No Cameras at Garfield High For the Forseeable Future Says Mayor Wilson

 On Thursday, The Seattle Times reported that Mayor Katie Wilson stated this:

 Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson said Thursday she’s pausing the planned addition of police CCTV cameras — with an exception for the stadiums before the World Cup — amid fears they could be used to target immigrants and add to a creeping surveillance state.

She won’t, however, turn off any of the cameras the city currently uses, save for one near a clinic that offers reproductive health services.

The halt, she said, will give her and her administration time to thoroughly audit the protocols surrounding their use, which will likely take several months and involve help from New York University’s Policing Project, which aims to create more accountability and transparency in policing techniques.

What about safety at high schools?

Wilson’s announcement seeks to thread a needle on the issue. Though she’s pausing the addition of cameras near Garfield High School and Capitol Hill, she said she had greenlit their installation in the stadium district before the World Cup this summer. But those cameras would not be turned on unless the city received credible warnings of a security threat.

The definition of “credible threat” has not yet been established, she said.

Wilson has also heard calls from mothers who support camera use and are concerned about safety for their children, particularly in the aftermath of the killing of two Rainier Beach High School students.

At the same time, a petition from workers and volunteers on her campaign, calling on her to “immediately stop” the expansion of cameras, gathered momentum.

First, it sure won't help Garfield High if nothing is installed before the end of the school year. Second, maybe she's unaware but teens with guns don't always give out "a credible threat" before they act.


Via Publicola:

Wilson had this to say about the cameras and I think it is not good:

“For some people, seeing CCTV cameras in a neighborhood where they live or work or attend school makes them feel safer. For others, those same cameras make them feel less safe,” she said. “But precisely because different people and different communities experience the cameras differently, it’s important to base a decision on more than feelings. It’s important to ground our actions in a thorough understanding of how the cameras are being used, of the public benefits they are providing, and of any harm they are causing or could cause.”

 

Is she saying that the parents in those school communities are being overly emotional about their fears? It kinda sounds like it. Because the harm of NOT having cameras appears to have a real effect at high schools.  

Wilson said that if the reviewers at NYU don’t raise major concerns about data privacy, she’s inclined to expand the surveillance network.

“I think that if, if the audit comes back and says everything’s totally secure, we’re not at all worried about this data getting into the hands of federal government I think likely my decision at that point would be to move forward with the expansion of the pilot,” Wilson said, adding that it’s “legitimate” to ask whether “we want to live in a society where there’s cameras on every corner.”

Again, she needs to curb her wording. "Everything's totally secure" is absolutely not something that ANYONE can guarantee for data privacy. I'd like to think she can do better. 

 

In addition, SPD will switch off all the Automated License Plate Reader systems installed on patrol cars—about 400—as well as six used by SPD’s parking enforcement division. A recently passed state law prohibits the use of ALPR, which identifies the owner of a vehicle based on their license plate, around schools, places of worship, food banks, and courthouses. SPD’s crime and community-harm reduction director Lee Hunt said SPD is figuring out how to “geofence” these locations so that its license plate readers, made by Axon, can turn off and on as they pass by on the street.