Laserfiche WebLink
6.D. - Page 76 of 179 <br />as well as the protection of the rights of the community and police officers. Hillsborough <br />is in the process of developing a similar policy. Respondent agrees with this factual <br />statement. Respondent notes, however, that although most policies have similarities <br />and consistencies, Body Worn Video policies are unique to each agency. That <br />necessary uniqueness creates a landscape of equipment and data usage, data <br />retention, and video production which will result in (sometimes great) variations in <br />overall costs for implementation and maintenance from one agency to the next. <br />F5 Many local law enforcement agencies that currently do not employ body -worn cameras <br />acknowledge that these systems are beneficial and will likely be implemented in the <br />future either voluntarily or by mandate. Respondent agrees with this factual statement. <br />Response to Grand Jury Recommendations: <br />R1 The Grand Jury recommends that the councils of those cities/towns that have not adopted <br />body -worn cameras direct their respective chiefs of police to develop an appropriate <br />body -worn camera implementation plan and advise the public of their plan by November <br />30, 2016. The recommendation has been implemented. The respondent, after <br />hearing a staff report from the San Mateo Police Department, has directed the City <br />of San Mateo Police Chief to develop an implementation plan no later than <br />November 30, 2016. <br />R2 The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Sheriff develop a plan to <br />implement body -worn cameras and advise the public of his plan by November 30, 2016. <br />This Recommendation is not applicable to this respondent. <br />R3 The Grand Jury recommends that the police departments of those cities, towns, and the <br />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. This recommendation will be implemented in the future, with <br />a time frame as follows: Respondent has recommended complete implementation of <br />body worn video technology with a targeted implementation date of November 2017, <br />providing all policy, practice, and equipment related matters have been satisfied. <br />R4 The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Sheriffs Office implement a <br />body -worn camera system as soon as practicable but, in any event, no later than October <br />31, 2017. This Recommendation is not applicable to this respondent. <br />This response to the Grand Jury was approved at a public meeting on August 15, 2016. <br />The City of San Mateo continues to support the ongoing work of our San Mateo Police <br />Department to be leaders in the area of transparency, legitimacy, and community engagement. <br />We see Body Worn Video as a key component of our Police Department's continued leadership <br />in these important areas, and applaud the County's endeavor to support our local law <br />enforcement agencies' leadership in that regard. <br />Respectfully, <br />Joe Goetha s <br />Mayor — City of San Mateo <br />115 <br />