25.139
Targeted Impact Tier
Contracts
25.140
FY 22-23 Program Report
Agency Name: United Way of Santa Cruz County Program Name: Cradle to Career Condition: Thriving Families Tier: Targeted Budget: $715,500.00 Goal FY 22-23 Goal FY 22-23
Unduplicated Participants
Total UnduplicatedParticipants 385 408
How Many Activities/Services Will Be Provided?
3 new hires (Community Organizer deployed at 3 school
sites) 3 3
C2C Promotoras deployed at 3 schools 3 3
Develop initial collaborative action plans with two or more school districts 2 3
At least one new service or activity at 3 schools 1 1
Countywide Advisory Board in place 1 1
One or more Hopes and Dreams workshop at 3 schools 1 1
One or more designated youth-focus C2C Advisory Board
meetings with Youth Action Network members 1 1
Learning and Leadership Circle Formed and launched with two or more meetings held 2 2
Goal FY 22-23
Age
0-5 20% 13%
6-18 50% 46%
19-59 30% 41%
60+ 0% 0%
Unknown 0% 0%
Goal FY 22-23
Language
English 75% 27%
Spanish 25% 56%
Other 0% 0%
Unknown 0% 17%
Ethnicity
African American 3% 1%
Asian 5% 1%
Latino 50% 37%
Multi-racial 10% 1%
Native American/Alaskan 1% 1%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 0.50% 2%
White 30.50% 19%
Other 0% 1%
Unknown 0% 37%
Gender
Female 48.50% 39%
Male 48.5 20%
Transgender- Female 0.50% 0%
Transgender- Male 0.50% 0%
Other 2% 0%
Unknown 0% 41%
Location
Capitola 0% 0%
Santa Cruz 34% 33%
Scotts Valley 0% 0%
Watsonville 0% 6%
Unincorporated Mid-County (e.g., Live Oak, Soquel, Aptos ) 33% 31% Unincorporated North County (e.g. , Davenport ) 0% 0%
Unincorporated San Lorenzo Valley (e.g., Ben Lomond ) 33% 19% Unincorporated South County (e.g., Freedom ) 0% 0%
Unknown 0% 11%
Goal FY 22-23 Goal FY 22-23
How Well Did We Provide Service?
How many participiants did you survey? 385 83
80% of program participants report being either “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with program services as measured by a onequestion participant survey that will be completed by 06/30/2023. (Direct Services)
80% 88%
80% of people engaged with capacity-building activities report being either “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with participation as measured by a one-question survey that will be completed by 06/30/2023. (Capacity Building)
80% 100%
Goal FY 22-23 Goal FY 22-23
Is Anyone Better Off?
100% of participating schools will increase the number and diversity of services and supports at schools by one or more activities, measured by the development of MOUs by
06/30/23.
100% 100%
100% of participating schools will increase the number of families engaged with their student’s education at the school site, measured by counts of family engagement activities (ongoing, reported by 06/30/23).
100% 100%
Additional CORE Questions (The maximum length is limited to 750 characters in the below boxes)
25.141
1. Briefly describe any progress and/or successes your CORE program achieved implementing its activities during FY 2022- 2023. (Recommended 2-4 sentences)
C2C expanded to 3 new districts through 5 new schools as a result of CORE funding. MOUs were developed with each school, and infrastructure was built across districts to support partnerships. School leadership worked with C2C to assess their systems and structures of family engagement and equity. Community Organizers met and initiated relationships with the school staff and with families to understand their hopes and dreams for their children and for the school community. The Learning and Leadership Circle was launched, engaging families and formal decision-makers to identify policy priorities and build skills for change. The Circle was county-wide, engaging people from across the county.
2. (Optional, Success Stories) Please share a short story about the experience of a participant or family that received services funded through this contract during FY 2022-2023. Please state the specific activity that was provided and the impact or positive change that occurred as a result of the service(s) provided. *Please make sure to change any identifying
information, such as names.*
A mom from SCCS contacted a C2C Organizer to ask for support. She had found black mold growing in her apartment, making her daughter sick. The landlord responded by giving the family 30 days to move out. The Organizer immediately supported the mom in housing websites, building computer literacy skills, and providing translation. They checked in regularly. The Organizer continued to help the parent respond to emails and set up tours. Thankfully, the family successfully moved into a new apartment before the end of the month. She also applied for a new neighborhood low-income housing longer-term option. Lastly, the Organizer helped the parent sign her daughter up for the SC Soccer Camp Scholarship. She was very grateful for the support.
3. Please describe any challenges your agency experienced in implementing its CORE funded program.
Community Organizers had difficulty fully connecting and establishing themselves in 2 of the 3 new districts.C2C started its work in the new school sites mid-year, which wasn’t the ideal time for outreach. At least one of these districts, San Lorenzo Valley, experienced natural disasters that also impacted access. Office space was at a premium at all schools, and the Organizers did not have office space available to work at the school site. Often principals were very busy and did not have time to meet with the Organizer to troubleshoot challenges or approve the parent-requested activities and programming.C2C staff reviewed these challenges and identified new pathways and solutions for the 2023-24 school year.
4.Have you encountered challenges in collecting
CORE program or participant data?
Yes No
5. If you answered yes, what challenges did you experience? (Recommended 2-4 sentences)
C2C invested considerable time in developing data infrastructure, but it was not ready to fully implement during the reporting time frame. C2C also experienced setbacks in data sharing and privacy concerns with schools but will continue to work towards effective data sharing in service of students and families. Challenges with data collection are evidenced in “unknown” counts in some aspects of demographics.
6. What technical assistance can HSD or the CORE Institute provide to support your data collection activities?
There are also continued challenges in matching CORE data collection requirements to the C2C model. Defining “service” can be challenging, and asking families for demographic information has felt understandably uncomfortable for some C2C participants. In the next year, we will revise the data collection approach to better meet CORE needs and also hope to continue discussions about how to balance CORE expectations with what is realistic for families and schools to provide. for families and schools to provide. It may also help to include a place in reporting to provide additional explanations for counts and metrics.
7. During FY 2022-2023, did your CORE program staff
participate in a CORE Institute event (e.g., Coffee Chats or Conversations)?
Yes No
8. During FY 2022-2023, how did your CORE program
engage its staff on issues of equity?
The C2C Racial Equity committee developed and conducted Racial Equity training for staff, community partners, and Parent Coordinators. The committee is made up of both parents and C2C staff. The training, which was simultaneously translated, was facilitated by one of the C2C parents and a trainer. The committee agreed to bring this training to more Parent Leaders and the Promotoras, so all C2C participants will have shared language and understanding of racial equity and how to address inequities in the community.
9. In the CORE RFP, your program indicated an equity issue your program would address. How has your program
impacted this equity issue in FY 2022-2023?
C2C addressed equity at multiple levels. At the school/structure level, assessments with school leadership helped to identify strengths and gaps in school communication and family engagement opportunities. This assessment centered equity. At the individual level, C2C organizers focused on support for families that may face barriers to engaging with school.
Organizers accomplished this through personal outreach. Finally, and perhaps most impactfully, C2C addressed equity through listening and action. Organizers learned about issues and opportunities from families and supported relevant activities (e.g., technology workshops and summer program scholarships) to support children and families.
25.142
1 Overview of Emerging Themes from the Community Engagement Process • There was interest in clarifying the intent for CORE funding. Participants asked whether this money is intended for existing safety net services, for new innovative programs, or both? • Most believe funds should be distributed using a data informed approach aligned with an equity framework. Data should be disaggregated by age, geography, race and ethnicity. • Most believe the RFP should not prioritize applicants that have the ability to leverage funds (state and federal).
• Most believe the RFP should not score past performance of programs. • Most believe large agencies should be limited from applying for smaller grant amounts and that a large agency should be defined by both staff and budget size. • Most believe the RFP should set a cap on the total amount of CORE funding agencies can apply for.
• There was no alignment on how to prioritize the CORE funding by a population of focus (e.g., children or older adults), CORE condition, or region (e.g., San Lorenzo Valley or South County).
• There was no alignment on whether a percentage of CORE funding should be set aside (i.e., not included in the RFP process) for distribution after the recommended awards. • Any prioritization within the RFP should include evidence-based data, full transparency, and clear guidelines and parameters of the process.
Summary of Community Engagement Questions and Comments
In the community engagement sessions, respondents were shown graphics on the RFP process timeline and poverty data as a part of the discussion prompts, prior to being asked a series of questions. Survey respondents were also provided the poverty data followed by the same series of questions.
Request for Proposal (RFP) Process and Timeline
In the engagement and listening sessions respondents were shown a graphic of the RFP process and timeline. Feedback shared during the engagement sessions and the survey echoed themes raised during the most recent RFP Lessons Learned process.
Collective of Results and Evidence-based Investments (CORE) Request for Proposal (RFP) Community Engagement Process From October 16 through November 3, 2023, Human Services Staff (HSD) held 6 Community Engagement Sessions (4 virtual, 2 in-person) and provided an online survey about the CORE Request for Proposal (RFP) process. Both the engagement sessions and survey provided an opportunity to respond to questions regarding the CORE RFP process. This document provides a summary of those responses.
25.143
2 • Most appreciated that the RFP’s timeframe was extended from the last RFP. • Many wanted clearer definitions of who is eligible to apply, how equity will be operationalized, and the scoring rubric in the RFP.
• Many wanted the RFP Technical Assistance to have a more explicit focus on the scoring rubric used by the reviewers.
• Participants wanted increased panelist diversity in the scoring process of the RFP. • Most asked for the RFP to be simplified by making the application less time consuming and having clearer questions.
Using Data to Prioritize CORE Investments Funding
In both the engagement sessions and the survey, respondents were shown poverty data disaggregated by race as an example of using data to set funding priorities. They were asked how these data related to their work and other data points their organization uses. • Most participants stated their organizations are working directly with individuals in poverty or can connect different aspects of their work with the metric. • Many stated that you need more data/indicators than just poverty to understand community needs.
• Other data suggestions included community health, hospital, school, crime, populationspecific, geographically based, and climate data.
What are the equity implications of treating applicants differently based on whether they can leverage state and federal funds?
• Most participants were against treating applicants differently based on leveraging funds because it excluded many agencies that do not have the capacity to leverage state and federal funding sources.
• Some participants were in favor because it would allow more funding and resources to be brought into Santa Cruz County to amplify the work and services offered in the community.
What are the equity implications of treating applicants differently based on their prior contracted performance with the City and County? • Most participants were against this approach because it would favor already funded programs and may disadvantage new programs that do not have prior history as a contractor with the City and County.
• Some also questioned how this criterion would be incorporated fairly. For example, if an agency’s staff were different than a prior team, should they be accountable for prior performance issues?
• Some were in favor because it provides accountability with potential of an improvement plan and can result in funding effective and (data) proven programs.
25.144
3 What are the equity implications of excluding large agencies from applying in the small grant tier? How do we define a “large” agency? For example, is it based on the size of their budget versus staffing?
• Most were in favor because smaller agencies have fewer resources to apply for funding compared to larger agencies and this would allow a more equitable distribution in the community.
• Some were against because it puts artificial limits on larger agencies who still may have small programs (within their larger agency) that need funding. • Many participants suggested defining a large agency by their budget and staff size.
What are the equity implications when agencies are restricted from applying for unlimited or large proportions of CORE funding?
• Most participants were in favor because limits promote the local monies having a varied, collective impact on local needs by distributing funds among different programs. • Some were against because limits not based on merits restrict agencies from funding and resources that would allow them to expand important work in the community.
