Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
6/13/2001 - STAFF REPORTS (2)
DATE: JUNE 13, 2001 TO: CITY COUNCIL FROM: C. LEE WEIGEL, CHIEF OF POLICE AUTHORIZING THE PURCHASE OF EQUIPMENT NECESSARY TO PROVIDE CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION CAMERAS (CCTV) IN THE DOWTOWN AND UPTOWN AREAS OF PALM SPRINGS TO ASSIST LAW ENFORCEMENT IN CRIME DETERENCE, CRIME DETECTION, APPREHENSION AND PROSECUTION RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council award bid for the purchase of 16 closed circuit television cameras plus ancillary equipment from DA Pacific, of Palm Desert, CA on a unit price basis in the total amount of $160,143.57 (unit prices on file at the Office of the City Clerk). SUMMARY: Police agencies in the United States have experimented with the use of CCTV cameras to deter crime, detect crime, and gather evidence for criminal prosecution in their jurisdictional areas for more than thirty years. Their efforts have proven to be successful in the reduction of criminal activity and in prosecution of criminals committing crimes ranging from vandalism to homicide. Approval of the purchase of closed circuit television cameras and related equipment'for the downtown and uptown areas of Palm Springs would assist law enforcement in crime deterrence, crime detection, apprehension, and prosecution. BACKGROUND: Since September 1999, the Police Department has received more than 30,800 calls for service in the designated "bicycle beat" area of downtown Palm Springs. Approximately one year ago, the Palm Springs Police Department was awarded a $65,000 grant toward the purchase and installation of a CCTV camera system in downtown Palm Springs. In addition, the Palm Springs Police Department plans to utilize technology grant funds awarded by the State and Federal government as well as anticipated asset forfeiture funds as they become available. The use of CCTV cameras has become commonplace in public areas everywhere throughout the world such as shopping centers, corporations, ATM's, theme parks, sporting events, casinos, banks, convenience stores, apartment buildings, schools, and many other public venues. Public video surveillance began in the UK in 1986 in an industrial area outside the English town of King's Lynn. Before the installation of the cameras, there had been 58 crimes reported, mostly vandalism. In the two years following the installation, there were no crimes reported. By 1994, 300 jurisdictions in the country had installed some form of public video surveillance. According to British government reports, in the town of Berwick, burglaries fell by 69 percent. In Northhampton, overall crime decreased by 57 percent. In Glasgow, Scotland, crime decreased by 68 percent. In a highly publicized case in mid-February 1996, the UK media broadcast grainy images of a small child being led away by two youths. Two-year-old James Bulger, who had wandered from his mother's side in the shopping center, was later found murdered. Arrests followed shortly after the images were broadcast to the public. In the U.S., the most deadly act of domestic terrorism, the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City, might never have been solved and the perpetrator never brought to justice had it not been for the images recorded by a CCTV camera mounted at an ATM. According to Officer Siegmund at the Baltimore, Maryland Police Department, they have had CCTV surveillance cameras in place since the early 1990's and public sentiment has been positive since the beginning of their program. He knew of no complaints, and they are in the process of expanding their program. They use visible pole-mounted cameras similar to the ones being proposed for the City of Palm Springs. According to Officer Siegmund, there has been a marked decrease, in fact almost elimination, of violent crime in the areas where the cameras are installed. He said Baltimore didn't track any statistics regarding crime moving to other areas where there aren't any cameras and admitted it would be hard to track. He said in general, he didn't see any trends in that direction that could be attributed to the cameras or lack of cameras. In Tampa, Florida, district three Corporal Larry Timmer said their CCTV cameras have been in place in a busy business district known as Ybor City for about five or six years. There are 10 to 12 cameras with five or six monitors. They are monitored during the day by a private security company paid for by their merchants. At night, the cameras are actively monitored by sworn officers. According to Cpl. Timmer, people in that area said they feel safer with the cameras present. This became more evident when two recent homicides were caught on video by their cameras including a recent stabbing where the video was used in court to secure a conviction. He added that cameras can work for or against the officers in the department, too, when there are citizen