TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Philippe Eskandar, City Manager
BY: John Incontro, Police Chief
Naved Qureshi, Police Commander
DATE: October 25, 2024
SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF LENSLOCK BODY-WORN AND VEHICLE
MOUNTED CAMERAS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT
STRATEGIC PLAN CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS
• Safe Community
• Priority Initiative
• Efficient, Responsive, and Effective City Services
BACKGROUND
Body-worn cameras have become increasingly prevalent in law enforcement agencies nationally. A body-worn camera (BWC) is a small device that records interactions between members of the public, victims, suspects, and trained law enforcement officers. These cameras are an effective tool to enhance the safety of officers and members of the public, improve evidence collection and documentation, reduce use of force encounters, increase civility and transparency, provide training opportunities, deter illegal and unprofessional conduct, and facilitate quicker resolutions and require fewer resources to investigate citizen complaints, prosecution, and lawsuits. Carl Warren & Company, LLC, the city’s property and liability third party administrator, has stated that having BWC footage would be helpful in law enforcement claims as they can provide very good insight as to what exactly happened.
During the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget Process, City Council approved BWCs as one of the police department’s priority initiatives and an objective for the coming year. This objective provides vital resources for the police department that will enable personnel to continue to provide the highest level of service to the community.
Steven W. Huang, DDS, Mayor
Gretchen Shepherd Romey, Vice Mayor
Steven Talt, Council Member
Calvin Lo, Council Member
Tony Chou, Council Member
, Council Member
Public involvement in the decision to procure BWCs was imperative, as it ensured transparency and accountability in law enforcement practices. The city actively invited public comments on several occasions, hosting community meetings and forums to gather input and address concerns, fostering a collaborative approach to this important initiative. These events included, but were not limited, to the following:
Public Safety Commission Meetings:
July 17, 2023, November 20, 2023, December 18, 2023, January 22, 2024, March 18, 2024, April 15, 2024, October 14, 2024
City Council Meetings:
March 13, 2024, March 29, 2024, May 31, 2024, October 25, 2024, Budget Town Hall meeting with City Manager:
February 15, 2024
Budget Priority Initiative survey sent out to the public for comments/suggestions:
March 3, 2024 (due date)
DISCUSSION
Currently, our organization does not utilize body-worn cameras. However, there has been growing interest from both within our ranks and the community to explore their adoption.
Implementing BWCs within our organization is a significant step toward enhancing transparency and accountability. These cameras offer an unbiased record of interactions between our personnel and the public, fostering trust and clarifying incidents to further help the City Council’s Public Safety Excellence Priority Initiative. Their adoption requires careful consideration of the financial implications, including initial setup costs and ongoing maintenance. Balancing these expenses against long-term benefits, such as improved evidence collection and reduced litigation risks, is crucial for informed decision-making.
The San Marino Police Department embarked on a rigorous 30-day evaluation of three BWC vendors (Axon, Motorola, and LensLock) to identify the most suitable solution for our department needs. Each vendor was assessed based on several criteria, including cost, technological capabilities, and quality of service.
Axon
Axon, a leading name in body-worn camera technology with a 25-year track record of serving law enforcement agencies, offered a compelling solution with its advanced features and high-quality equipment. However, despite its strong reputation and the total projected cost of $360,014 over five years, several concerns emerged during the evaluation process.
One significant issue was the quality of customer service. While Axon is known for its cutting-edge technology, the department experienced challenges with the responsiveness and support provided by the company. Effective customer service is crucial for addressing technical issues and ensuring smooth operation of the equipment, and any deficiencies in this area could lead to delays and operational disruptions.
Additionally, there was a notable concern regarding the potential for price increases. Axon's premium pricing model, while reflective of its high-quality offerings, also raises the risk of future cost escalations. This uncertainty about future costs could impact budget planning and overall financial feasibility for the department.
Another critical issue involved delays in Wi-Fi connectivity experienced by officers when reviewing video footage. Efficient and timely access to video evidence is essential for law enforcement operations, and any lag in connectivity can hinder the review process, potentially affecting the effectiveness of evidence management and the overall workflow of the department. These connectivity issues not only slow down the process but also introduce a risk of inefficiencies that could undermine the intended benefits of using body-worn cameras.
There are notable security concerns associated with Axon body-worn cameras.
A recent lawsuit alleges that these cameras contain Chinese-made chips that may be vulnerable to hacking. According to the claim made by a Californiabased artificial intelligence company, this vulnerability could jeopardize the security of sensitive data, including that of election officials, and potentially enable foreign interference in the U.S. election process.
