‘Minimize the creepiness’: Batavia working out how manage expanded surveillance

Batavia City Council members are torn on how to protect the public’s privacy while “minimizing the creepiness” of the newly expanded fleet of 112 surveillance cameras, expected to begin watching over the city next month.

Council members approved an agreement last year with Aurora telecom company Scientel Solutions to add 55 new cameras to public areas downtown and key city-owned facilities.

The cameras are expected to be online and recording by the first week of July, but the rules about who can watch from the other side, when and why are still being decided.

While the new system was installed, the city and police department worked together to draft a policy that identifies who will have access to which cameras and how that access will be tracked and managed.

Council members discussed the new surveillance policy for the first time for nearly an hour during the May 27 Committee of the Whole meeting, where Police Chief Eric Blowers gave an overview of the policy and fielded questions from council members.

The overall goal of the policy was to enforce strict permissions and clear procedures to hold users accountable and prevent any abuse of the system. What that procedure should look like, however, was where council members disagreed.

As proposed, the surveillance system and those who use it will be subject to an annual audit, which will review complete records of when the system was accessed, by whom and what they saw. If a user’s actions are questioned during the audit, the user may be subject to an interview to explain their reasoning.

The main point of contention in the discussion was whether the audit trail was enough supervision, or if a more detailed log should be kept.

Alderman Abby Beck said the notion of being watched is not sitting well with some council members, and was in favor of requiring users to log their reasoning every time they access footage.

“We’re all still reacting– some of us are just not used to that idea of always being watched outside– and we are just feeling like, ‘How do we minimize the creepiness of this?’” Beck said. “Minimizing the creepiness, for me, would be just a little bit more of a paper trail or some accountability.”

On the other hand, Alderman James Fahrenbach was among several council members who had already accepted that, when in public, they are being recorded.

“We are surveillanced [sic] 24/7, whether it’s through our smartphones, whether it’s walking around all over the place, it’s unavoidable,” Fahrenbach said.

Alderman Christopher Sulfa argued that the audit system would do the same job without adding unnecessary restrictions and extra work for staff.

Blowers agreed with Sulfa in saying that for those who continually monitor live feeds throughout their workday, “logging that would be extremely arduous and challenging.”

While certain police department and city staff members will have access to live feeds of select cameras for security and safety purposes, only police will have access to recordings.

Any outside request for access to recordings, including staff inquiries and Freedom of Information Act requests, will be reviewed and approved through the police department.

Signage will be installed in areas monitored by the cameras to notify the public where they are under surveillance, and recordings will be deleted after 30 days, unless they are archived for a specific reason.

City Administrator Laura Newman said the city’s goal was to have system operational before July, and she does not expect the policy discussion to delay that timeline.

The policy is expected to come back for further discussion at a committee meeting later this month.