complaints. In many instances, the cameras helped to exonerate officers. In at least one case, however, the cameras confirmed that the officers had used unnecessary force and they were disciplined for misconduct. According to Cpl. Timmer, "The City is in love with the system." There are plans in place to expand the system to other areas as soon as they can come up with sufficient funding. Desk Officer Margo Parker was interviewed at the first precinct at the police department in Virginia Beach, Virginia. She said the cameras there have been in place for a number of years, and as far as she knew, there had been no l� • complaints about the system from the public at the beginning or since. She said the only protests she was aware of was when they were proposing the CCTV system. There was a great deal of media coverage and an organized group from out of the area waged an unsuccessful protest, but there were no local protests Officer Parker was aware of. At the Memphis, Tennessee Police Department, Lt. Webb was interviewed. He said their camera system is used in their busy downtown business district. He said the cameras have been in place for a number of years, and they are well received by the officers and the citizens. He knew of no complaints about them since they have been installed. Lt. Webb said that after their cameras were installed, a number of businesses installed their own similar high-tech cameras on the outside of their businesses at their own expense, and did their own recording. Memphis PD recently investigated a murder and the crime was caught on video by one of these cameras. He added that a lot of their downtown economy is dependent upon tourist pedestrian traffic, and one of the main problems identified by their merchants is the aggressive panhandlers. He said officers monitoring the cameras will frequently catch the panhandlers in the act of harassing someone on the street, and officers are dispatched to handle it. Legal Issues: There have been concerns raised about privacy issues and liability concerns. The U.S. Supreme Court in Katz vs. United States defined modern search and seizure law under the Fourth Amendment. The court declared that a person in a public place such as a public sidewalk or public park cannot reasonably expect that his activity will be immune from the public eye or from observation by the police. In another U.S. case, United States vs. Knotts, the court recognized that a person traveling on a public road in an automobile had no reasonable expectation of privacy. Following this reasoning courts have allowed police to videotape individuals on public roads. In United States vs. Sherman, the court of appeals for the ninth circuit held that individuals videotaped in public view have no reasonable expectation of privacy, and could not challenge the government's use of videotape as violating the Fourth Amendment. In California, the court held in Aisensio vs. American Broadcasting Co., Inc., that the videotaping of an individual on a public street does not constitute an unreasonable intrusion into that person's solitude. The issue of increased liability for "failure to protect" is covered under California Government Code Sections 821, 845, and 846 which state, in part: "Neither a public entity or a public employee [may be sued] for failure to provide adequate police protection or service, failure to prevent the commission of crimes and failure to apprehend criminals." IA3 The Federal and most state courts, including California's, have recognized that although police agencies and their officers will inevitably do everything within their power to prevent crime and protect its citizens, it is under no legal obligation to do so. In California, this premise is confirmed in Hartzler v. City of San Jose, in Davidson v. City of Westminster, in Susman v. City of Los Angeles, et al, and in Antique Arts Corp. v. City of Torrence. In each of the aforementioned cases, the underlying message is that law enforcement officers do not have a duty to protect an individual from harm, unless a special relationship exists between the law enforcement agency and the individual. Most of the cases in which a special relationship was found to exist involved a person suffering an injury while in custody; or, shortly after being released from custody by officers who knew, or should have known, that the person was unable to exercise ordinary care.. Historically, tourism is and likely will continue to be the main source of revenue for the City of Palm Springs. The proposed CCTV system is intended to assist public safety in quicker response to the needs of our citizens, merchants, and visitors so that our business district continues to thrive. Since one of the primary functions of public safety is the security and well being of our citizens and visitors, we believe we should strive to utilize available technology to provide the people in our downtown area with at