While Axon's reputation and technology offer significant advantages, the concerns regarding customer service, potential price increases, and connectivity delays highlight important considerations.
Motorola
Motorola, a prominent vendor in the body-worn camera market, offers a costeffective solution at $199,124 over five years, making it an appealing option for budget-conscious departments. However, despite the lower cost, there are several notable downsides associated with Motorola’s body-worn cameras that could impact their overall effectiveness.
One significant issue is the mixed feedback Motorola has received from various departments regarding their recent integration of body-worn cameras. The San Marino Police Department encountered problems with Motorola’s customer service and timely product delivery. Delays in receiving products and inadequate support can disrupt operations and hinder the department’s ability to effectively utilize the technology.
Additionally, officers reported concerns about the poor battery life of Motorola’s body-worn cameras. Inadequate battery performance can lead to frequent recharges, which may result in gaps in video coverage and undermine the reliability of the equipment. The ability to review videos directly from the device was also problematic, with officers facing difficulties in accessing and managing footage. This can further impede operational efficiency and delay the assessment of critical evidence.
In summary, while Motorola’s body-worn cameras are competitively priced, the issues with customer service, battery life, and video review capabilities highlight potential challenges. These factors could affect the overall functionality and effectiveness of the equipment, making it a less favorable option compared to vendors offering more robust support and reliable performance.
LensLock
LensLock has emerged as the most advantageous choice for the San Marino Police Department, with a total projected cost of $294,337.10 over five years.
This vendor provides a Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS)-compliant solution and in addition to BWCs, would provide the department with in-car camera equipment at no additional cost. This will enhance project affordability, as the existing and aging in-car video equipment will be replaced with new equipment.
CJIS, a division of the FBI sets the standard that regulates data security and privacy for state, local, and federal law enforcement. All LensLock solutions confidently utilize the secure and FBI-CJIS compliant cloud storage provided by the Microsoft Azure Government Cloud. This exclusive cloud is accessible only to U.S. federal, state, local, and tribal governments and their partners, and is operated by screened U.S. citizens. This is an important aspect of the project, as this compliance refers to the set of security standards that all organizations handling criminal justice information must adhere to.
In addition to competitive pricing, LensLock offers a range of sole-source services that further enhance its appeal. These include LensLock Video Services, which cover all-inclusive cameras, mounts, replacements, and unlimited data storage. LensLock Portal provides a robust digital evidence management system. LensLock provides unlimited outsourced redaction services at no additional charge, ensuring compliance and security in handling sensitive information. Furthermore, LensLock integrates Bluetooth technology for seamless connectivity and enhanced functionality. This service integrates law enforcement vehicles, body-worn cameras, and other cutting-edge technology to ensure cameras automatically record digital evidence.
LensLock’s customer service is tailored to the needs of smaller departments, providing highly professional, responsive, and supportive assistance. Their commitment to technology upgrades includes replacing all devices every 30 months and upgrading outdated in-car cameras, ensuring that the equipment remains current and effective. The equipment provided by LensLock is a lease service model, so the equipment is not owned by the city. A few benefits to this pricing model are reduced upfront cost, a structured payment plan, protection against outdated equipment (replaced every 30 months), and the city is not mired to costly equipment if they decide to change vendors. The integration of their systems on a single platform simplifies video data management, enhancing operational efficiency and allowing officers to focus on their core responsibilities without being hindered by fragmented technology.
The All-Inclusive Video Services package from LensLock offers a compelling advantage for the department. Under this package, the department is not responsible for any replacement costs of cameras or parts during the contract period. Additionally, the benefit of unlimited data storage means that the department will not need to worry about upgrading to larger servers or facing increased costs. This unique offering ensures that both data and equipment are covered at no extra charge, setting LensLock apart in the market.
LensLock’s Digital Evidence Management system integrates all video and image data into a single, secure cloud-based server. This streamlined solution enhances the efficiency of disseminating, retaining, and managing digital evidence, significantly reducing the time required for these processes.
Currently, the department's video systems are limited to in-car recording, capturing only a small portion of the evidence and missing key interactions occurring outside the vehicle. The existing audio recording system linked to the in-car cameras has a restricted range, limiting its effectiveness in capturing sound from the officer when they are too far away from the vehicle.
Implementing the Body-Worn Camera Program will ensure comprehensive coverage during public interactions. The LensLock proposal includes an upgrade of the department’s current in-car camera systems across all patrol vehicles with the added benefit of unlimited cloud storage. The proposal also includes expanding this storage to the drone program and incorporating advanced redaction software, aimed at simplifying the process of fulfilling Public Records Act requests and improving overall efficiency.
