New surveillance cameras planned for Berkeley prompt support and concern

BERKELEY — A Berkeley Police Department request for more advanced surveillance cameras faced pushback over concerns about data protection but received support from councilmembers who say the new system could be an invaluable tool.

In the interest of thwarting crime, the department is seeking to install cameras at up to 20 locations known for high foot traffic and retail theft. The Berkeley City Council approved the request in a 6-1 vote on Tuesday.

The council previously approved 15 locations for fixed surveillance cameras but the department is requesting to shift some of those spots given that most areas are already being monitored or will be covered through automatic license plate readers.

In addition to adding and adjusting the location of cameras, the department hopes to switch its system provider from Edgeworth Integration to Flock Safety, given that the Edgeworth Integration cameras come with electricity requirements and other infrastructure costs that have delayed their installation. Flock cameras run on solar power and can be mounted on any city pole and integrated into the Flock automatic license plate reader system already in place.

Some in the business community encouraged the council to back the proposal for more cameras, including John Caner, CEO of the Downtown Berkeley Association, and Beth Roessner, CEO of the Berkeley Chamber of Commerce.

“This proposal is a positive step toward enhancing safety in key business districts. By focusing on high pedestrian areas, it addresses crime trends and retail theft while also responding to feedback from local businesses,” Roessner said.

But the proposal was also met by a strong public outcry from residents who said they fear the federal government will use the data to target vulnerable groups, including undocumented immigrants, queer or transgender people and protestors.

Data security in city programs like security cameras and municipal identification cards have been of particular concern in recent weeks amid threats of mass deportations, a crackdown on diversity, equity and inclusion programs and student protests, and anti-transgender stances from President Donald Trump’s administration.

Recognizing those fears, Councilmember Igor Tregub proposed the city prohibit Flock from sharing the city’s data, which is encrypted, with any outside personnel or agency unless required under court order.

“We are in times that require us to hold a multitude of truths. One truth is a country that is careening toward fascism and there are legitimate concerns,” Tregub said while recognizing another truth regarding support for surveillance cameras in his district.

While security measures meant to limit access to the system are being proposed, members of the public on Tuesday shared strong doubts the city would have the ability to fight off the federal government’s attempts to access the data either through the courts or by some sort of force.

Several of those that spoke asked that a specific identified location be removed from the list: the intersection of Telegraph and Durant avenues, right next to the University of California, Berkeley, campus.

Councilmember Cecilia Lunaparra, who represents the district where the Cal campus is located, shared similar concerns about the potential risks of expanding surveillance in the city, particularly around the university campus, which she said has become a target of President Trump due protests against the Israeli-Hamas war last year.

Lunaparra also raised concerns that students were not consulted on the proposal like the business community was and implored her colleagues to remove the intersection near the campus from the list. The council had agreed less than a year ago to remove the intersection of Telegraph Avenue and Dwight Way from the original list of locations where surveillance cameras would be placed that came before the council last January, she noted.

“I know we’re balancing a lot here and we all care about public safety and we care about privacy and that we care about our vulnerable residents, but I want to make it very clear what we are risking. I want to make it clear this is a risk,” Lunaparra said. “The best way, the only way we can keep our city a sanctuary city is by not collecting this data at all.”

While sympathetic to Lunaparra’s concerns, a majority of her colleagues ultimately agreed that the camera at Telegraph and Durant Avenue should remain on the list given that residents travel throughout the city regardless of district boundaries.

Regarding the potential misuse of data or federal government access, councilmembers said they shared those fears and would like to see a policy hammered out that would give the city the ability to pause or terminate its contract with Flock if the federal government sought access to data.

Other concerns around whether or not the system can shut off sound recording or facial recognition technology will also need to be addressed in the future, councilmembers agreed.

Despite those unanswered questions, a majority of the council decided the cameras would be an important tool for the city’s understaffed police department. Mayor Adena Ishii said there will be a thorough vetting process with ample public outreach and consultation with the Police Accountability Board.

“There are many more steps left here that we will get opportunities to review,” Ishii said. “It’s not like we’re trying to pull one over on anyone. This is just part of the process and we have a strict process in place to protect people’s rights.”