least the level of comfort they are able to enjoy at a convenience store. Funds for this purpose are available as follows: $65,000 from a 99/00 State technology grant; $54,314.73 for a 97/98 State technology grant; and $40,828.84 from a 00/01 State technology grant. C. il- " WEIGEL Harold E. Good Chief of Police Procurement Manager APPROVED City Manager Attachments: 1. Minute order REVIEWED BY DEPT.OF FINANCE Martha EdgmoR From: Ronald G. Williams [rgw221@gte.net] Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 12:48 PM To: MarthaE@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: Fw: Downtown video camera proposal Martha, Please print this out for Ms.Hodges for tonight's city council meeting. Thank you, Ron Williams --Original Message----- From: Ronald G. Williams To: DeynaH@Cl palm-spings ca us Sent: Wednesday, June 061 2001 12:04 PM Subject: Downtown video camera proposal Dear Deyna, Just a quick note from an old acquaintance,if you have a moment. As a retired peace officer and a member of the Palm Springs Police Department's Citizen Advisory Board I should like to enlist your aid in supporting the proposal to install and use fourteen(14)video cameras in the downtown area to reduce crime in that area. I saw the negative editorial in the Desert Sun,but I believe that the author of that piece had some problems with their accuracy. First,the cameras can be purchased, installed,and working for about$400,000.00. This money already exists in part from grant funds,donations,and asset forfeiture funds. This is a lot cheaper than putting fourteen new police officers on the street.....your staff can verify that. Second,you and I are fortunate to have one of the best police departments I have had the opportunity to meet in some 39 years of involvement in the law enforcement community. Let us allow them to do their jobs to protect us-the residents and visitors to our city-they have far more expertise in that field than has the Desert Sun. Third,the editorial indicates that the cameras only relocate crhne to areas where there is no surveillance. That may be true,but I feel that the removal of such crimes as"smash and grabs",burglaries,assaults,armed robberies,graffiti, and others would be just fine in another city......my own view is that we need to protect our own citizens and visitors and these video surveillance techniques will do just that! Please support the proposal to install and use these video devices in our city. Also,please feel free to contact me in any issue before the city if I may be of assistance with my background. Respectfully, Ronald G. Williams 2040 East Amado Road Palm Springs,CA 92262-6508 (760)327-9547 rgw221na,gte.net 6/6/O1 lv O5 'rJ% Martha Edgmon From: George Puddephatt[gpuddephatt@earthlink.net] Sent: Tuesday, June 05, 2001 4:30 AM To: marthae@ci.pal m-springs.ca.us Subject: Cameras in Downtown Please register my full support of the installation of cameras in downtown Palm Springs! I see it as the equivalent of having full-time police protection in an area that needs additional attention and not an invasion of privacy. The only ones who would seem so adamantly opposed to this idea would seem to be ones with criminal intent on their minds. George Puddephatt 1 2 Martha Edgmon From: Bobphillips726@cs.com Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 10:53 AM To: marthae@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: Proposal to Install Gestapo Cameras- Palm Springs, California Try limiting the hours your city executives and City Council meet. Perhaps that will reduce the number of totally outrageous, childish, and stupid "solutions" such as the above sunject. Read the Constitution (of the USA). Peruse the dictionary for words like liberty, freedom, rights, etc. Robert Phillips (Part time Palm Springs visitor) Robert Phillips 73563 El Hasson Circle Palm Desert CA 92260 T-760-341-6643 F-760-568-5395 6/4/01 Martha Edgmon From: Jayne Martin oaynemar@earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2001 1:01 AM To: marthae@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: RE: opposed to surveillance cameras Dear Mayor and City Council members: Per the Desert Sun's Our Voice: Big Brother preps to get bigger There's nothing to smile about for these cameras As a citizen of Palm Springs I wish to voice strong opposition to the proposed installation of 14 video surveillance cameras in downtown Palm Springs as a way to ensure safety. That these 'images' can be viewed utilizing 'tilt and zoom' capabilities brings to mind a variety of possible abuses. Certainly I will no longer shop or take casual walks along the boulevard if such cameras are put into service. It's fully understood the problems and challenges that a growing community faces, but there has to be a less offensive way. Respectfully, Jayne Martin Palm Springs ---iffnemar acarthhlink.net 6/4/01 Martha Edgmon From: Pammygram@aol.com Sent: Monday, June 04, 2001 