In conclusion, while Axon and Motorola are reputable and well-known vendors in the industry, LensLock stands out as the best choice for the San Marino Police Department. LensLock’s combination of cost-effectiveness, comprehensive warranty, excellent customer service, and operational efficiency makes it the most suitable option, aligning well with the department’s needs and budgetary considerations. The implementation of the BWC program will not result in the need for additional personnel or staffing.
Department Policy on Body-Worn Cameras
The body-worn camera policy outlines clear guidelines pertaining to activation criteria, data storage, and privacy protections to ensure adherence to legal standards and safeguard the rights of all individuals involved.
Ultimately, integrating BWCs into our operations signifies a commitment to professionalism and proactive engagement with our community. By navigating these discussions thoughtfully and inclusively, we can leverage technology to strengthen public trust, uphold transparency, and enhance the overall effectiveness of our services.
FISCAL IMPACT & PROCUREMENT REVIEW
The estimated cost includes body-worn cameras, all new in-car cameras, 5- year warranty with free replacement of body-worn cameras after 30 months, CAD integration with MARK 43, redaction software for the records manager for PRA requests, hosting of legacy and drone data, unlimited Cloud storage, and training. The first year includes installation costs and training. This request is eligible to be paid by the COPS Fund.
Initial year cost of $61,947.42 will be funded by COPS Fund. The Adopted FY 24/25 Budget includes an appropriation of $60,197.61 in account # 233-30- 4613-0002. A budget adjustment is needed in the amount of $1,749.81 to cover the first-year cost. The increase in cost is due to additional body-worn cameras needed. The COPS fund can absorb this increased budget amendment.
Contract Years 2-5 will be included into each yearly Cops Fund budget at $58,097.42.
EQUIPMENT EXPENSE
Body-Worn Cameras & Data Plan $38,364
In-car Video & Data Plan $18,543
Tax $5,040.42
Total $61,947.42
BWC
Vendor Testing and Evaluation Critiques Cost
Axon
▪ Poor/Unresponsive customer service
▪ Did not provide redaction demo or updated
quote
▪ Camera warranty replacement never
confirmed by vendor
▪ Drone video service additional ($35,548.96
for 5 years)
▪ Two separate systems for BWC and in-car
cameras
▪ WiFi connectivity issues
▪ 37 BWCs with 4 docking stations sold
separately
$360,013.53
LensLock
▪ One system for BWC and in-car cameras
▪ In-car camera replacement
▪ Positive and timely customer service
interactions
▪ 30-month replacement for BWC and in-car
cameras
▪ CAD integration with Mark43
▪ Drone video integration included
$294,337.10
▪ Officers tested/evaluated over 30 days and
found system optimal amongst all three
BWC products
▪ High-definition video quality
▪ Ease of operation
▪ 40 BWCs and 7 in-car cameras with
docking stations included
Motorola
▪ Two separate systems for BWC and in-car
cameras
▪ Battery died quickly
▪ In-field playback was slow
▪ Video uploads slowly
▪ Least desired for operability amongst
officers
▪ Redaction software was acceptable but not
as desired as LensLock’s software
▪ BWC had to be docked to review videos
▪ 37 BWCs with additional cost per battery
(total $4,070.00)
▪ Additional cost for WiFi and transfer
stations
$199,124.40
Potential Funding Source
The Police Department is currently in Phase II of the approval process for a federal grant earmarked for law enforcement agencies interested in establishing or expanding a BWC program. The grant award is in the amount of $80,000 and must be matched by the City of San Marino dollar for dollar. COPS funds are eligible for use for this match purpose. The performance period for this grant is three years beginning January 1, 2024, and concluding December 31, 2027. Once the grant is approved by the Bureau of Justice Assistance and Justice Systems Strategies, Inc. (JSS), staff will bring the acceptance of grant funds for Council approval.
LEGAL REVIEW
The City Attorney's office has reviewed this report and approved as to form.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with LensLock, Inc. for body-worn cameras and in-car cameras, in the amount not to exceed $294,337.10 for the term ending October 31, 2029.
If the City Council concurs with staff’s recommendation, an appropriate motion would be:
“I move to authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with LensLock, Inc. for body-worn and in-car cameras, in the amount not to exceed $294,337.10 for the term ending October 31, 2029, and approve a COPS Fund FY 24/25 budget appropriation of $1,749.81.”
ATTACHMENTS
1. LensLock, Inc. Cost Proposal
2. Professional Services Agreement with LensLock, Inc.
3. Policy 439 – Body-Worn Camera Video (Draft Version 10-9-2024)