If a portion of the CORE funding were prioritized to meet specific critical community needs such as unsheltered individuals or natural disasters, what would be the equity implications in making this type of shift? • Opinions were divided on this approach, but most agreed that clear and evidence-based data would have to be provided to make this shift and justify the prioritization. • Those in favor thought CORE funding could be used to meet emerging needs in the community.
• Those against felt this would limit an already small pool of funding, which may further compound community inequities.
If a percentage of CORE funding was not included in the competitive RFP process and was set aside for distribution after the recommended awards are announced, what would the equity implications be?
• Opinions were divided on this item. Those in favor thought this could work if the decisions are based on data demonstrating needs and priority areas, including full transparency, clear guidelines, and parameters of the process.
• Those against felt the RFP process should dictate CORE funding, since all CORE conditions are important, and all other programs would have to compete. They also expressed this creates the opportunity of introducing political bias and conflict of interest from the Board of Supervisors and City Council and may threaten the integrity of CORE.
25.145
4 Major Themes and Suggestions
Agency on Aging (AAA) Santa Cruz County:
• CORE funding priorities should be clear and consider current and historically funded programs in its priorities, particularly those funding older adult services. • CORE funding decisions should account for both programs getting funded and those losing funding.
• Consider ways to increase the CORE budget to be able to fund more programs. • Consider how to make the RFP appeals process more transparent.
South County Triage Group:
• CORE should commit to disaggregating data by geography, race and ethnicity, income, age, and other factors.
• Include the Pajaro community residents in CORE and other county investments. • The CORE RFP review panels and any other decision-making body should be proportional, and representative of community members.
• CORE funding should be proportional to the needs in the community, based on data, and address the disproportionate needs of South County residents. • CORE funding should prioritize agencies with a confirmed commitment to equity, data disaggregation, and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
• Align the CORE process with the City of Watsonville’s Health in All Policies and with Santa Cruz Health Services Strategic Plans.
• Consider prioritizing agencies engaged in anti-poverty prevention and service work.
Childhood Advisory Council
• CORE should consider funding early childcare programs, which have consistently been cut by the Board of Supervisors and the City of Santa Cruz. • CORE should clearly articulate its funding priority areas. This will help agencies understand whether or not they should apply for CORE funds. • Technical Assistance sessions for the CORE RFP should continue.
25.146
CORE Prioritization Methodology
The Collective of Results and Evidence-based (CORE) Investments is both a funding model and a movement designed to equitably improve the well-being of county residents. Based on the 2022 Lessons Learned report and direction given to staff at the April 25, 2023 Board presentation to engage the community in a priorities and values conversation, prior to the next RFP draft, staff completed the analysis below. Specifically, staff looked at available data and reports as well as the County budget using the CORE Conditions of Health & Well-being equity framework.
Methodology Development
Through the CORE lessons learned, community engagement, county analysis and recent adoption of a County equity statement, key questions emerged about what data should be used to inform decision making for the limited General Fund dollars available through CORE. HSD developed a methodology to support prioritization of the limited CORE funding to create maximum equitable impact. The CORE Conditions of Health and Well-being (see Table 1) will continue to be used as the foundational equity framework to align strategic priorities. More information on this can be found at Santa Cruz (datasharescc.org).
Table 1: CORE Conditions of Health and Well-being
CORE Condition CORECommunity ImpactStatements
Lifelong Learning & Education ● Equitable access to high-quality education and learning opportunities ●Quality of education and learning opportunities and environments ● Participation in education and learning opportunities ● Skills & educational achievement
● Educational attainment & workforce readiness
Community Connectedness ●Connection to others
●Access to diverse community arts and cultural experiences ● Increased civic engagement
Thriving Families ● Increased resilience of children and youth ● Increased resilience among adults
● Increased resilience among older and dependent adults Healthy Environments ●Quality of the natural environment and natural resources ●Climate change resiliency
● Safe, affordable, accessible recreational spaces
● Safe, affordable, accessible transportation system
Stable, Affordable Housing &
Shelter
● Increased inventory of housing, especially affordable housing ● Increased availability of safe shelter
●Access to safe, stable, affordable housing
Safe & Just Community ● Individuals and families are free from all forms of violence ● Neighborhoods and communities are safe
● Justice systems are fair, restorative, and promote healing Health & Wellness ● Equitable access to affordable, quality care ●Appropriate utilization of care
●Behaviors that maintain or improve health
●Optimal health status
Economic Security & Social
Mobility
● Increased economic vitality
●Higher levels of self-sufficiency
● Increased social, economic, and occupational mobility ● Increased generational wealth
25.147
County Data + Funding Context = Impact Opportunity
CORE Conditions of Health & Well-being
The methodology requires leveraging the use of existing County reports, authored and presented by subject matter experts, to demonstrate critical needs in each of the CORE Conditions of Health and Well-being. This in addition to a high-level analysis of the current County budget deconstructed to align with the CORE Conditions of Health and Well-being (see Table 2) provide an opportunity to collectively impact identified needs in our community (see Table 3).
County Budget by CORE Condition
Summary
Analysis of the County budget is a multifaceted and nuanced process due to numerous funding sources and complexity within those sources. To better understand how the budget aligns with the CORE Conditions of Health & Well-being the FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget was apportioned into the CORE Conditions. The first column, “FY 2023-24 Adopted Budget Expenses” is how much money the County allocates to each CORE Condition followed by a column that demonstrates the overall percentage of the budget. The “General Fund Contribution” column is how much of our County’s discretionary revenue is assigned to each of the CORE Conditions followed by a column that demonstrates the percentage ofthe General Fund contribution. The majority (65%) of the General Fund is invested in Safe & Just Community.
Table 2: County Budget by CORE Condition*
CORE Condition
FY2023-24Adopted
BudgetExpenses
% of Adopted
BudgetExpenses
GeneralFund
Contribution
% ofGeneralFund
Contribution
Lifelong Learning & Education $ 8,911,187 1% $ - 0%
Community Connectedness $ 11,729,625 1% $ 11,008,854 5% Thriving Families $ 42,436,112 3% $ 956,411 0%
Healthy Environments $ 48,711,936 4% $ 10,432,322 5%
Stable, Affordable Housing &
Shelter $ 89,670,955 7% $ 6,555,997 3%
Safe & Just Community $ 247,688,955 20% $ 139,300,285 65% Health & Wellness $ 394,650,114 31% $ 21,717,831 10%
Economic Security & Social
Mobility $ 418,984,495 33% $ 25,728,274 12%
GrandTotal $ 1,262,783,380 100% $ 215,699,974 100%
*Each item in the current County Budget was assessed and allocated a primary CORE Condition. County operational costs were counted separately and spread proportionally amongst the CORE Conditions.
25.148
Table 3: County Budget by CORE Condition and Aligned County Reports CORE Condition
FY 2023-24
Adopted Budget
Expenses
% of
Budget
Expenses
Aligned County Reports and Highlighted Issues
Lifelong Learning &
Education $8,911,187 1%
Santa Cruz County Office of Education 2019-2024
Strategic Plan
Only half of all children ages 3-4 were enrolled in preschool or Transitional Kindergarten. (pg.6)
Santa Cruz County Early Care, Education, and After-School Care Strategic Plan - 2023
There is a shortage of about 14,700 spaces across all age groups in the County, or, 51% of children that need a childcare space do not have one, and 49% of demand for childcare for all ages is being met. (pg. 29)
Community
Connectedness $11,729,625 1%
A Santa Cruz Like Me
• 16% ofrepresentatives identify as Latino and 17% of
representatives identify as having a disability compared to 35% and 34% of the County population respectively. There was no young adult representation from the survey participation, compared to 13% of the County population. (pg.2)
• The City of Watsonville, which is 31% of the County population, is significantly underrepresented with only 16% representation in County Boards and Commissions. (pg.2)
Thriving Families $42,436,112 3%
Thrive by Five
Strong Start scores (max of 12) for the two largest cities, Santa Cruz (10.1) and Watsonville (8.5), illuminate geographic differences in the conditions into which children are born. The Strong Start Index can be used to understand the number of assets children have at birth, including identifying areas of the community in which children have fewer assets and where additional services and supports may be important to promote equity. (pg. 22)
Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors Board Memo- Update on AARP “Age Friendly” Designation August 8, 2023
Master Plan on Aging, 5 Bold Goals: Housing for all ages and stages, health reimagined, inclusion and equity not isolation, caregiving that works, affording aging need aligns with significant increase in older adult population in Santa Cruz County by year 2030 (presentation slides 5 & 6)
Healthy
Environments $48,711,936 4%
County of Santa Cruz Climate Action and Adaptation
Plan
• Reduce vehicle miles traveled through higher density zoning for housing developments along transit corridors and optimize use of remote work. (pg. 39)
• Reduce at-risk communities from wildfire risk through improved forest health management. (pg. 49)
25.149
Stable, Affordable
Housing & Shelter $89,670,955 7%
Santa Cruz County Homeless Count and Survey
• Decrease in homelessness exceptfor an increase in the City of Watsonville. (pg. 13)
• A large number of people experiencing homelessness with a disabling condition. (pg. 24)
Safe & Just
Community $247,688,955 20%
Santa Cruz County CCP Public Safety Realignment Implementation Plan
• Open and bring the South County Success Center to full operation, including services during non-traditional hours. (pg. 9) • Complete the survivor services system mapping and develop a plan and proposal for a Santa Cruz County Trauma Recovery Center that addresses specific populations to be served. (pg. 10) Health & Wellness $394,650,114 31%
SCC Community Health Improvement Plan
• Increase the number of children ages 0-5 in Santa Cruz County accessing quality dental care. (pg. 19)
• Increase access to quality and affordable primary care. (pg. 23) Economic Security
& Social Mobility $418,984,495 33%
Santa Cruz County State of the Workforce
• Housing costs continue to have sizable effects on the current and potential workforce for the county. (pg. 18)
• A declining and aging workforce in the transportation, water, housing, and energy sectors implies bigger problems in the future. These sectors will need to replenish and grow their labor force by tapping into younger talent and expanding the pipeline of potential workers. (pg. 25)
Recommendation
By using the methodology outlined above and with the information in the tables presented in this document HSD has developed a first recommendation to focus on CORE Conditions where additional General Fund investment will yield the greatest impact.
FY 2023-24
CORE Condition Adopted Budget
Expenses
% of
Budget
Expenses
Aligned County Reports and Highlighted Issues
25.150
City Council
AGENDA REPORT
DATE: 12/04/2023
AGENDA OF: 12/12/2023
DEPARTMENT: Police
SUBJECT: Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant Proposal – Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) (PD)
RECOMMENDATION: Motion to:
1) Approve the attached FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant proposal letter and direct staff to send the letter to the Santa Cruz County Office of Response, Recovery, and Resilience, Authorized Body of Five no later than December 31, 2023; 2) Approve the installation of automated license plate readers within Santa Cruz city limits, purchased with funds received through the FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant; and
3) Review the Santa Cruz Police Department’s Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Policy and provide comment.
BACKGROUND: The FY 2024 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) is one of three grant programs that support the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)/Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) focus on enhancing the ability of state, local, tribal, and territorial governments, as well as nonprofit organizations, to prevent, prepare for, protect against, and respond to potential terrorist attacks. These grant programs are part of a comprehensive set of measures authorized by Congress and implemented by the DHS to help strengthen the nation’s communities against potential terrorist attacks and other hazards. HSGP is composed of three grant programs:
• State Homeland Security Program
• Urban Area Security Initiative
• Operation Stonegarden
The County of Santa Cruz is eligible to be awarded an estimated $329,000 through the FY24 State Homeland Security Program Grant (SHSPG), which will be distributed among multiple agencies, including Santa Cruz County Health Services Agency, Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office, City of Santa Cruz Police and Fire Departments, and Scotts Valley Police Department.