9:29 PM To: marthae@ci.paim-springs.ca.us Subject: Re: Our Voice...Desert Scum...June 3rd Hi: I am all for the surveillance cameras. I wish they could be all over town. Every business and parking lot needs them. It is a fantastic idea. Chief Weigel is a wonderful person and is so dedicated to the safety of Palm Springs. I hope the City Council gives him their full support. I have lived in Palm Springs for over 30 years and own my home here. As a tax payer, I want the cameras downtown. Sincerely, Pam & Gene Sims 2795 Venetia Rd Palm Springs, CA 92262 1 Martha Edgmon From: Jeanne Reller-Spurgin Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 11:47 AM To: Martha Edgmon Subject: FW: Proposed video cameras in downttown From: Ronald G. Williams[SMTP:RGW221 @GTE.NET] Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 11:47:32 AM To: JeanneRS@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: Proposed video cameras in downttown Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear Jeanne, Hello from an old friend. Just a moment of your time, if you would be so kind. As a former peace officer and a member of the Palm Springs Police Department's Citizen Advisory Board I should like to politely request your support for the proposed video cameras in the downtown area. My reasons to support this proposal are many and varied, but as a responsible citizen of the city I feel very strongly about this program. The Desert Sun printed a very negative editorial about the cameras,but I feel they misrepresented some important facts. (1) The program is far less expensive than hiring fourteen(14)new police officers. Not that we couldn't use additional officers,but the cost is far higher than the expense of this program. (2) There is no"privacy" issue involved here,the courts have ruled that a person has no right to expect"privacy" in a public place-as on the streets of Palm Springs. (3) Studies in other cities show that the crime in areas covered by such cameras does indeed DECREASE. That is the major reason for such a program. I don't care if it stops it or just moves it elsewhere......like to another city which does not have cameras. As long as it STOPS such activities as "smash and grabs",fights,burlaries,armed robberies, and so forth. We are most fortunate to have in this city one of the best police agencies I have ever contacted in my 39 years in that community. I strongly believe that we should support the police department and the programs they propose to keep us all safer. Please support the program when it comes before the City Council. Please feel free to use my experience and background in any manner for the betterment of the city. Contact me at any time I may be of assistance to you. Respectfully, Ronald G. Williams 2040 East Amado Road 6Springs,CA 92262-6508 Martha Edgmon From: BO [chilany@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 11:21 AM To: marthae@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: Surveillance cameras Please be advised that I strongly oppose the installation of any surveillance cameras by the City of Palm Springs.We do not pay taxes for the City to spend money on limitations of our civil rights. J.Blayd Ott 83 Portola Drive Palm Springs, CA 92264 6/7/O1 Martha Edgmon 0,; ••��'/ From: Ron Oden Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:29 AM To: Martha Edgmon Subject: FW: Cameras >---------- >From: TIM O'BAYLEY[SMTP:TOBAYLEY@DESERTAIDSPROJECT.ORG] >Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 8:26:17 AM >To: Ron Oden (E-mail) ; Jeanne Reller-Spurgin (E-mail) ; Will >Kleindienst (E-mail) ; Jim Jones (E-mail) >Subject: Cameras >Auto forwarded by a Rule Dear Mayor and Councilmembers: I am writing as a resident of Palm Springs to voice my objection to the proposed plan to install surveillance cameras in downtown Palm Springs. I consider it an inappropriate way for the Palm Springs police to do their job. If there's that much trouble that 24 hour monitoring is called for, then put more officers on the corners, not cameras. I live and work here, and do not wish to have our village turned into something from Orwell's 111984". Tim O'Bayley Communications Manager Desert AIDS Project 760/323-2118 ext. 262 (This is my personal opinion, and is not necessarily the position of my employer, Desert AIDS Project. ) 1 `_ Martha Edgmon From: Jay Schuster Uhs@earthlink.net] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 10:30 PM To: marthae@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject: cameras Is this a joke? I have vacationed in Palm Springs and will definitely think twice before coming there again if these cameras are installed. Its one thing for a corner traffic light, but spying on people on the street or at malls? Come on. This will kill whatever tourist business you have. I strongly urge you to reject this proposal. The worldwide publicity alone will kill off Palm Springs. THIS IS DEFINITELY BAD P.R. 1 