My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2020-11-23 Joint SA PFA
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2020
>
AgdaPkt 2020-11-23 Joint SA PFA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/3/2020 5:27:49 PM
Creation date
11/19/2020 6:20:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Meeting Type
Joint
Agency Type
City Council and Successor Agency and Public Financing Authority
Date
11/23/2020
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
840
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
6.1). - Page 73 of 179 <br />Response of the City of San Bruno <br />July 12, 2016 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />F4. The Atherton, Belmont, Foster City, Hillsborough, and Menlo Park Police <br />Departments have developed written policies regarding the operation and data retention <br />of body -worn camera systems as well as the protection of the rights of the community <br />and police officers. Hillsborough is in the process of developing a similar policy. <br />Response: <br />The City of San Bruno agrees with this finding. <br />FS. Many local law enforcement agencies that currently do not employ body -worn <br />cameras acknowledge that these systems are beneficial and will likely be implemented in <br />the future either voluntarily or by mandate. <br />Response: <br />The City of San Bruno understands what is represented in the Grand Jury Report. The City is <br />not familiar with the position of other cities or police departments regarding this topic. <br />Responses to Grand Jury Recommendations: <br />R1. The Grand Jury recommends that the councils of those cities/towns that have not <br />adopted body -worn cameras direct their respective chiefs of police to develop an <br />appropriate body -worn camera implementation plan and advise the public of their plan <br />by November 30, 2016. <br />Response: <br />This recommendation requires a detailed cost — benefit analysis and an examination of <br />available technology that allows for successful integration with existing computer aided dispatch <br />(CAD), record management, mobile audio visual (MAV), and data storage systems. This <br />analysis is expected to be completed by November 1, 2016, and presented to the City Council <br />by November 30, 2016. <br />R2. The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Sheriff's Office develops <br />a plan to implement body -worn cameras and advise the public of this plan by November <br />30, 2016. <br />Response: <br />The City of San Bruno has no response to this recommendation. <br />R3. The Grand Jury recommends that the police departments of those cities, towns, <br />and the Broadmoor Police Protection District that have not adopted body -worn cameras <br />implement a body -worn camera system as soon as practicable but, in any event, no later <br />than October 31, 2017. <br />Response: <br />Should the City choose to move forward based on the analysis described in the response to <br />Recommendation One (R1), staff will request that the City Council include sufficient funding in <br />the FY 17-18 budget so that the cameras can be implemented by October 31, 2017. <br />112 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.