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 19 of 179 <br />FINDINGS <br />FL The Atherton, Belmont, Foster City, Hillsborough, and Menlo Park Police Departments <br />have deployed body -worn camera systems. <br />F2. The Sheriff s Office and five of the city police departments that have not deployed body - <br />worn cameras all expressed similar concerns regarding the implementation of these <br />systems, the cost of equipment, the cost of data retention, and policy development. <br />F3. The Atherton, Belmont, Foster City, Hillsborough, and Menlo Park Police Departments <br />have budgeted sufficient funds to manage the cost of equipment, data retention, <br />and training. <br />F4. The Atherton, Belmont, Foster City, and Menlo Park Police Departments have developed <br />written policies regarding the operation and data retention of body -worn camera systems as <br />well as the protection of the rights of the community and police officers. Hillsborough is in <br />the process of developing a similar policy. <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 future <br />either voluntarily or by mandate. <br />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 />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 />R3. The Grand Jury recommends that the police departments of those cities, towns, and <br />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 />R4. The Grand Jury recommends that the San Mateo County Sheriffs Office implement <br />a body -worn camera system as soon as practicable but, in any event, no later than <br />October 31, 2017. <br />2015-2016 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.