FY 2024 SHSPG project proposals will be submitted to the Santa Cruz County Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience (OR3) and reviewed by the Program’s Authorized Body of
26.1 Five for the final SHSPG application submission. All proposals must address at least one of the grant’s eleven priority areas:
1. Enhance Information and Intelligence Sharing and Cooperation with Federal Agencies, including DHS (National Priority)
2. Enhance the Protection of Soft Targets/Crowded Places (National Priority)
3. Enhance Cybersecurity (National Priority)
4. Enhancing Community Preparedness and Resilience (National Priority)
5. Combating Domestic Violence Extremism
6. Strengthen Emergency Communications Capabilities through Planning, Governance, Technology, and Equipment
7. Enhance Medical and Public Health Preparedness
8. Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration
9. Enhance Multi-Jurisdictional/Inter-Jurisdictional All-Hazards/Whole Community Incident Planning, Response & Recovery Capabilities
10. Protect Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (including Food & Agriculture)
11. Enhance Election Security (National Priority)
The City of Santa Cruz Police Department has received funds through the SHSPG in prior years (FY 2019, 2020 & 2023) to cover the cost of body armor, a Throwbot, specialized visual equipment, and personal ballistic shields.
DISCUSSION: The Santa Cruz Police Department is seeking approval of an FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant Proposal Letter addressed to the OR3 Body of Five members to request funds to support the purchase of automated license plate readers (ALPRs). The ALPRs would be installed within the city limits of Santa Cruz and accessed by the Santa Cruz Police Department.
If approved, the proposal letter will be submitted to the OR3 Body of Five for review no later than December 31, 2023. OR3 will finalize and submit their application to the California Office of Emergency Services no later than January 31, 2024. Final approval of applications is expected to occur between September and October of 2024. The performance period, when funds can be spent, is expected to occur between October 2024 and June 2026.
Within the proposal letter to OR3, the Santa Cruz Police Department has requested $84,000 to lease fourteen (14) Flock Safety fixed ALPRs for two years to enhance the department’s crime prevention and investigative capabilities throughout the City of Santa Cruz.
The requested equipment is pre-approved by FEMA’s authorized equipment list and meets several of the eleven grant priority areas.
Vehicle data obtained by the fixed APLRs would provide information to police officers to identify stolen vehicles, locate missing children or adults, and investigate individuals wanted for serious crimes. In addition, the city’s numerous tourist attractions and public schools create soft target opportunities for criminal and terrorist activities. The use of ALPRs would build on the Santa Cruz Police Department’s capabilities to use real-time information and historical analysis to identify and investigate potential threats and enhance its support towards regional public safety efforts.
26.2 Please see the Santa Cruz Police Department’s draft ALPRs Policy, ALPR Usage and Privacy Policy, and frequently asked questions about ALPRs in the provided attachments.
HEALTH IN ALL POLICIES (HiAP): The proposed FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant project proposal is consistent with the Health in All Policies pillars of equity and public health in that it will assist the city in dedicating funding towards infrastructure that reduces bias and supports neighborhood safety and communities free of crime, violence, and social disorder.
FISCAL IMPACT: Approval of the FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant proposal letter would have no fiscal impact on the general fund. If funds are awarded to the Santa Cruz Police Department through the State Homeland Security Program Grant, approval of the FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant proposal letter will allow the City to accept $84,000 in grant funds with no cash match requirement.
Prepared By:
Catherine Brothers
Principal Management
Analyst
Submitted By:
Bernie Escalante
Chief of Police
Approved By:
Matt Huffaker
City Manager
ATTACHMENTS:
1. FAQ – AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS & SANTA CRUZ POLICE DEPARTMENT USE POLICY.PDF
2. FY 2024 STATE HOMELAND SECURITY PROGRAM GRANT PROPOSAL LETTER.PDF
3. SANTA CRUZ POLICE DEPARTMENT AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS (ALPRS) POLICY_DRAFT.PDF
4. SANTA CRUZ POLICE DEPARTMENT AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READER USAGE AND PRIVACY POLICY.PDF
26.3 FAQs – AutomaƟc License Plate Readers & Santa Cruz Police Department Policy on ALPRs 1 | P a g e
1. What is an AutomaƟc License Plate Reader (ALPR)?
Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) systems function to automatically capture an image of a vehicle and the vehicle’s license plate, transform the plate image into alphanumeric characters using optical character recognition, compare the plate number acquired to one or more databases (also known as “hotlists”) of vehicles of interest to law enforcement, and then alert law enforcement officers when a vehicle of interest has been observed. Databases can include the National Crime Information Center, California Department of Motor Vehicles, and local Be on the Lookout lists. The stored license plate data also provides law enforcement investigators with a pointer system that may help them identify vehicles associated with suspects, witnesses, or victims, and develop exculpatory information that assists them with focusing their investigative resources.
The data also allows law enforcement to connect serial criminal activities that may have occurred in disconnected law enforcement jurisdictions.
ALPR cameras can be installed on vehicles ("mobile ALPR") or attached to fixed objects like traffic lights or dedicated poles ("fixed ALPR").
2. Who has access to ALPR data?
ALPR systems are restricted to law enforcement personnel with 1. An official and legiƟmate law enforcement purpose for accessing the system. 2. A criminal case or incident number/name. 3. A lawful purpose with a need to know and right to know the informaƟon.
3. What is a lawful purpose, Need to Know, and Right to Know? The lawful purposes required for users to access the system are:
1. Locate Stolen, Wanted, or Suspect Vehicles.
2. Locate Suspect(s) of Criminal InvesƟgaƟon (Violent, Retail, CatalyƟc Convertor, etc.) or Arrest Warrant.
3. Locate Witnesses or VicƟms of Violent Crime.
4. Locate Missing Children and Elderly individuals (Amber / Silver Alerts).
5. Protect the Public during Special Events / SituaƟonal Awareness.
6. Protect CriƟcal Infrastructure.
Need to know is a standard that establishes when the requested informaƟon is perƟnent and necessary to the requesƟng agency in iniƟaƟng, furthering, or compleƟng the performance of a law enforcement acƟvity.
Right to know is a standard that establishes when the requester is acƟng in an official capacity and has statutory authority to obtain the informaƟon being sought.
26.4 FAQs – AutomaƟc License Plate Readers & Santa Cruz Police Department Policy on ALPRs 2 | P a g e
4. Is ALPR data shared for the purpose of immigraƟon enforcement? Santa Cruz Police Department Policy 414.2 Policy states Santa Cruz Police Department does not permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City of Santa Cruz or its contractors/subcontractors for the purpose of federal immigraƟon enforcement, pursuant to the California Values Act (Government Code § 7282.5; Government Code § 7284.2 et seq.) – these federal immigraƟon agencies include ImmigraƟons and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Patrol.
5. Where are ALPRs located?
ALPR units are aƩached to law enforcement vehicles or deployed at fixed locaƟons, where they collect license plate informaƟon from vehicles on public roadways, public property and vehicles that are within public view. Santa Cruz Police Department Policy 414.4(h)(1) OperaƟons, Invasion of Privacy states except when done pursuant to a court order such as a search warrant, it is a violaƟon of this policy to uƟlize the ALPR to record license plates except those of vehicles that are exposed to public view (e.g., vehicles on a public road or street, or that are on private property but whose license plate(s) are visible from a public road, street, or a place to which members of the public have access, such as the parking lot of a shop or other business establishment.)
6. Can ALPR devices see into a vehicle or capture occupant images? ALPR devices do not have illuminaƟon to aid in idenƟfying the driver of the vehicle. The purpose of the ALPR is to idenƟfy the vehicle, not the occupants. If ambient lighƟng is sufficient or a subject is outside, and near the vehicle, their image may be captured.
7. DO ALPR devices provide video surveillance?
No, ALPR systems only provide authorized law enforcement personnel with a single photo “pointer” for one moment in Ɵme and locaƟon where a vehicle was located to provide potenƟal leads to support criminal invesƟgaƟons.
26.5 FAQs – AutomaƟc License Plate Readers & Santa Cruz Police Department Policy on ALPRs 3 | P a g e
8. What company provides ALPRs?
Flock Safety is a company that provides, installs, and maintains ALPR devices. Flock Safety products are made and manufactured in the United States.
9. What are Flock’s security measures and privacy protecƟon policies? Flock Safety “Flock” products are NaƟonal Defense AuthorizaƟon Act (“NDAA”) compliant and Trade Agreements Act ("TAA") compliant.
The InformaƟon Security program at Flock aligns with industry-recognized security frameworks, including SOC 2 Type II, SOC 3 Type II, NIST Cybersecurity Framework, Cloud Security Alliance's Cloud Control Matrix, AWS FoundaƟonal Security Best PracƟces, and CIS AWS FoundaƟons Benchmarks.
Flock provided mulƟfactor authenƟcaƟon and single sign-on idenƟty management tools. A search reason is required for all searches conducted on Flock’s database. Flock devices are equipped with endpoint encrypƟon and asset management protecƟons.
The Agency/City owns photos generated by Flock Safety ALPR devices and are never sold or shared by Flock.
Flock does not support facial recogniƟon soŌware, and Flock’s database does not contain personally idenƟfiable informaƟon (i.e., data that can trace or idenƟfy a person).
10. How long are ALPR data maintained?
Santa Cruz Police Department policy 414.5 Data CollecƟon and RetenƟon states the AdministraƟon Deputy Chief is responsible for ensuring systems and processes are in place for the proper collecƟon and retenƟon of ALPR data. Data will be transferred from vehicles to the designated storage in accordance with department procedures.
All ALPR data downloaded to the server should be stored for a minimum of one year (Government Code § 34090.6) and in accordance with the established records retenƟon schedule. ThereaŌer, ALPR data should be purged unless it has become, or it is reasonable to believe it will become, evidence in a criminal or civil acƟon or is subject to a discovery request or other lawful acƟon to produce records. In those circumstances, the applicable data should be downloaded from the server onto portable media and booked into evidence.
ALPR vendor will store the data (data hosƟng) and ensure proper maintenance and security of data stored in their data towers. ALPR vendor will purge their data at the end of the 30 days of storage.
However, this will not preclude SCPD from maintaining any relevant vehicle data obtained from the system aŌer that period pursuant to the established City of Santa Cruz retenƟon schedule menƟoned above or outlined elsewhere. Relevant vehicle data are scans corresponding to the vehicle of interest on a hot list.
RestricƟons on use of ALPR Data: InformaƟon gathered or collected, and records retained by ALPR cameras or any other Santa Cruz Police Department (SCPD) ALPR system will not be sold, accessed,
26.6 FAQs – AutomaƟc License Plate Readers & Santa Cruz Police Department Policy on ALPRs 4 | P a g e
or used for any purpose other than legiƟmate law enforcement or public safety purposes. SCPD ALPR data shall not be shared with ImmigraƟons and Customs Enforcement unless under the authority of a valid court order.
11. How much do ALPRs cost?
Cost per ALPR device can vary depending on the model (fixed vs mobile and capabiliƟes). Flock’s Safety Falcon, a fixed infrastructure-free ALPR for standard two-lane roadways with moderate traffic, costs $3000 annually. An addiƟonal one-Ɵme installaƟon fee ranges between $150-$650. The annual fee covers the device lease, maintenance, and data management.
