IE 11 Not Supported

For optimal browsing, we recommend Chrome, Firefox or Safari browsers.

ACLU Pushes Public Input Before Adoption of Police Surveillance Tech

The ACLU of California released a report detailing instances throughout the state and country where equipment such as drones and cellphone interceptors were acquired with the help of federal and other outside funds without any public scrutiny or input.

In a move inspired partly by uproars over surveillance technology in California Bay Area cities, the American Civil Liberties Union is pushing the state's largest municipalities to enact ordinances that would require public evaluation before police agencies get and use new high-tech equipment.

The ACLU of California released a report Wednesday detailing an array of instances throughout the state and country where equipment such as drones and cellphone interceptors were acquired with the help of federal and other outside funds without any public scrutiny or input.

Snooping by the NSA headlined the chronicle of privacy transgressions in the report, but also included were an instance in San Jose, where the police department quietly purchased a drone, and Oakland, where a citywide surveillance center was on the verge of approval before public outcry tamped down the project.

The report ostensibly functions as a guide for residents and policymakers to propose such ordinances in their cities and counties. One of its most vocal proponents is Santa Clara County Supervisor Joe Simitian, who plans to pursue an ordinance to the county board this month.

"This is a part of a larger, longer-term concern I've had about erosion of privacy," said Simitian, who as a state senator made the issue one of his key policy platforms. "The public became particularly mindful of these issues in the wake of exposures of our own federal government practices."

Simitian added: "It's important to acknowledge that privacy protection and public safety are not mutually exclusive. We can craft an ordinance that respects and reflects concerns on both sides."

That is echoed by one of the report's authors, who cited the San Jose drone as one of the touchstones for why prior public input needs to be codified.

"What we saw in San Jose is a pretty consistent pattern up and down the state. Basic transparency and accountability is the exception, not the rule," said Nicole Ozer, technology and civil liberties policy director for ACLU of California.

Along with the report, the ACLU released data from counties and cities throughout the state tallying through public records the types and quantities of surveillance equipment used by police agencies, including automatic license-plate readers, body-worn cameras, use of facial-recognition databases, video-surveillance networks, and the more controversial drones and cell tower mimicking devices that cast an electronic net for cellphones in a given area. San Jose is the only agency in the Bay Area to have a drone, and also has a Stingray, a brand of cell interceptor.

Earlier this year, reports surfaced that, through a Homeland Security grant, the San Jose Police Department purchased what it called an unmanned aerial vehicle -- a hobbyist multi-rotor helicopter, to be exact -- and bypassed giving any notice of the equipment to the community or City Council since it did not involve city money.

When the revelation surfaced this past summer, the police department halted the development of a program to use the device, and pledged public hearings to explain and gather input about how and whether it should be used in a police capacity. Officials initially said the purchase was to bolster the department's bomb squad to keep officers out of harm's way, but acknowledged its utility in rescue and other situations. That expansiveness, without any regulatory policies in place, alarmed civil libertarians.

"We could have rolled it out better," police spokesman Officer Albert Morales said. "We want to keep the public informed. We understand it's a sensitive issue. We want to know the public's concerns, and we also want to explain what the benefits are."

As it happens, the first of those public hearings is at 6:30 p.m. Wednesday at San Jose City Hall.

©2014 the San Jose Mercury News (San Jose, Calif.)