The San Francisco Police Department has selected the Mission District for the launch of its first two surveillance cameras in the city, after voters approved Proposition E to expand some police powers in March.
The cameras will both be on Mission Street, at 19th Street and 24th Street, locations with criminal activity that the police department believes could improve with surveillance.
At a community meeting today discussing the two proposed locations, Police Chief Bill Scott said that in the past six months, the 19th and Mission area saw 49 crimes, and the 24th and Mission area saw 61. Those included a homicide, assaults and rape, as well as theft and arson.
“One of the things that we look at when we’re trying to determine where to go next is what’s going on in that area that we think we can impact,” Scott said. “So that’s baked into our calculations.”
Scott, who since Prop. E’s passage may propose locations for surveillance cameras, is required to hold a public meeting in the neighborhood to solicit community feedback. He is also required to review that feedback prior to deciding on the installation and placement of any new cameras.
Now that the meeting has been held, there are no further requirements for the SFPD’s use of the cameras.
The only non-police attendees at today’s meeting at Mission Station, however, were an Office of Civic Engagement and Immigrant Affairs employee sent by her supervisor, and this reporter. Most of Scott’s remarks were in response to this reporter’s questions during the meeting.
The project’s lead, Lt. Chris Wilhelm, said the department had not received a single public comment, although the meeting was advertised with 30-inch signs at the two intersections and in social media posts.
Scott said that, in addition to the crime levels, the two locations are the first in the city because 10 years ago, the Department of Emergency Management installed cameras at both locations and recently upgraded the cameras. It is unclear if or when they have been used.
“Logistically, we were able to actually get to this point a lot quicker with these particular cameras,” Scott said. “But there are definitely locations across the city where we believe that this will be beneficial.”
Although the police department will now technically own the cameras, under the new ordinance, police sergeants and higher-ranking officers will still need to request surveillance camera footage from the Department of Emergency Management, according to the ordinance, and may use them in the “investigation of specific crimes, active operations, and crimes in progress.”
To access live-monitoring of the cameras, a captain or higher-ranked officer must sign off on the request.
The two cameras can each record in four directions, but the cameras’ additional capabilities are still up in the air: The city’s ban on facial recognition technology, Chapter 19B, will not apply to SFPD’s use of the new public safety cameras.
The new cameras will be labeled with large blue signs within 25 feet, stating that “for public safety, area is under camera surveillance.”
“Our goal isn’t to hide these cameras. These cameras are to prevent, to deter crime,” said Wilhelm, who said the department is also looking to add blue lights to make them more visible.
Footage from the cameras will be retained for 30 days, unless an investigation requires them to be kept longer.
The department will be required to report annually to the Board of Supervisors about the locations of its cameras and the crime statistics at those locations, the frequency of requests for the recorded images or live monitoring, and the use of any camera footage in making arrests.
I live very near one of these cameras. I strongly support this.
San Francisco has spent too long excusing crime and letting it fester.
When friends come to visit, I sometimes take them to the 24th St BART station — where one of these cameras will be — to get the train to the airport. They are always horrified. It’s instructive to see the city through their eyes. And my friends are urban residents, not country people.
We’re not done yet fixing this city, but this is a good step.
Leave
“The city’s ban on facial recognition technology, Chapter 19B, will not apply to SFPD’s use of the new public safety cameras.”
That’s a bombshell sentence! Why will 19B not apply?
In order to identify criminals and prevent further crimes
So, an after-the-fact investigatory tool? OK, sounds useful. But someone should let SFPD know it is also free to physically BE in these places BEFORE a crime occurs. SFPD can patrol and be out in the community. There’s a word for this, coincidentally – “policing.”
Sounds like you aren’t familiar with either of these intersections. These are two of the most crime ridden intersections in SF in spite of the fact both are saturated with law enforcements presence. There are almost always cops in the flesh, at least one visible police vehicle, as well as plenty of signs-large, easy to read signs- encouraging all of us to behave because SFPDs watching. Now that I think of it, a few months ago mission local reported on the literal mobile watchtower law enforcement brought into the middle of the 24th street bart plaza. Type “24th and mission police” into google search. First result.
Hi friend – I live literally feet from 19th and Mission. Come down and visit. And show me a single police officer in the course of a day, a week, a month.
i’d be interested to attend one of these community meetings one day
Thank you for attending this meeting and reporting on this subject!
I walk around 24th street all the time and never saw these signs. They expected people to notice two small signs with tiny font like that? No wonder no one attended the meeting! No one knew about it.
Hopefully these cameras will have a greater impact on crime as the presence of the Highway Patrol and National Guard have had on the Tenderloin. Although that’s a pretty low bar.
Seems to me like cameras were everywhere since 20 years ago. With not much results.
So wait, creepy cameras have been in place already and yet the crime continues? Seems like they didn’t deter anything. 24th street I understand, but why 19th street versus 16th Street? Strange.
Why aren’t these cameras in the Tenderloin ? There’s a plethora of all kinds of crimes in that area.
Because they’d get stolen in the TL.
Balonium. Criminals don’t care about cameras.
Look at the night-time break-in vids – things are as casual as can be.
All you need is a hoody and a mask. Duh.
All this “crime” is a few blocks from the cop shop.
The idea they can’t exit the fortress of solitude and keep an eye on their own nearby premises is laughable.
The cops have checked out and are just riding the pension gravy train till they can skip off the trolley and then it’s buen viaje to Rancho Relaxo.
In Cuba there are cameras absolutely everywhere. In China too, along with a social credit scheme to straitjacket anyone who runs afoul of the CCP. I have been to both dystopias and witnessed it first hand. Marxists just love cameras and total control, once they have suckered the population into falling for their eternal revolutions…
Check out London and get back to us with your stereotypes.
Grow up man, this is going to deter crime in the areas they’re placed.
Please get back to me in six months and let me know how much crime was deterred or solved by these cameras. I’ll give you a hint: It’ll be between zero and not much.
Watch… the City will soon find out that these cameras are more useful to them as extraction devices for AI — not for stopping crime. They’ll soon discover that they can monetize the stream of visual data they collect. Especially true since installation of the cameras do not respect the City’s ban on facial recognition. Stopping crime will become secondary to monetizing human data to feed the ever-voracious large-language AI data sets. Whether the intention is there now or not, this is a bait-and-switch, with Big Tech winning over Humanity. Again.
Your comment is useless. All your doing is causing unnecessary anxiety.