12. What other ciƟes or towns use ALPRs?
Within Santa Cruz County: ScoƩs Valley,
Capitol (Pending), Watsonville
Within the Bay Area: Morgan Hill, Los
Gatos, Monte Sereno, Milpitas, Santa Clara,
Foster City, Hillsborough, Millbrae,
Atherton, San Mateo, San Mateo County,
San Bruno, Novato, Fairfield, Dixon, Vallejo,
Vacaville, Rio Vista, Benicia, Piedmont,
Livermore, San Ramon, Danville, Hercules,
Orinda, Oakley, Mountain House,
Woodland, Roseville, Elk Grove, Grass
Valley, Salinas
Within California: Alhambra, El Monte,
Glendale, La Canada Flintridge, Monterey
Park, San Dimas, Arcadia, Azusa, Glendora,
Covina, West Covina, Pomona, Calabasas, La
Puente, Rosemead, Whiƫer, Santa Fe
Springs, Walnut, Pico Rivera, Cathedral City,
Riverside County Sheriff, Temecula, Moreno
Valley, Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake,
Beaumont, Indio, Norco, Atherton,
Roseville, Vallejo, Fullerton, PlacenƟa,
Stanton, Laguna Hills, Lake Forest, Seal
Beach, Oceanside, Bakersfield, Elk Grove,
Woodland, Grass Valley, San Ramon,
Danville, Livermore, Hercules, Vacaville,
Lake County Sheriff, Clear Lake, Fairfield,
Benicia, Rio Vista, Dixon,
Napa County Sheriff, San Mateo County
Sheriff, Novato, San Mateo PD, San Bruno,
Foster City, Colma, Hillsborough Alhambra,
El Monte, Glendale, Monterey Park, Arcadia,
Azusa, Glendora, Covina, West Covina,
Pomona, Calabasas, La Puente, Whiƫer,
Beverly Hills, San Marino, South Pasadena,
La Canada Flintridge, Santa Fe Springs,
Walnut, Rosemead, San Dimas, Pico Rivera,
Industry, Lancaster, Paramount, Bakersfield,
Santa Maria, Ventura, Port Hueneme,
Cathedral City, Temecula, Menifee, Moreno
Valley, Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake, San
Jacinto, Perris, Desert Hot Springs,
Beaumont, Barstow, Indio, Norco, Murrieta,
Bakersfield, Corona, Riverside, Redlands,
Seal Beach, Los Alamitos, Lake Forest,
HunƟngton Beach, Fullerton, PlacenƟa,
Stanton, Laguna Hills, Costa Mesa, Dana
Point, San Juan Capistrano, Oceanside, El
Centro, Brawley, Westmoreland
13. Where can I learn more about the Santa Cruz Police Department’s policy on ALPRs? The Santa Cruz Police Department posts a complete policy manual in the Policies and Training folder of the Department’s Transparency Portal at www.SantaCruzPolice.com
26.7 155 Center Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95060 • (831) 420-5810 • Fax (831) 420-5811 Bernie Escalante, Chief of Police
December 31, 2023
Authorized Body of Five
Office of Response, Recovery & Resilience
County of Santa Cruz
Dear Authorized Body of Five,
The Santa Cruz Police Department is submiƫng the following request for the upcoming FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant:
Equipment:
03OE-01-ALPR – System, Automated License Plate RecogniƟon (ALPR) Fixed, portable, or vehicle-mounted mobile system consisƟng of imaging technology and opƟcal character recogniƟon soŌware capable of determining the informaƟon on license plates.
QuanƟty:
A multiyear service agreement to lease fourteen fixed ALPRs to enhance the Santa Cruz Police Department’s crime prevention and investigative capabilities throughout the City of Santa Cruz.
Justification:
ALPRs are a widely adopted tool that utilizes technology to capture and record vehicle license plates and associate a temporal and spatial reference with each image. Vehicle information is temporarily stored, and pertinent data is readily available to help officers efficiently identify stolen vehicles, missing children or adults, and locate individuals wanted for investigation of serious crimes. Numerous tourist attractions, the University of California Santa Cruz, and fifteen city and charter K-12 schools, which draw hundreds of thousands of people into the city every year, create soft target opportunities for criminal and terrorist activity. The use of ALPRs, purposefully placed around the city, would build on the Santa Cruz Police Department’s capabilities to use real-time information and historical analysis to identify and investigate potential threats before criminal actions occur. In addition, building upon the existing network of ALPRs within the county and surrounding Bay Area, the Santa Cruz Police Department will enhance its support towards regional public safety efforts.
Cost: $84,000
Respecƞully,
Bernie Escalante, Chief of Police
26.8 Santa Cruz Police Department
Santa Cruz PD-CA, Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/11/08, All Rights Reserved. DRAFT Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Published with permission by Santa Cruz Police Department Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
415.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE
The purpose of this policy is to provide guidance for the capture, storage and use of digital data obtained through the use of Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) technology. 415.1.1 DEFINITIONS
Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR): A device that uses cameras and computer technology to capture images of every vehicle that passes the camera’s view and compare digital images to lists of known information of interest.
ALPR Operator: Trained department members who may utilize ALPR system/equipment. ALPR operators may be assigned to any position within the department, and the ALPR Administrator may order the deployment of the ALPR systems for use in various efforts.
ALPR Administrator: The Investigations Bureau Lieutenant or the Administration Deputy Chief's designee, serves as the ALPR Administrator for the department.
Hot List: A list of license plates associated with vehicles of interest compiled from one or more databases including, but not limited to, National Crime Information Center (NCIC), California Department of Motor Vehicles, local be on the lookout (BOLO's) lists, etc.
Vehicles of Interest: Including, but not limited to vehicles, which are reported as stolen; display stolen license plates or tags; vehicles linked to missing and/or wanted persons, and vehicles flagged by the Department of Motor Vehicle Administration or law enforcement agencies.
Detection: Data obtained by an ALPR of an image (such as a license plate) within public view that was read by the device, including potential images (such as the plate and description of vehicle on which it was displayed), and information regarding the location of the ALPR system at the time of the ALPR's read.
Hit: Alert from the ALPR system that a scanned license plate number may be in the NCIC or other law enforcement databases for a specific reason including, but not limited to, being related to a stolen car, wanted person, missing person, domestic violation protective order or terroristrelated activity. 415.2 POLICY
The policy of the Santa Cruz Police Department is to utilize ALPR technology to capture and store digital license plate data and images while recognizing the established privacy rights of the public.
All data and images gathered by the ALPR are for the official use of this department. Because such data may contain confidential information, it is not open to public review.
The Santa Cruz Police Department does not permit the sharing of ALPR data gathered by the City of Santa Cruz or its contractors/subcontractors for purpose of federal immigration enforcement, pursuant to the California Values Act (Government Code § 7282.5; Government Code § 7284.2 et seq.) – these federal immigration agencies include Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Patrol (CPB). Further, pursuant to Government Code section
26.9 Santa Cruz Police Department
Santa Cruz PD-CA, Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/11/08, All Rights Reserved. DRAFT Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Published with permission by Santa Cruz Police Department 1798.90.55, a public agency is not permitted to share ALPR information with private entities or out-of-state or federal agencies, including out-of-state and federal law enforcement agencies. 415.3 ADMINISTRATION
The ALPR technology, also known as License Plate Recognition (LPR), allows for the automated detection of license plates. It is used by the Santa Cruz Police Department to convert data associated with vehicle license plates for official law enforcement purposes, including identifying stolen or wanted vehicles, stolen license plates and missing persons. It may also be used to gather information related to active warrants, homeland security, electronic surveillance (plot movement of wanted suspect(s)), suspect interdiction and stolen property recovery.
All installation and maintenance of ALPR equipment, as well as ALPR data retention and access, shall be managed by the Administration Deputy Chief. The Administration Deputy Chief will assign members under his/her command to administer the day-to-day operation of the ALPR equipment and data. 415.3.1 ALPR ADMINISTRATOR
The Administration Deputy Chief shall be responsible for developing guidelines and procedures to comply with the requirements of Civil Code § 1798.90.5 et seq. This includes, but is not limited to (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53):
(a) The authorized purposes for using the ALPR system and collecting ALPR information. (b) A description of the job title or other designation of the members and independent contractors who are authorized to use or access the ALPR system or to collect ALPR information. (c) Training requirements for authorized users. (d) A description of how the ALPR system will be monitored to ensure the security of the information and compliance with applicable privacy laws. (e) The purposes of, process for, and restrictions on, the sale, sharing, or transfer of ALPR information to other persons.
(f) Procedures for system operators to maintain records of access in compliance with Civil Code § 1798.90.52. (g) The title of the official custodian, or owner, of the ALPR system responsible for implementing the policies and procedures provided in Civil Code section 1798.90.51 and 1798.90.53.
(h) A description of the reasonable measures that will be used to ensure the accuracy of ALPR information and correct data errors.
(i) The length of time ALPR information will be retained, and the process the ALPR operator will utilize to determine if and when to destroy retained ALPR information.
26.10 Santa Cruz Police Department
Santa Cruz PD-CA, Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/11/08, All Rights Reserved. DRAFT Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Published with permission by Santa Cruz Police Department 415.4 OPERATIONS
Use of an ALPR is restricted to the purposes outlined below. Department members shall not use, or allow others to use the equipment or database records for any unauthorized purpose (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53).
(a) An ALPR shall only be used for official law enforcement business. (b) An ALPR may be used in conjunction with any routine patrol operation or criminal investigation. Reasonable suspicion or probable cause is not required before using an ALPR.
(c) Partial license plates and unique vehicle descriptions reported during major crimes should be entered into the ALPR system in an attempt to identify suspect vehicles. (d) If practicable, The officer shall make every reasonable effort to verify an ALPR response through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) before taking enforcement action that is based solely on an ALPR alert.
Once an alert is received, the operator shall confirm that the observed license plate from the system matches the license plate of the observed vehicle. Before any law enforcement action is taken because of an ALPR alert, the alert will be verified through a CLETS inquiry via a mobile digital communicator or through dispatch. Members will not take any police action that restricts the freedom of any individual based solely on an ALPR alert unless it has been validated. Because the ALPR alert may relate to a vehicle and may not relate to the person operating the vehicle, officers are reminded that they need to have reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause to make an enforcement stop of any vehicle. For example, if a vehicle is entered into the system because of its association with a wanted individual, officers shall attempt to visually match the driver to the description of the wanted subject prior to making the stop or should have another legal basis for making the stop.
(e) Hot Lists. Designation of hot lists to be utilized by the ALPR system shall be made by the ALPR Administrator or their designee. Hot lists shall be obtained or compiled from sources as may be consistent with the purposes of the ALPR system set forth in this policy. Hot lists utilized by the department's ALPR system may be updated by agency sources more frequently than the department may be uploading them and thus the department's ALPR system will not have access to real time data. Occasionally, there may be errors in the ALPR system's read of a license plate. Therefore, an alert alone shall not be a basis for police action (other than following the vehicle of interest). Prior to initiation of a stop of a vehicle or other intervention based on an alert, department members shall undertake the following:
1. Verification of status on a hot list. An officer must receive confirmation, from a Santa Cruz Police Department Communications Dispatcher or other department computer device, that the license plate is still stolen, wanted, or otherwise of interest before proceeding (absent exigent circumstances). 2. Visual verification of license plate number. Officers shall visually verify that the license plate of interest matches identically with the image of the license plate number captured (read) by the ALPR, including both the alphanumeric characters of the license plate, state of issue, and vehicle descriptors before proceeding. Department members alerted to the fact that an observed motor
26.11 Santa Cruz Police Department
Santa Cruz PD-CA, Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/11/08, All Rights Reserved. DRAFT Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Published with permission by Santa Cruz Police Department vehicle's license plate is entered as a hot plate (hit) in a specific BOLO list are required to make a reasonable effort to confirm that a wanted person is actually in the vehicle and/or that a reasonable basis exists before a department member would have a lawful basis to stop the vehicle. 3. Department members will clear all stops from hot list alerts by indicating the positive ALPR hit, i.e., with an arrest or other enforcement action. If it is not obvious in the text of the call as to the correlation of the ALPR hit and the arrest, then the department member shall update with the Communications Dispatcher and original person and/or a crime analyst inputting the vehicle in the hot list (hit).