Martha Edgmon From: S B. Casmier[suzcas@pacbell.het] �d Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 7:15 PM To: marthae@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject:: surveillance cameras Card far S B Casmler I hope you vote against the spy cameras. I certainly won't visit Palm Springs again if they are installed. I'm sure many other occasional and regular visitors would agree with me. Sincerely, Susan B. Casmier Reseda, CA 1 C� Martha Edgmon r/�1 From: S B. Casmier[suzcas@pacbell.net] Sent: Monday, June 11, 2001 7:05 PM To: marthae@ci.palm-springs.ca.us Subject:: surveillance 11-1 Card tar S B.Casmier As an occasional visitor to Palm Springs, you need to know that I will never come to PS again if you install those surveillance cameras. Susan B. Casmier 6601 Wilbur Ave. #50 Reseda, CA 91335 k 1 El �G,�GI r-��a+���,Bn �=s'a�aat2o€,� vltA�ed® �F�hb"N�� .,,�.r� o �=���iri•o � r � ���,,��, (;��o �w�u 'vi� � !i�,?� C;�r June 12, 2001 U Mr. David Ready 3200 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way Palm Springs, CA 92262 Dear David, I am writing to you on behalf of the Palm Springs Hotel&Hospitality Association's Board of Directors. Earlier this year, the Board voted unanimously in support of the Palm Springs Police Department's plan to install approximately fourteen security cameras in downtown Palm Springs. We feel that the PSPD is responding properly and efficiently to the safety concerns of the downtown merchants, and we support the pro active position they are taking in addressing these issues. We feel that the proposed installation of cameras will not only be a crime deterrent, but will also aid the PSPD in the procurement of arrests and prosecutions of those that wish to do harm to the Village of Palm Springs, its merchants, citizens, and tourists. As an organization with an interest in the business of tourism, it is important to our members that the City be as secure and safe as possible for those visiting our wonderful resort destination. In a perfect world, we would be able to afford as many police officers as needed to protect our streets, homes, and businesses. Since this is not a financial reality, we applaud the PSPD for taking the initiative to find alternate solutions. We are thankful that the Palm Springs Police Department is looking forward to the future in anticipation of potential policing problems. The cameras can only enhance the chances of their success. Sincerely, �0 Denise Goolsby, President Palm Springs Hotel&Hospitality Association cc: Chief Lee Weigel � J In Page 1 of 3 rY , 1 W t 9 � IJ 111H T":L�•' I '- n i II% ,. .. u ,'".�w.�s t,E;•'s�axle Dk, l5r V>!u x - i r0 Cmpaa,vne_nc January 29,2001 f,.,t., u;va ,n z - .f.•=n� .e„ - -..- Graphco Technologies, Inc. 41 University Drive, #205 Newtown, PA 18940 Vice President,Sales and Marketing. (215)497-9170 x134 On January 28th, Criminals No Longer Another Face in the Tampa Stadium Crowd Tampa., Flail January 29, 2001 -Graphco Technologies, Inc. (G-TECTM), a leading developer of technology and solutions for blometric authentication, secure access, and expert information-sharing systems, announced l:oday that they provided a surveillance and facial recognition system at both the Raymond James Stadium in Tampa and at Ybor City, Florida. The system was in place from January 21 - January 28, 2001 to monitor potential cr lmincJl activities during the sporting events and related activities at the two locations. In cooperation with the Tampa Sports Authority, Graphco Technologies partnered with Raytheon Company's (NYSE: RTNA, RTNB) Unthicusn, Maryland office, Visage Technology, Inc. (NASDAQ: VISG), and VelTek International, Inc., W provide its FaceTracT'" facial recognition system to the Tampa Police Department and other federal, state and local law enforcement agencies. "Not everyone comes to sporting events with good intentions," says David Watkivns, G-TEC's Managing Director, "The multiple distractions at the nation's premier athletic events provide criminals with opportunities to engage in a variety of illegal activities. G-TEC's facial recognition system provided the Raymond James Stadium with a superior surveillance system that not only captures images of individuals but also compares their facial features against a database of known felons.' The FaceTracT" core facial recognition technology provides the ability to locate faces, to build 'face print' templates and to recognize matches to images stored in a database. When integrated with G-TEC's law enforcement database, FaceTracTM allows rapid search, comparison and Identification all suspect facial photos within the database. FaceTracT14 may be used for surveillance with multiple locations networked to a high capacity site, for analysis and system-search results. G-TEC r installed FaceTracTM at the Raymond James Stadium as a single site system, integrated with a custom designed database and search result