5 ms·

The town installed it on a one-year trial basis. The cameras didn't break any cases and cost the town a huge amount of money to pay for police overtime to revie

The town installed it on a one-year trial basis. The cameras didn't break any cases and cost the town a huge amount of money to pay for police overtime to review all the footage. The city council voted unanimously to make them permanent, even in the face of clear evidence that they were useless. Why? To be seen to be doing something. They even said so in the resolution. Check out the staff report on page 335 of the agenda packet PDF. https://losaltoshillsca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/2742/files https://losaltoshillsca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/2742/fil... The final paragraphs before hitting boilerplate were especially galling: Even though residential burglaries are at an all-time high since the system was installed and no direct correlation can be made between the system and a reduction in residential burglaries, the cameras remain a tool that the Sheriff’s Office can use to help solve ongoing crime in Town and have been successful in solving other types of crimes. It is impossible to tell whether the presence of the cameras themselves could have deterred additional burglaries from happening, but in all, the cameras remain a reminder to the citizens of Los Altos Hills that the Town cares about their safety and that the Council is actively trying to reduce crime from occurring in Town.

WillPostForFood 3y ago
The cameras didn't break any cases That's not true, the page right before the one you quoted: During this evaluation period, a total of four suspects were arrested in two separate and ongoing investigations. Two were arrested for an armed robbery and carjacking that occurred in Cupertino and two were arrested while driving a stolen vehicle and committing various thefts in Town.
- zbrozek 3y ago
  The system was installed with the express intent of solving and reducing residential burglaries. I should've been more specific about the crime in my comment. Another quote from the document: Staff would like to note that 0 (zero) residential burglary cases were solved by to the ALPR system.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    > The system was installed with the express intent of solving and reducing residential burglaries. Can you link to the source of this claim?
    - zbrozek 3y ago
      That the linked document largely framed everything in terms of residential burglaries not enough, I suppose? There's also the agenda packet from March, 2021: https://losaltoshillsca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/49/files https://losaltoshillsca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/49/files Further, because of an increase in residential burglaries in 2020, staff was given direction to research current ALPR technology and report back with the steps that would be involved to implement ALPR cameras in the Town. You can also watch the city council meetings from both of these dates (same links) to get more context.
      - MichaelZuo 3y ago
        I don't see how reductions in business burglaries are excluded from consideration or even diminished in importance.
        drewda 3y ago
        That's because the Town of Los Altos Hills has effectively banned all businesses within its city limits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Altos_Hills,_California#Strictly_residential https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Altos_Hills,_California#St...
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        'Businesses' would also include business vehicles visiting the town, such as FedEx trucks, moving trucks, etc.

WillPostForFood 3y ago

The cameras didn't break any cases That's not true, the page right before the one you quoted: During this evaluation period, a total of four suspects were arrested in two separate and ongoing investigations. Two were arrested for an armed robbery and carjacking that occurred in Cupertino and two were arrested while driving a stolen vehicle and committing various thefts in Town.

zbrozek 3y ago
The system was installed with the express intent of solving and reducing residential burglaries. I should've been more specific about the crime in my comment. Another quote from the document: Staff would like to note that 0 (zero) residential burglary cases were solved by to the ALPR system.
- MichaelZuo 3y ago
  > The system was installed with the express intent of solving and reducing residential burglaries. Can you link to the source of this claim?
  - zbrozek 3y ago
    That the linked document largely framed everything in terms of residential burglaries not enough, I suppose? There's also the agenda packet from March, 2021: https://losaltoshillsca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/49/files https://losaltoshillsca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/49/files Further, because of an increase in residential burglaries in 2020, staff was given direction to research current ALPR technology and report back with the steps that would be involved to implement ALPR cameras in the Town. You can also watch the city council meetings from both of these dates (same links) to get more context.
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      I don't see how reductions in business burglaries are excluded from consideration or even diminished in importance.
      - drewda 3y ago
        That's because the Town of Los Altos Hills has effectively banned all businesses within its city limits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Altos_Hills,_California#Strictly_residential https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Altos_Hills,_California#St...
        MichaelZuo 3y ago
        'Businesses' would also include business vehicles visiting the town, such as FedEx trucks, moving trucks, etc.