4. General hot lists (i.e. Stolen Vehicle System) will be automatically downloaded into the ALPR system a minimum of once a day with the most current data overwriting the old data. 5. All entries and updates of specific hot lists within the ALPR system will be documented by the requesting department member within the appropriate general offense report. As such, specific hot lists shall be approved by the ALPR Administrator (or their designee) before initial entry within the ALPR system. The updating of such a list within the ALPR system shall thereafter be accomplished pursuant to the approval of the department member's immediate supervisor. The hits from these data sources should be viewed as informational; created solely to bring the officer's attention to specific vehicles that have been associated with criminal activity.
All hot plates and suspect information entered into the ALPR system will contain the following information as a minimum:
(a) Entering department member's name
(b) Related case number
(c) Short synopsis describing the nature of the originating call (f) Training. No member of this Department shall operate ALPR equipment or access ALPR data without proper training or authorization to do so. (g) Login/Log-Out Procedure. To ensure proper operation and facilitate oversight of the ALPR system, all users will be required to have individual credentials for access and use of the systems and/or data, which has the ability to be fully audited. (h) Permitted/Impermissible Uses. The ALPR system, and all data collected, is the property of the Santa Cruz Police Department. Department personnel may only access and use the ALPR system for official and legitimate law enforcement purposes consistent with this policy. The following uses of the ALPR system are specifically prohibited:
1. Invasion of Privacy: Except when done pursuant to a court order such as a search warrant, it is a violation of this policy to utilize the ALPR to record license plates except those of vehicles that are exposed to public view (e.g., vehicles on a public road or street, or that are on private property but whose license plate(s) are visible from a public road, street, or a place to which members of the public have access, such as the parking lot of a shop or other business establishment.)
2. Harassment or Intimidation: It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system
26.12 Santa Cruz Police Department
Santa Cruz PD-CA, Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/11/08, All Rights Reserved. DRAFT Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Published with permission by Santa Cruz Police Department to harass and/or intimidate any individual or group. 3. Use Based on a Protected Characteristic. It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system or associated scan files or hot lists solely because of a person's or group's race, gender, religion, political affiliation, nationality, ethnicity, sexual orientation, disability, or other classification protected by law. 4. Personal Use: It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system or associated scan files or hot lists for any personal purpose. 5. First Amendment Rights. It is a violation of this policy to use the ALPR system or associated scan files or hot lists for the purpose or known effect of infringing upon First Amendment rights.
6. Anyone who engages in an impermissible use of the ALPR system or associated scan files or hot lists may be subject to administrative sanctions, up to and including termination, pursuant to and consistent with the relevant collective bargaining agreements and Department policies.
415.5 DATA COLLECTION AND RETENTION
The Administration Deputy Chief is responsible for ensuring systems and processes are in place for the proper collection and retention of ALPR data.
All ALPR data downloaded to the server should be stored for a minimum of one year (Government Code 34090.6) for a maximum of 30 days and in accordance with the established records retention schedule. Thereafter, ALPR data should be purged unless it has become, or it is reasonable to believe it will become, evidence in a criminal or civil action or is subject to a discovery request or other lawful action to produce records. In those circumstances, the applicable data should be downloaded from the server onto portable media, booked into evidence, and stored in accordance with the established records retention schedule.
ALPR vendor will store the data (data hosting) and ensure proper maintenance and security of data stored in their data towers. ALPR vendor will purge their data at the end of the 30 days of storage. However, this will not preclude SCPD from maintaining any relevant vehicle data obtained from the system after that period pursuant to the established City of Santa Cruz retention schedule mentioned above or outlined elsewhere. Relevant vehicle data are scans corresponding to the vehicle of interest on a hot list.
Restrictions on use of ALPR Data: Information gathered or collected, and records retained by ALPR cameras or any other Santa Cruz Police Department (SCPD) ALPR system will not be sold, accessed, or used for any purpose other than legitimate law enforcement or public safety purposes. SCPD ALPR data shall not be shared with Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unless under the authority of a valid court order. Furthermore, Government Code section 1798.90.55 does not permit a public agency to share ALPR information with private entities or out-of-state or federal agencies, including out-of-state and federal law enforcement agencies. Nor will ALPR data be shared with any law enforcement agency for the purposes of enforcing prohibitions on reproductive or gender-affirming care.
26.13 Santa Cruz Police Department
Santa Cruz PD-CA, Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/11/08, All Rights Reserved. DRAFT Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Published with permission by Santa Cruz Police Department 415.6 ACCOUNTABILITY AND SAFEGUARDS
All data will be closely safeguarded and protected by both procedural and technological means.
The Santa Cruz Police Department will observe the following safeguards regarding access to and use of stored data (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53):
(a) All non-law enforcement requests for access to stored ALPR data shall be processed in accordance with applicable law. (b) All ALPR data downloaded to the mobile workstation shall be accessible only through a login/password-protected system capable of documenting all access of information by name, data and time.
(c) Members approved to access ALPR data under these guidelines are permitted to access the data for legitimate law enforcement purposes only, such as when the data relates to a specific criminal investigation or department-related civil or administrative action.
(d) Such ALPR data may not be released to other authorized and verified law enforcement officials and agencies, unless the Administration Deputy Chief provides written approval, and only for a valid crime.
(e) Every ALPR Detection Browsing Inquiry must be documented by either the associated Santa Cruz Police case number or incident number, and/or a reason for the inquiry.
For security or data breaches, see the Records Release and Maintenance Policy. 415.7 ALPR DATA DETECTION BROWSING AUDITS
It is the responsibility of the Professional Standards Unit (PSU) Sergeant or the Chief's designee to ensure that an audit is conducted of ALPR detection browsing inquiries at least once during each calendar year. The Department will audit a sampling of the ALPR system utilization from the prior 12-month period to verify proper use in accordance with the above authorized uses. The audit shall randomly select at least 10 detection browsing inquiries conducted by department employees.
The audit shall be documented in the form of an internal department memorandum to the Administration Deputy Chief. The memorandum shall include any data errors found so that such errors can be corrected. After review by the Administration Deputy Chief, the memorandum and any associated documentation shall be filed and retained by PSU. 415.8 RELEASING ALPR DATA The ALPR data may be shared only with other law enforcement or prosecutorial agencies for official law enforcement purposes or as otherwise permitted by law, using the following procedures:
(a) The agency makes a written request for the ALPR data that includes:
1. The name of the agency.
2. The name of the person requesting. 3. The intended purpose of obtaining the information.
26.14 Santa Cruz Police Department
Santa Cruz PD-CA, Policy Manual
Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs)
Copyright Lexipol, LLC 2023/11/08, All Rights Reserved. DRAFT Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Published with permission by Santa Cruz Police Department (b) The request is reviewed by the Administration Deputy Chief or the authorized designee and approved before the request is fulfilled.
(c) The approved request is retained on file.
Requests for ALPR data by non-law enforcement or non-prosecutorial agencies will be processed as provided in the Records Maintenance and Release Policy (Civil Code § 1798.90.55) 415.9 TRAINING
The Training Manager should ensure that members receive department-approved training for those authorized to use or access the ALPR system (Civil Code § 1798.90.51; Civil Code § 1798.90.53).
26.15 Policy 415 – Addendum (a)- Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Usage and Privacy Policy ALPR Purpose and Authorized Uses: Automated License Plate Reader (ALPR) technology, also known as License Plate RecogniƟon, allows for the automated detecƟon of license plates. It may be used by the Santa Cruz Police Department (the Department) to convert data associated with vehicle license plates for official law enforcement purposes, including idenƟfying stolen or wanted vehicles, stolen license plates, and missing persons. It may also be used to gather informaƟon related to acƟve warrants, electronic surveillance (plot movement of wanted suspect(s)), suspect interdicƟon, and stolen property recovery.
Access: The InvesƟgaƟons Lieutenant will be the custodian and head administrator of the ALPR systems and its operaƟon. The only individuals who have access and the ability to query data in the Flock database system are officers of the Santa Cruz Police Department who have been trained in its use.
All logins and queries will be stored and monitored in compliance with Civil Code 1798.90.52. If an ALPR operator accesses or provides access to ALPR informaƟon, the ALPR operator shall do the following:
(a) Maintain a record of that access. At a minimum, the record shall include all of the following:
(1) The date and time the information is accessed.
(2) The license plate number or other data elements used to query the ALPR system. (3) The username of the person who accesses the information and, as applicable, the organization or entity with whom the person is affiliated. (4) The purpose for accessing the information.
(b) Require that ALPR information only be used for the authorized purposes described in this Usage and Privacy Policy.
Training: ALPR operators will receive iniƟal training from the ALPR technology vendor (Flock Safety) on the procedure and proper use of the system prior to being granted access to the ALPR system; each user will also receive annual refresher training from the InvesƟgaƟons Lieutenant or Chief’s designee. No member of this Department shall operate ALPR equipment or access ALPR data without proper training or authorizaƟon to do so.
Accuracy: ALPR operators shall make every reasonable effort to verify an ALPR response through the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) before taking enforcement acƟon that is based solely on an ALPR alert. Once an alert is received, the operator shall confirm that the observed license plate from the system matches the license plate of the observed vehicle. Before any law enforcement action is taken because of an ALPR alert, the alert will be verified through a CLETS inquiry via a mobile digital communicator or through dispatch. Operators will not take any police action that restricts the freedomof any individual based solely on an ALPR alert unless it has been validated. Because the ALPR alert may relate to a vehicle and may not relate to the person operaƟng the vehicle, officers are reminded that they need to have reasonable suspicion and/or probable cause to make an enforcement stop of any vehicle. Any data error(s) idenƟfied from an ALPR response shall be documented in an associated case report.
Data RetenƟon: Images and affiliated data will be stored in the Flock server for no longer than 30 days.
Flock Safety will store the data (data hosƟng) and ensure proper maintenance and security of data stored in their data towers. Flock Safety will also purge data at the end of the 30 days of storage. Any data related to a criminal or civil acƟon or that is subject to a discovery request or other lawful purpose shall
26.16 Policy 415 – Addendum (a)- Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) Usage and Privacy Policy be downloaded from the server and into the Department’s evidence system and retained pursuant to the established records retenƟon schedule.
RestricƟons on use of ALPR Data: InformaƟon gathered or collected and records retained by the Santa Cruz Police Department will not be sold, accessed, or used for any purpose other than legiƟmate law enforcement or public safety purposes. Pursuant to Senate Bill 34, the Department is not permiƩed to share ALPR informaƟon with private enƟƟes, out-of-state or federal agencies, including out-of-state and federal law enforcement. Santa Cruz Police Department ALPR data shall not be shared with ImmigraƟons and Customs Enforcement (ICE) unless under the authority of a valid court order.
Security: All data will be closely safeguarded and protected by both procedural and technological means. The Department will observe the following safeguards regarding access to and use of stored data:
a. All non-law enforcement requests for access to stored ALPR data shall be processed in accordance with applicable law.
b. All ALPR data downloaded to the mobile workstation shall be accessible only through a login/password-protected system capable of documenting all access of information by name, date, and time.
c. Members approved to access ALPR data under these guidelines are permitted to access the data for legitimate law enforcement purposes only, such as when the data relates to a specific criminal investigation or department-related civil or administrative action. d. Such ALPR data may not be released to other authorized and verified law enforcement officials and agencies unless the Administration Deputy Chief provides written approval and only for a valid law enforcement investigation.
e. Every ALPR Detection Browsing Inquiry must be documented by either the associated Santa Cruz Police case number or incident number and/or a reason for the inquiry.