notifications for —F� tracking faces in a crowd and monitoring access to secure areas. h4Ltp:l/,wvr;Fr.viisage.con,/jaiiu, y_29_2001.1,trr 6/13/2001 FIl Page 2 of 3 if Tom Colatosti, Vilsage President and CEO said, "Places where large crowds are present, such as sporting events, are tempting targets for all types mischief, criminal behavior and larger threats. Using patented Viisage technology, G-TEC has introduced a new generation of tools for law enforcement officials to more effectively and non-intrusively provide for public safety. As an integral partner in the project, Vilsage Technology provided G-TEC with the industry's leading and most robust face-recognition technology." Viisage Technology's FaceFINDERTM software drives the FaceTracT" surveillance and identification process. Viisage's industry-leading face-recognition technology has the world's largest image database deployment in surveillance and investigative applications. Viisage also provided the project with image acquisition and integration technology and services. During the week of January 21st, G-TEC deployed the FaceTracT" system throughout the Raymond James Stadium to detect and identify individuals who are wanted or suspect, and may present a danger to the public. Using standard cameras to recognize human faces during entry to the sporting event, FaceTracT'" continuously compared faces in the incoming crowd to an extensive, customized database of known felons,terrorists, and con artists provided by multiple local, state and federal agencies. A law enforcement task force of local, state and federal agency personnel monitored the system. Once individuals were matched with photo files in the database, officers of the joint task force, circulating throughout the complex., could be dispatched immediately to make possible arrests, quickly and discreetly. In addition to 'installing cameras supplied by VelTek International at the Raymond James Stadium, G-TEC adapted its FaceTracTM capability to cameras in Ybor City, Florida to oversee the celebrations before and after-the athletic events. Raytheon Company, a global developer and supplier of high-tech products and services, and a G-TEC partner, provided sophisticated cameras and expertise to provide police wit'R exceptional night vision capabilities for poorly lit or darkened areas in Ybor City. G-TEC, headquartered in Newtown, PA, develops, manufactures, and markets secure database and secure communications systems worldwide. G-TEC combines information sharing, biometric authentication, secure access, and secure data facility technologies to provide technical infrastructure and applications in support of public and private law enforcement, corporate security, manufacturing, and secure web-enabled virtual communities. G-TEC's Intrapol Analysis Center offers secure-access data storage, sharing, and secure virtual community systems to corporate and law enforcement entities at the local, regional, state, national, and international levels. Graphco Technologies is located on the World wide web at www.araphcotech.com. Vilsage Technology, Inc, (NASDAQ: VISG), Littleton, Massachusetts; is a world leader in biometric face-recognition technology and in digital identification solutions. Viisage's fare-recognition technology is widely recognized as the most convenient, non-intrusive and cost-effective biometric available. Viisage's patented face-recognition technology, originally developed at MIT, and its systems integration and software design capabilities, improve personal convenience, privacy and security while deterring identity theft and fraud. Raytheon Company (NYSE: RTNA, RTNB), based in Lexington, Mass., is a global technology deader that provides products and services in the areas of commercial and defense electronics, business and special mission aircraft. The company is now successfully expanding its defense technologies into non-defense sectors such as air traffic control, data, image and information management, transportation and communications. Raytheon's Unthicum, Maryland office has expertise in network security and large system development and deployment for both national intelligence and commercial customers, and is the primary Raytheon branch that supported G-TEC's surveillance efforts at the Raymond James Stadium. Additional hrp://i,Avin,,.viisage.com/jamaar,,_24_20011trn 6/13/2001 r' IIa Page 3 of 3 information is available at wvaw.raytheon.com Veltek International, Inc. is a leading manufacturer of Closed Circuit Television and security related equipment. Veltel, currently offers over 250 different CM, products through worldwide distribution including standard and specialty video cameras, housings, video signal, remote transmission, digital video streaming and digital storage equipment. FaceTracT14 Is a trademark of Graphco Technologies, Inc. FaceFINDERT"' Is a trade mark of Viisage, Inc, Crack To plain Corporate Information I Face Recognition I Systems Integration I Contact us I Home ©1999-2000 Viisage inc,all rights reserved. http://www.