology. Addressing the citizens shows our willingness to work

with the community to gain their trust and respect while implementing new policies to help the

agency serve the community. (University of San Diego [USD], n.d.). To do this, we should

schedule a press conference within an upcoming city council meeting to openly discuss our plans

to utilize the camera systems contained within the Smart Street Lights and possibly develop our

city-controlled surveillance system. We can explain our intentions and request community

members, community organizations, and privacy rights groups, reach out to us for meetings to

discuss their concerns. We can then meet with each group that responds. After the meetings, we

consider these concerns and develop a policy to create a system that ensures the public's privacy

is protected. If we were to install cameras in public places with supporting evidence from

criminal statics and community input, we would mount the surveillance systems in these areas

where they are visible to the public, and possibly even with signs advising the camera's

existence.

3
 If we decide to move forward with facial recognition software, we should be wary that

the software is not full proof and must exist as investigative leads only. The International

Association of Chiefs of Police has established five principles, which all must hold to ensure the

software's ethical implementation: software must follow local and state laws, protect the

constitutional rights of all citizens, the results must consider features of the identified subject,

must not dispose of physical attributes such as race, gender, and age, results gathered are only

investigative leads and not evidence, and all users of the system shall undergo specialty training

designed around understanding the technology, and its ethical use (Guiding Principles for Law

Enforcement's Use of Facial Recognition Technology, 2019). 

An excellent example of how we could implement this is to have the software installed

separately or with separate permissions from the surveillance equipment. When facial

recognition is needed, we can establish a civilian advisory board, which the agency can petition

to access the facial recognition. The agency will have to convey sufficient cause for the

software's deployment as the need to catch the perpetrator against the other subjects' rights

captured in the video footage. This process would protect the rights of other civilians in the

footage, as running the facial recognition and identifying software as being considered similar to

having every person captured in the video as required identify themselves. 

The public's privacy and department transparency are essential. Communication and

clarity are critical to ensure that our community is well informed about the use of surveillance

techniques in our jurisdiction (University of San Diego, n.d.). We must ensure that each new

technology in surveillance meets all ethical standards to protect our citizens' privacy.  

(Word Count: 998)

4
 References

Bill text - ab-1215 law enforcement: Facial recognition and other biometric surveillance. (n.d.).

Retrieved February 19, 2021, from

https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201920200AB1215

Figueroa, T. (2020, November 11). San diego city council unanimously backs ordinances to

govern surveillance technologies. San Diego Union-Tribune. Retrieved February 19,

2021, from https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/public-safety/story/2020-11-

10/san-diego-city-council-unanimously-backs-ordinances-to-govern-surveillance-

technologies

Guiding principles for law enforcement's use of facial recognition technology. (2019, October

17). International Association of Chiefs of Police. Retrieved February 19, 2021, from

https://www.theiacp.org/resources/document/guiding-principles-for-law-enforcements-

use-of-facial-recognition-technology

Todd, G. (2020, November 19). Police cameras disproportionately surveil nonwhite areas of dc

and baltimore, cns finds. CNS Maryland. Retrieved February 19, 2021, from

https://cnsmaryland.org/2020/11/19/police-cameras-disproportionately-surveil-nonwhite-

areas-of-dc-and-baltimore-cns-finds/

University of San Diego. (n.d.). Presentation 5.1 Spotlight Expert: Surveillance, Ethics &

Technology Part 1 [Lecture Video presentation]. University of San Diego, LEPSL.

https://sandiego.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=6bbf3d97-e5e8-

4dd3-8152-ac930128987b&start=2.637994

5
University of San Diego. (n.d.). Presentation 6.1 Spotlight Expert: Surveillance, Ethics &

Technology Part II [Lecture Video Presentation]. University of San Diego LEPS.

https://sandiego.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=716160c3-db57-

4dfc-9ec7-ac93012dbd37&start=199.827553