PosƟng of Usage and Privacy Policy: The AdministraƟon Deputy Chief will ensure the most recent version of this Usage and Privacy Policy or any changes to this Policy are conspicuously posted on the Department’s transparency portal.
26.17 From: Mark Boolootian
To: City Council
Subject: Automatic License Plate Readers
Date: Monday, December 4, 2023 10:38:56 AM
Dear honorable council members,
I would like to voice a strong vote
in favor of the city leasing ALPRs.
While privacy concerns are real,
the volume of crimes involving
cars which go unidentified is, in
my mind, sufficient to accept the
tradeoff.
Please support the leasing of these
devices and help the SCPD to more
effectively discharge their duties.
respectfully,
mark boolootian
24 Hanover Ct
Santa Cruz
26.18 From: Craig Lane
To: Fred Keeley; City Council; Matt Huffaker; Bernie Escalante Subject: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 11:11:03 AM
Greetings ("Representatives of We The People")
I grew up in this town and have seen and heard many people in the local Government speak about the waste of resources and money for pet projects.
The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line.
Your reputations are already terrible.
I oppose and will not comply with this further eroding of our freedoms and privacy. I DO NOT CONSENT TO LICENSE PLATE READERS.
Blessings,
Craig
LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
26.19 From: Fred Keeley
To: Craig Lane; City Council; Matt Huffaker; Bernie Escalante Subject: RE: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 12:12:01 PM
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your email.
The ALPR is of concern to me. That is why I made extensive remarks about this at our City Council meeting last week, and had the item continued to December 12th. I have met with the Police Chief and the ACLU during the week, and continue to have issues.
As to your other remarks about corruption in the City, I take serious exception to your characterization. I have held four elective offices in the community since 1988 (County Supervisor, County Treasurer, California Assembly Member, and, now, Mayor). In none of those offices have I comported myself in any manner that could be construed as corrupt. If you have evidence of City official corruption, please send it to the District Attorney. If not, please do not accuse me of such behavior again.
Again, thank you for your email.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 11:11 AM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>; City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]> Subject: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Greetings ("Representatives of We The People")
I grew up in this town and have seen and heard many people in the local Government speak about the waste of resources and money for pet projects.
The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line.
Your reputations are already terrible.
I oppose and will not comply with this further eroding of our freedoms and privacy. I DO NOT CONSENT TO LICENSE PLATE READERS.
Blessings,
26.20 Craig
LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
26.21 From: Fred Keeley
To: Craig Lane; City Council; Matt Huffaker; Bernie Escalante Subject: RE: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 12:12:01 PM
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your email.
The ALPR is of concern to me. That is why I made extensive remarks about this at our City Council meeting last week, and had the item continued to December 12th. I have met with the Police Chief and the ACLU during the week, and continue to have issues.
As to your other remarks about corruption in the City, I take serious exception to your characterization. I have held four elective offices in the community since 1988 (County Supervisor, County Treasurer, California Assembly Member, and, now, Mayor). In none of those offices have I comported myself in any manner that could be construed as corrupt. If you have evidence of City official corruption, please send it to the District Attorney. If not, please do not accuse me of such behavior again.
Again, thank you for your email.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 11:11 AM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>; City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]> Subject: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Greetings ("Representatives of We The People")
I grew up in this town and have seen and heard many people in the local Government speak about the waste of resources and money for pet projects.
The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line.
Your reputations are already terrible.
I oppose and will not comply with this further eroding of our freedoms and privacy. I DO NOT CONSENT TO LICENSE PLATE READERS.
Blessings,
26.22 Craig
LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
26.23 From: Fred Keeley
To: Craig Lane
Cc: City Council; Matt Huffaker; Bernie Escalante
Subject: RE: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 1:01:04 PM
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your response.
Thank you for clarifying that you have no personal knowledge of public official corruption. If you do, I again urge you to contact the District Attorney.
Perhaps you could enlighten me as to when the voters “voted down Hwy 1 widening”, as my recollection is that Measure D a few years ago authorized funding for, among other items, exactly that project.
Again, thank you for participating in the democracy.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 12:49 PM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>
Cc: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Thank you Fred
A personal response even!
My statement comes from City and County employees over three decades.
And "concern" is not action brother. We shall see how this plays out.
I'm only sharing what I was told and have observed
We The People voted down Hwy 1 widening, and it still went through.
Downtown is an insane mess of Developers getting high rises up which is NOT what Santa Cruz is.
The River street "low income housing multi-plex" I hear only has like two units set aside for low income people? Is this accurate?
My statement was what was sent and there are no accusations only input from others in the hundreds
"The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line - (my opinion 1st amendment right of free speech)
26.24 Your reputations are already terrible."
Perhaps you are a welcome change and that would be great.
Our Police Chief is a personal friend of Scott Sawyer whom is a close friend of mine and I'm glad for a local in office whom will be held accountable to our community for upholding the truth.
Many of these are words of your own city and county employees brother.
I make no claims other than observations over many years that We The People's freedoms like the Convid lockdowns.
BTW lawyers are loyal to the B.A.R. = not We The People per se and many of us are educating the public about this.
And we also know about Oath of Office, which I am sure you took? Both pages...? My wish is a transparent and honest representation of We The People, and we all work together, not behind closed doors which is what the Board of Supervisors meetings have become I hear? Wishing you all a good day and Happy Holidays!
Blessings,
Craig Lane
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
26.25 LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 12:12 PM Fred Keeley <[email protected]> wrote:
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your email.
The ALPR is of concern to me. That is why I made extensive remarks about this at our City Council meeting last week, and had the item continued to December 12th. I have met with the Police Chief and the ACLU during the week, and continue to have issues.
As to your other remarks about corruption in the City, I take serious exception to your characterization. I have held four elective offices in the community since 1988 (County Supervisor, County Treasurer, California Assembly Member, and, now, Mayor). In none of those offices have I comported myself in any manner that could be construed as corrupt. If you have evidence of City official corruption, please send it to the District Attorney. If not, please do not accuse me of such behavior again.
Again, thank you for your email.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 11:11 AM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>; City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]> Subject: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Greetings ("Representatives of We The People")
I grew up in this town and have seen and heard many people in the local Government speak about the waste of resources and money for pet projects.
The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line.
Your reputations are already terrible.
I oppose and will not comply with this further eroding of our freedoms and privacy. I DO NOT CONSENT TO LICENSE PLATE READERS.
Blessings,
26.26 Craig
LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
26.27 From: Fred Keeley
To: Craig Lane
Cc: City Council; Matt Huffaker; Bernie Escalante
Subject: RE: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 1:01:04 PM
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your response.
Thank you for clarifying that you have no personal knowledge of public official corruption. If you do, I again urge you to contact the District Attorney.
Perhaps you could enlighten me as to when the voters “voted down Hwy 1 widening”, as my recollection is that Measure D a few years ago authorized funding for, among other items, exactly that project.
Again, thank you for participating in the democracy.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 12:49 PM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>
Cc: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Thank you Fred
A personal response even!
My statement comes from City and County employees over three decades.
And "concern" is not action brother. We shall see how this plays out.
I'm only sharing what I was told and have observed
We The People voted down Hwy 1 widening, and it still went through.
Downtown is an insane mess of Developers getting high rises up which is NOT what Santa Cruz is.
The River street "low income housing multi-plex" I hear only has like two units set aside for low income people? Is this accurate?
My statement was what was sent and there are no accusations only input from others in the hundreds
"The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line - (my opinion 1st amendment right of free speech)
26.28 Your reputations are already terrible."
Perhaps you are a welcome change and that would be great.
Our Police Chief is a personal friend of Scott Sawyer whom is a close friend of mine and I'm glad for a local in office whom will be held accountable to our community for upholding the truth.
Many of these are words of your own city and county employees brother.
I make no claims other than observations over many years that We The People's freedoms like the Convid lockdowns.
BTW lawyers are loyal to the B.A.R. = not We The People per se and many of us are educating the public about this.
And we also know about Oath of Office, which I am sure you took? Both pages...? My wish is a transparent and honest representation of We The People, and we all work together, not behind closed doors which is what the Board of Supervisors meetings have become I hear? Wishing you all a good day and Happy Holidays!
Blessings,
Craig Lane
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
26.29 LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 12:12 PM Fred Keeley <[email protected]> wrote:
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your email.
The ALPR is of concern to me. That is why I made extensive remarks about this at our City Council meeting last week, and had the item continued to December 12th. I have met with the Police Chief and the ACLU during the week, and continue to have issues.
As to your other remarks about corruption in the City, I take serious exception to your characterization. I have held four elective offices in the community since 1988 (County Supervisor, County Treasurer, California Assembly Member, and, now, Mayor). In none of those offices have I comported myself in any manner that could be construed as corrupt. If you have evidence of City official corruption, please send it to the District Attorney. If not, please do not accuse me of such behavior again.
Again, thank you for your email.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 11:11 AM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>; City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]> Subject: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Greetings ("Representatives of We The People")
I grew up in this town and have seen and heard many people in the local Government speak about the waste of resources and money for pet projects.
The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line.
Your reputations are already terrible.
I oppose and will not comply with this further eroding of our freedoms and privacy. I DO NOT CONSENT TO LICENSE PLATE READERS.
Blessings,
26.30 Craig
LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
26.31 From: Fred Keeley
To: Craig Lane
Cc: City Council; Matt Huffaker; Bernie Escalante
Subject: RE: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 1:49:05 PM
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for keeping the conversation going.
Best to you,
Fred Keeley
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 1:06 PM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>
Cc: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Fred
Thanks again for your time!
If you are sincere I'll go back to my people and send you what happened.
I'm impressed you took the time to reply and it is nice to communicate with an elected official who is actually available for conversation! :)
Happy Holidays and best wishes to you and your family.
Blessings,
Craig
26.32 LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 1:01 PM Fred Keeley <[email protected]> wrote:
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your response.
Thank you for clarifying that you have no personal knowledge of public official corruption. If you do, I again urge you to contact the District Attorney.
Perhaps you could enlighten me as to when the voters “voted down Hwy 1 widening”, as my recollection is that Measure D a few years ago authorized funding for, among other items, exactly that project.
Again, thank you for participating in the democracy.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 12:49 PM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>
26.33 Cc: City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Thank you Fred
A personal response even!
My statement comes from City and County employees over three decades.
And "concern" is not action brother. We shall see how this plays out.
I'm only sharing what I was told and have observed
We The People voted down Hwy 1 widening, and it still went through.
Downtown is an insane mess of Developers getting high rises up which is NOT what Santa Cruz is.
The River street "low income housing multi-plex" I hear only has like two units set aside for low income people? Is this accurate?
My statement was what was sent and there are no accusations only input from others in the hundreds
"The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line - (my opinion 1st amendment right of free speech) Your reputations are already terrible."
Perhaps you are a welcome change and that would be great.
Our Police Chief is a personal friend of Scott Sawyer whom is a close friend of mine and I'm glad for a local in office whom will be held accountable to our community for upholding the truth.
Many of these are words of your own city and county employees brother.
I make no claims other than observations over many years that We The People's freedoms like the Convid lockdowns.
BTW lawyers are loyal to the B.A.R. = not We The People per se and many of us are educating the public about this.
And we also know about Oath of Office, which I am sure you took? Both pages...? My wish is a transparent and honest representation of We The People, and we all work together, not behind closed doors which is what the Board of Supervisors meetings have become I hear? Wishing you all a good day and Happy Holidays!