�iisage.com/j4tuuary29 2001.htm 6/13/2001 do Page 1 of 2 Unks'1" FIR Pzpava ili ol u do R s n J c, rc I s 0 popol a o h.les 1 Cj a v u cv i rz,"L", 'd p:?, vc ,It.n U S i I,,LAIc Ow, s o c r PI i t 11iF1 F�i 171 i(l s"J Fit th,e yr L T k C'n n Cj I II Li a I C.P a I I- S mi'lpalw's cha,avel a1 ul z! o-,,_t In"", 6 necx Er gym" jwHor, as Ule LOiilnld o i :ij n I ir 1 rl.I 1U ve!Mca d on ni, ,t 1 M, �V fla v_xi:.r�cjiioli ft)[ e-connnn cJ and horne !-, jad p2 Fraud I-ulut'Llon, casint) survePlance, -ih porF � L,nd o�:her 5ecuri'v i-mol enf"Igcement' appNCFNor-,. VI!Sag�, is lesdhig, Me waiv ,a' bring face ccoar][OD'I applicalicFps and -)ro, u�-,ts �r fn�ik I d F,�i'hei )Irlaase's Bilomenic sysL"m5 integia6can pm"k-hng Ilev IC)RvvaIa IrdiIk Wc.,nei:, c, I:m s h C 5 if r slgnstule E:m', ringerprin" T!I"i u,to b", `�odh rd.�:ldficn6orl mErmfication ral-b 5ystems. "Dt'a'a"r ,nd v1mN,0iGF1 systems 03v Tr-ram. appikauons inr4!6- ows, Cxt nn l eg;E'on s u,I I-,, 1n re&I-i;Lml P.. ;2'1.41.jf �•i,'IjrS'I l7f-',.;'f(% �,Ijj Jjsjj�, InGnt[fil-a'Llun jr1vr,1vL,-" a, or.[�.W-[Tiartv lrij o2hei applicaller, thot ra"quires as: indwkjucTs ri,]r,insl aH iderININcanva or vemNcoUo,i rJf ar in a Oazbae In orcier fa d mdnAdual, Vilsel; " envimo�IE" a day &C�l M�Me dent,tw ,md vt.rWic•°.Nnn is charao'� mvcd j,-,- 'At' I-rf soc'iety roLfld be Nocr. s IndNI(IiIiiii's iaC2 to c:L,rkh, LeVs, Put', �md sl".Maicuves. or Nei f,;1ni,,-,rJ irri age boo diva u o - pcis,111,s iaco bo Pie pw�4?.I'e, ID se (-A u;CI i FvY1l v, I'd e;O.Ji,y, Ill e 'Coo',11"a ii y's 'a C:e- 5-Cure cmd ir bLcaus% cA: Le. -'A Cu I MiQ.s 01'", LmZ;•, vap 1, Fnd, BCCIdVnre lnsLaFid�, cf geEnSDC.0 ho,rl eji{ze.v libra ""i'dec) Ell -,i W 6/1-4/2001 June 7, 2001 P.O. Box 2743 PS 92263-2743 Attn: Martha Edgemon FAX: 323-8207 Palm Springs City Council Members RE: Palm Canyon Surveillance Cameras I am writing to let you know that I am strongly opposed to the City's funding of the installation of the proposed cameras on Palm Canyon. The reasons for not installing the cameras are almost as numerous as the myriad of other, more useful, ways to use the $400,000.00. At the top of my wish list are dog runs set aside in some of our parks around town. The current situation with the "Dog Park" is just not an adequate or acceptable solution for pets or for fair use of the parks. Please vote down any proposal to install cameras in Palm Springs. I recently came across the new and interesting sculpture "fountain" on Palm Canyon. What a disappointment and missed opportunity. This art easily crosses the line from fountain to modern water sculpture. Instead of trying to compete with Cathedral City and Palm Desert all in one stroke, why didn't we just enhance the charm of the "old world" village atmosphere that already exists downtown with our wonderful palm trees? What a shame! Please consider moving this sculpture and do the fountain site, downtown, and the art some justice. Thank you. James Evans Q 9268E J 6n 126 E. Ramon Road Palm Springs, CA d 44 Martha Edgmon From: CruisemasterXXX@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2001 8:18 AM To: letters@thedesertsun.com Subject: Surveillance cameras Marie Leech's front page story about proposed surveillance cameras for downtown Palm Springs exposes the inconsistency in the thinking of our city leaders and the local police department. I am in favor of traffic cameras at intersections with signal lights to deter people who choose to run red lights. This is a public safety issue. Jim Seablom, the traffic sergeant at the Palm Springs police department, told me that the use of such cameras "is not forseen in the near future. " The city's concern is the invasion of privacy. I understand that signal light cameras are only activated when a driver runs a red light (i.e. breaks the law) while surveillance cameras observing pedestrians are in use constantly on the fear that someone might commit a crime. Why should our law in£orcement be more concerned about the rights of people breaking the law rather than people who are obeying the law? Apparently, our officials don't want to impede drivers on their way to our attractions; but, once on foot, any right to privacy is not a concern to the City of Palm Springs. Ness Olsen 1986 S. Yucca Place Palm Springs, CA 92264 (760) 323-2558 1 Palm Springs"The Surveillance City" -- — This report is to try to inform the citizens of Palm Springs oil the overall issue of privacy and the deterioration of our Fourth and Fifth Amendment P.ights. The downtown cameras will eventually be linked to the database of this system: The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AM✓IVA) is possibly the world leader among those working to establish a international 11) system. Their website is at: httv L/Nvww.a unva or-/g_The AAMVA currently:.manages huge databases of information about individuals which it obtains from states and other sources. It also links the information it collects to other privately-held databases of information, such as those maintained by credit reporting agencies(ChoicePoint for eyample). The AAMVA then sells this information.