Blessings,
Craig Lane
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
26.34 LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
On Tue, Dec 5, 2023 at 12:12 PM Fred Keeley <[email protected]> wrote:
Mr. Lane,
Thank you for your email.
The ALPR is of concern to me. That is why I made extensive remarks about this at our City Council meeting last week, and had the item continued to December 12th. I have met with the Police Chief and the ACLU during the week, and continue to have issues.
As to your other remarks about corruption in the City, I take serious exception to your characterization. I have held four elective offices in the community since 1988 (County Supervisor, County Treasurer, California Assembly Member, and, now, Mayor). In none of those offices have I comported myself in any manner that could be construed as corrupt. If you have evidence of City official corruption, please send it to the District Attorney. If not, please do not accuse me of such behavior again.
Again, thank you for your email.
Fred Keeley, Mayor
City of Santa Cruz
26.35 From: Craig Lane <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 11:11 AM
To: Fred Keeley <[email protected]>; City Council <[email protected]>; Matt Huffaker <[email protected]>; Bernie Escalante <[email protected]> Subject: I oppose installation of Automatic License Plate Readers Greetings ("Representatives of We The People")
I grew up in this town and have seen and heard many people in the local Government speak about the waste of resources and money for pet projects.
The government is viewed locally here as one of the most corrupt in the nation.
Your jobs are on the line.
Your reputations are already terrible.
I oppose and will not comply with this further eroding of our freedoms and privacy. I DO NOT CONSENT TO LICENSE PLATE READERS.
Blessings,
Craig
LINKTREE HEALTH ALKEMY
26.36 From: Cliff Bixler
To: City Council
Subject: License plate readers
Date: Tuesday, December 5, 2023 7:18:29 PM
I encourage you to approve license plate readers for the SCPD. Just yesterday the technology resulted in the arrest of the suspect in LA of a serial killer who had killed four people in four nights. The fact that his license had been read at all four locations undoubtedly saved more lives.
The best police work is catching criminals and convicting them through evidence collection.
In most other western countries CCTV is in most streets and the police don't have to rely on firepower and actual violent confrontations with criminals are more rare because of collected evidence and higher conviction rates. Higher conviction rates are a deterrent to criminal behaviour. Lack of consequences for criminality is the reason my friends in Santa Cruz report people checking out and breaking into cars on their streets almost every night.
We already use red light tickets and some CCTV, not to mention that courts allow collection of evidence out of people's trash left in cans at the curb, because there is no right to privacy in public spaces. That legal principle applies to those of us driving down any public street. It shouldn't require a cop posted on surveillance to collect visual evidence. We have technology that can be used to track down and convict criminals after the fact, to protect future victims, and to bring accountability and justice to criminals and their victims. Technology does not necessarily equate with authoritarianism. It is our constitution & courts that protect our rights. along with law enforcement.
Cliff Bixler
26.37 From: Garrett
To: City Council
Subject: 12.12.23 Agenda Item # 26 No on Automated License Plate Readers Date: Friday, December 8, 2023 9:04:34 AM
12.12.23 Agenda Item # 26 No on Automated License Plate Readers Dear Council,
This item is a fairly typical example of the worst in city agenda items, at least in general terms (Yes, some items have more opposition, or are more clearly a fiscal mistake, but it has all the characteristics of a bad item). 1) It was clear at the first recent presentation of this item it had easily a majority of people with strong feelings and principals against it, so much so in my opinion rather than look like you don't care a hoot what the public thinks on the matter, and not wanting to appear dispassionately authoritarian you tabled the matter only to bring it back I suspect hoping the opposition would disappear. I mean, what has actually changed in 2 weeks? It sure looks like that anyway, and I have seen these methods before on other matters, even this matter since it was tabled before the first time it came up.
2) In the past, say the cold war, the focus of national defense was outward toward our enemies, but since the cold war ended, and after 911, and especially recently, the focus of CIA, DOJ, NSA, and Homeland Security forces have been turned inward ON THE PEOPLE with spying, and loss of privacy and even freedom, even used to silence political opposition, censor and control media.
Say what you want, but this IS spying on the people recording the comings and goings of every car all over the city, and you can't tell me the data is beyond the reach of say, the NSA to hack.
3) the people don't want it.
4) It permanently costs money we don't have over time.
5) As far as stolen cars go, my personal experience is parking enforcement could actually give a hoot about them.
A stolen car was parked in front of the house next door for months while both myself and neighbors called parking to report it as a parking violation. It took months (3 or 4) and many calls, even emails, and eventually somebody came out to put notice on it and chalk the tires, but no action was taken and the car remained.
I had to play detective for a day and eventually found out who was authorized to drive it, found out then it was stolen, put the two back together, and then called the police to remove the stolen status.
26.38 The dispatch let it slip I assume when they said they don't like to tow cars they don't know who is responsible for them (this was an out of state car registered to a leasing company in yet another state, leased to a major Fortune 500 corporation), and NOBODY seemed to think they should check it's stolen status after at least a half dozen complaints.
6) So maybe for once, listen to the people, consider your financial status, and maybe let the state know they can do the spying for themselves as they can put cameras up on the highways them selves if they are intent on doing the spying.
Garrett Philipp - Westside
26.39 From: Larry McFall
To: City Council
Subject: surveillance
Date: Friday, December 8, 2023 1:46:07 PM
Dear City Council,
I am totally against the Santa Cruz Police getting 14 automated license plate readers from Flock Safety. It would be a large scale assault on privacy of those living here and any visitors who just want to have a good time in our wonderful city. None of the assurances by Chief Escalante about how benign the Flock system is really hold water.
And it is a certainty that the Department of Homeland Security will, in the end, get access to the stored data. It is a certainty that the data will get shared by numerous agencies, local and beyond. This would be a huge step into an Orwellian reality where privacy and human rights no longer exist.
Don’t let this happen. I want to live the rest of my life in a democracy. I want that for everyone.
Larry McFall
26.40 From: Gayle Bradshaw
To: Fred Keeley; City Council; Matt Huffaker; Bernie Escalante Subject: [CAUTION: Verify Sender Before Opening!] Santa Cruz police scanners NO Date: Friday, December 8, 2023 2:35:10 PM
Attachments: opposition to police survalliance.docx
Respectfully,
GayleMarie Bradshaw
26.41 1
Speech 2 min
California Constitution
Article I - Declaration of Rights
Section 1.
Universal Citation: CA Constitution art I § 1
SECTION 1.
All people are by nature free and independent and have
inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.
(Sec. 1 added Nov. 5, 1974, by Proposition 7. Resolution Chapter 90, 1974.)
________________________________________________________ US Constitution Amendment X IV. 14
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868. (Note: Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution was modified by Section 2 of the 14th Amendment.) SECTION 1
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. ___________________________________________________
26.42 2
I would like to address some of the issues I have with this proposal. #1. California has spent $2 billion on homelessness over the last 5 years and the problem has gotten worse. With all that money and it's gotten worse in recent years homelessness in California has increased 15 times faster than the country as a whole half of all the unsheltered homeless in the whole.
2. Xi Jinping Arrives in San Francisco for China-U.S. Summit Meeting and the 30th APEC Economic Leaders' Meeting a couple weeks ago when the president of China came to town in San Francisco The New York Times wrote a story talking about the makeover and beautification efforts that were hastily undertaken. Why can’t this beautification take place here in Santa Cruz? Where are the billions of dollars going to help the homeless? Why aren’t these funds being audited? Where is the transparency? WHERE is the money GOING?
________________________________________________________ The Santa Cruz Police plan to record every vehicle that enters the city using Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPR) but yet California has a massive deficit right now A $ 31.5 billion deficit.
Immigration and the Border in California as it is a sanctuary State is contributing to the fentanyl #l crisis to human trafficking and is introducing potential National Security violent crimes in California as well as Santa Cruz. All one has to do is walk down Pacific Ave and you see it. Or go to any of the homeless camps and see the effects of mass amounts of drugs coming into this city. That is where the police should focus their attention and not on surveilling honest citizens. I would like to know the number of bikes that are stolen every day, by these people. Yet nothing is done to recover these bikes and hold the homeless accountable. The working class pays highest amount of taxes in California. Yet we get little protection. We have the highest tax, the highest homeless population, highest gas tax, and now you want to take more of OUR money and set up surveillance on the very people who pay your salaries.
26.43 3
This Automatic License Plate Reader is against the law. Against the State of California Constitution, and the California Bill of rights. And you plan to turn this operation over to a private company whom we have no say in? You want to give this power to an entity who can control our lives? Dictate our freedom to travel, to live in Santa Cruz peacefully? WHO is this entity? Are they US citizens? Or are they in some way connected with the CCP? Is this why . Xi Jinping came to California?????!!!! This is EMPRISIONMENT….
DON’T tell me this is for our safety. We have lost our freedoms due to the lies of policies that are good for our safety. 911 and the patriot act is a good example. And here are a few other:
California ranks 48th most free state California has every year continued to erode the rights and freedoms of its residents when it comes to economic freedom Examples:
1. Covid lockdowns where California had the highest measure of government control
California has every year continued to erode the rights and freedoms of its residents when it comes to economic freedom ab5 which has deprived countless people of their right to earn a living effectively abolishing independent Contracting for many professions in California or just look at things such as ….
1. bans on straws
2. bans on gas powered leaf blowers
3. bans Chopsticks and Other single-use uh food items
4. bans on even gas-powered vehicles by 23 2035
5. bans of plastic bags although you could by water in plastic bottles, or plastic storage containers, but you couldn’t carry them out of the store in a plastic bag And yet everything in our world today is made in some form of plastic, including cell phone, shoes, desks etc.!!!!
26.44 4
covid-19 here's the reality
California had the single most Draconian and longest lasting lockdowns in the country when it came to:
• business shutdowns
• church shutdowns
• school shutdowns
• mass vaccine mandates
• Mask Mandates
• Beach closures – with arrest for those who were alone on the beach..
• vaccine passports mandates
• every step of the way California had the highest level of government coercion and control
• pilots were mandated to get the shot
• social workers and nurses
• teachers
• Children of all ages
• YET: Bar were open
• Weed dispensaries were open
• Homeless were exempt
• Illegals were exempt
________________________________________________________ And now you want to RECORD EVERY VEHICLE THAT ENTERS
THE CITY USING AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READER?
This is a criminal act. Its another lock down. Again, I ask is the CCP in control of California? Or are WE the People in Power and Control!?
________________________________________________________ _
26.45 5
Declaration of Independence: We hold these truths to be selfevident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.
Benjamin Franklin once said: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
That quote often comes up in the context of new technology and concerns about government surveillance.
26.46 From: Dorah
To: City Council
Subject: Vote NO on ALPR
Date: Saturday, December 9, 2023 3:22:54 PM
Dear Santa Cruz Mayor, Vice Mayor and Members of the Council, Please vote NO on these ALPRs which are an expensive to run, invasive technology which has not at all been shown to improve crime statistics despite its use in many communities. What is definitely known is that it can be hacked and costs at least $66,000 to run for staff time alone. Please be responsible and say no: vote No on Automatic License Plate Readers.
Thank you,
Dorah
Dorah Rosen
122 Kirby St.
95060
Pronouns: She/hers
With gratitude and respect to the Amah Mutsun, Uypi, Quiroste, Zayante, Coastanoan Ohlone and others who stewarded and continue to steward the unceded lands currently known as Santa Cruz County.
26.47 From: Stacey Falls
To: City Council
Subject: "No!" to ALPRs
Date: Sunday, December 10, 2023 10:28:52 AM
Greetings Santa Cruz City Council,
I am writing to strongly object to the purchase and use of ALPRs in the City of Santa Cruz.
In the 1990's, during my junior year of college, I lived in Beijing, as part of my college's extensive study abroad program. I had a wonderful experience. The history and culture in China's capital is rich. The food is amazing, and I made wonderful friends who left a life-long impact on me.
However, I was also always keenly aware of the dictatorship I was living under. Armed guards were stationed at key points all around the city-- banks, grocery stores, government buildings and colleges and universities.
I had friends who lived at Beijing University, and I couldn't go visit them without being stopped and questioned by guards on watch.
Guards were stationed at the entrance of my college too, and anyone entering or leaving was under scrutiny. It was easy to imagine guards forgetting the hundreds of people who passed by every day, but eventually it became clear that they would notice patterns and stop anyone who seemed out of place. At some point, my boyfriend, who was Chinese, was detained for spending too much time in my part of campus (the foreign student area).
Big Brother was always watching.
I remember that living in China made me more patriotic than I had ever been. I remember saying out loud, "this would never happen in the United States." Yet now the City of Santa Cruz is proposing high tech surveillance equipment that makes the armed guards at my Chinese college seem benign.
ALPRs scanning everyone who comes in and out of the city are a huge invasion of privacy. While they may make the job of the SCPD easier, so would retinal scans, human bar codes, and mandatory digital ID cards.
Where does it end? The slide to a dictatorship is a slippery slope.
I object to such an egregious invasion of my privacy and the privacy of my friends and family who drive around town.
There are currently no major public safety threats that demand this level of surveillance. If there had been a rash of serial murders one could justify the temporary use of high tech equipment, but I feel as safe as I ever
26.48 have, and I value my privacy, freedom, and the promise that in this land of democracy, I am innocent until proven guilty and don't need to have my every movement tracked like we are living in a dictatorship. --Stacey Falls
Santa Cruz resident
26.49 From: Debora Morrison
To: City Council
Subject: Please vote no on automatic license plate readers in Santa Cruz County.
Date: Sunday, December 10, 2023 7:58:18 PM
This would not be a step towards assuring personal freedom to come and go where and when we choose. It is another step towards control on a level that would be catastrophic. Think about it.
Thank you,
Debora Morrison
Santa Cruz, Ca
Sent from my iPhone
26.50 From: Ron Pomerantz
To: City Council
Subject: Council Agenda 12-12-23 Item #26 -Automated License Plate Readers ALPRs Date: Sunday, December 10, 2023 10:47:43 PM
re. Item #26 Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant Proposal – Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) (PD)
Good day Council members and Mayor.
Here we are again trying to decide if our City should accept another Homeland Security donation. The Department of “Homeland Security” is primarily in business to take away personal freedoms and undermine 1st Amendment rights under the guise of protecting public safety. This has been done to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars for military grade weaponry and surveillance systems. If you missed what this grant is about here are the 11 priority areas (good luck understanding the bureaucratese):
1. Enhance Information and Intelligence Sharing and Cooperation with Federal Agencies, including DHS (National Priority)
2. Enhance the Protection of Soft Targets/Crowded Places (National Priority)
3. Enhance Cybersecurity (National Priority)
4. Enhancing Community Preparedness and Resilience (National Priority)
5. Combating Domestic Violence Extremism
6. Strengthen Emergency Communications Capabilities through Planning, Governance, Technology, and Equipment
7. Enhance Medical and Public Health Preparedness
8. Strengthen Information Sharing and Collaboration
9. Enhance Multi-Jurisdictional/Inter-Jurisdictional All-Hazards/Whole Community Incident Planning, Response & Recovery Capabilities
10. Protect Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (including Food & Agriculture)
11. Enhance Election Security (National Priority)
As I read these priority areas it's all about information gathering and sharing with governmental agencies. Also using the ruse of combating US-based terrorism, and a few other non-existent local issues in order to keep people in fear so a new surveillance toy can be used.
A case by Santa Cruz Police Department has not made for the need local surveillance using ALPRs.
What considerations were given by the SCPD to our right to privacy and protection of civil rights?
The SCPD has not provided a whit of local evidence to support spending tens of thousands of dollars for the ALPR system let alone clerical support and maintenance. There are inadequate protections from the private corporation, Flock, that will access the data and control it. The grant covers a little more than half of the system lease. The City has to cover the difference of the purchase and ongoing costs. The City says they’re in a budget crisis and will asking to raise the sales tax by ½%. Our local money can most certainly be better spent or, better yet, reduce budget demands.
With the billions of dollars spent by Homeland Security most folks I talk with feel less secure and safe. Santa Cruz should not fall prey to the snake oil sales persons of ALPRs.
I strongly urge you to deny this grant request and any local money for an ALPR system.
Thank you for your time and thoughtful consideration.
26.51 Ron Pomerantz
26.52 From: Cheryl Ban
To: City Council
Subject: Automatic License Plate Readers
Date: Monday, December 11, 2023 9:25:48 AM
December 8, 2023
Dear City of Santa Cruz Council Members,
As a 40 year resident of Santa Cruz County I wanted to voice my concerns in regards to the purchase of Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPR) for the City of Santa Cruz that will effect Santa Cruz County.
There are legal and policy concerns.
There are court cases involved with the use of ALPR technology.
The U.S. Constitution’s Fourth Amendment protects people from unreasonable searches and seizures. Katzv. U.S. (1967) .
According to the U.S. Supreme Court, the Fourth Amendment’s purpose “is to safeguard the privacy and security of individuals against arbitrary invasions by government officials.” First Amendment rights to freedoms of association, religion, and speech.
ALPR readers are used for police use and non police use.
Helping government agencies through license plate readers, compile and store personal private data for unspecified duration, information used in unknown circumstances, and the possibility of limiting citizens movements.
Governments agencies may curb environment pollution by limiting ordinary people choices and movements, based on carbon credits or potential future social credit systems.
Tracking and storing data on how many trips made to specific places, how long the trip was, who else was there, and tracking out of state license plates travel across state lines.
Control movement. Control People.
Impacting our very Civil Liberties and Civil Rights.
Technology can be easily used in ways that may have unintended unpredictable consequences.
For instance:
Personal privacy exposed to unknown third party companies. Who are these companies? What are the Vendors history?
Databases owned by private companies, rendering the ordinary citizen powerless over their own vital information.
If there is downstream data sharing what are the levels of protection that would be created through policy?
A company used in Livermore, California, Vigilant Solutions (owned by Motorola Solutions), a leading provider of ALPR data to police based in Livermore, California, sells access to its database of more than 5 billion license plate scans collected across the country, including 1.5 billion reads provided by law enforcement agencies.
This process creates a revolving door of license plate scans from law enforcement to Vigilant Solutions back to law enforcement agencies.
Who will utilizes billions upon billions of scanned license plate information? Some ALPR readers use photos of vehicle occupants.
Who has access to information collected by third party agencies? What safeguards are guaranteed?
How long is data stored?
What are the data retention policies maintained by police or third party vendors?
26.53 Personal information is susceptible to being sold, hacked, sustaining loss of control over personal private data.
Is there any support to find remedy if a private citizen's data is fraudulently used? Citizens would be without recourse to choose or opt out of collection and tracking of their private movements and information, unless a citizen did not use a vehicle.
Consider the short and long term consequences of surveillance and data collection technology employed over the citizens of the United States of America.
Is there transparency and accountability?
What policies would be in place to govern use of ALPR technology or provide protections? What guarantee that this type of surveillance and data collection will not be used for implementing controls over the freedom to travel freely, to gather, to protest? As happened in 2008 in Virginia, attendees at political rallies for Barack Obama and Sarah Palin and eventually President Obama’s inauguration,
had their license plates surveilled and data retained for more than three years until it was purged.
The Attorney General of Virginia had warned ongoing retention would violate the state’s Government Data and Dissemination Practices Act.
In terms of crime, a small percentage, far below 1 percent of cars scanned by ALPR are connected to any crime or wrongdoing.
There are high error rates with ALPR, in a couple of ways, inaccurate hot lists and inaccurate reads.
And then there is the cost of the program.
Often Drivers shoulder the cost of technology and surveillance through fees.
My personal safety in my community rests upon freedom of movement without surveillance, tracking, data collection and protection from data hacking.
Why would we accept mass surveillance, tracking and data collection in our daily lives? In my opinion there are of high unmitigated risks involved in the use of Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPR) in our community of Santa Cruz.
Thank-you,
Cheryl Ban
[email protected]
26.54 26.55
From: Greg
To: City Council
Subject: Council Meeting 12/12 comment: Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) (PD) Date: Monday, December 11, 2023 5:00:26 PM
Hello,
I'd like to include this comment about the Santa Cruz city council agenda item on 12/12/23:
26. Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant Proposal – Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) (PD)
I am strongly opposed to installing ALPRs in Santa Cruz. They are a huge invasion of privacy, tracking every vehicle entering/exiting the city. Some might say that our phones already track where we go. That is true to varying degrees, but someone still has the choice to turn off their phone. We do not need to build/increase the surveillance state, tracking every car's whereabouts, even if it is supposedly only ever used for tracking down criminals. Tracking databases end up being abused as well as broken into.
Thank you,
Greg Harmon
Santa Cruz city resident.
26.56 Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant Proposal – Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) 1) Motion to approve an FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant proposal letter and direct staff to send the letter to the Santa Cruz County Office of Response, Recovery, and Resilience, Authorized Body of Five, no later than December 31, 2023. 2) Motion to approve the installation of automated license plate readers within Santa Cruz city limits, purchased with funds received through the FY 2024 State Homeland Security Program Grant.
3) Motion to have City Council review the Santa Cruz Police Department’s draft Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs) policy and provide comment December 12, 2023
Santa Cruz Police Department
26.57 Efficacy
Beach Flats ALPR – November 3-29, 2023
• 27 Hits (Average 1 Hit/Day)
• Stolen Vehicles and Stolen Vehicle Plates
Beach Flats Shooting – November 19, 2023
• Located Wanted Vehicle
Santa Cruz Wharf Burglary – July 5, 2023
• Identified Suspect
Downtown Santa Cruz Robbery - June 26, 2023
• Assistance from Roseville PD ALPRs
• Apprehended Four (4) Suspects
Fremont Homicide – April 8, 2023
• 5-year-old Eliyanah Killed
• Apprehended Suspect
SUCCESS STORIES FROM NEIGHBORING AGENCIES
Capitola Fatal Hit and Run – November 18, 2023
Santa Cruz Sheriff’s Office Residential Burglary –
December 2, 2023
Bakersfield PD – Six (6) Homicide Arrests
Morgan Hill PD – 200+ Arrests in Two (2) Years
• Burglaries 36%
• Larcenies 14%
• Catalytic Converter Thefts 66%
South San Francisco PD – Vehicle Theft Reduced by 50% • Auto Burglaries 80%
• Motor Vehicle Theft 50%
Benicia PD – 100+ Arrests in Two (2) Years
26.58 Department Policy – #415
Automated License Plate Readers
26.59 Department Policy – #415
Automated License Plate Readers
26.60 Department Policy – #415
Automated License Plate Readers
26.61 Department Policy – #415
Automated License Plate Readers
26.62 Department Policy – #415
Automated License Plate Readers
26.63 Department Usage & Privacy Policy
Automated License Plate Readers
26.64 Department Usage & Privacy Policy
Automated License Plate Readers
26.65 Department Usage & Privacy Policy
Automated License Plate Readers
26.66 Questions?
December 12, 2023
Santa Cruz Police Department
26.67 28.1
28.2 28.3
28.4 28.5