(or access to it) to paying subscribers. Centralized collection by the AAMVA of the massive amounts of personal information held by the various state licensing and vehicle registration agencies was authorized, made possible, and protected by the Driver's Privacy Protection Aet (DPPA), which the AAMVA supported. The database information is market under the name of AAIVIVAnet. Whereas the federal government and the states are prohibited fromn amassing centralized databases of associated information such as this, private "government-affiliated" entities, such as the AAD/DIA are permitted to do so. The AAMVA promotes and helps develop standards for drivers licenses, and supports legislation which makes drivers licenses into de facto identification documents. The AA.MVA is a key player in the ISO SC17 WG-10 Project, a program working LOT the establishment of international standards for driver license f identification documents. Information about the "International Driver License/identu;cat.or,Document Standard" is available online: http:f/wvrti*zaa va of�f/Famvahnde embersli-, himl "For the past year, AV-JVA has been involved with the International Standards Organization's (ISO) SC17 WGIO effort to establish a worldwide standard for imforma tion contained on, and technologies used on, the driver license document. The standard will create a common basis for international use and recognition of driver licenses ... . There are currently 13 countries fi-om five continents involved in this effo,.t: Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and North America. AAMVA currently serves as the Internet clearinghouse for this effort." "The ISO effort has recently taken a new direction_ The WG10 Working Croup intends to work with the United Nations to develop standards for an International Driver License (IDL) to take the place of the current International Driver Permit (IDP). Upon development of these standards, countries that issue domestic licenses meeting the IDL standards would be able to use their license as an IDL." 1 The PAA-AA A has worked aggressively towards establishing standards or&iver licenscs and identification cards in the US and Canada. A PDF version of their Standard is available here: ham://ram .7amva.orela nianet/standards/g�ablie/pdJAe W�k�AE?� r'tandrd000630.pdf The Standard includes guidelines for digital photos, digital signatures, inachine-readable features (i.e-, magnetic stripe, bar-code, smartcards). It also incorporates sociall security numbers as a key identification item.It appears that the AANWA is funded in whole or in part through association dues and membership fees. Membership is made up of state motor vehicle administrators and corporations which benefit from establishment of databases and standards. The corporations are typically those who will also sell the equipment to the states to bring them into compliance with the standards. And others themselves access and market the information assimilated by the A-MvIVA(or AAN VA-net). It also appears that its services marketed under AAMVA-iiet help ,with hinding. The AA—MVA hosts routine con[brences at lavish hotels in highly-desirable locations where state motor vehicle administrators gather to hear about new programs being promoted by the AAMVA, and meet with industry leaders who educate them on the new technologies which will serve to accomplish the AAMVA goals (i.e., national and international standard identification documents). The AAMVA web site states: "Associate membership is available to organizations, associations and business enterprises with interests that are compatible with A�SfiJA and its program objectives." Associate membership includes: ChoicePoint Inc., Automated Tracking Systems, Cardeom Technology, Electronic Access Inc., Experian, IBM, IdentiScan, Intelli-Check Identification& Verification Systems, Lockheed Martin, Maw Tek Inc., MasterCard, Polaroid, SafeCard ID Systems, Sym,ol, Unisys, ViiSAGE Technology. And in addition: The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators is a non profit organization. So the question arises: What motivates these people? These are individuals who spend every day thinking tip ways to achieve more control over us. `What drives them? As we saw, the AAMVA is the driving force (no pun intended)behind the effort to establish an international identification systern --you read that right, international. But they are not candid about their goal. They use all sorts of lofty-sounding excuses to justif, their back-door, po,,ver-grabbing measures. For example, the deadbeat dad laws which require all driver licensing agencies to collect social security rrurr ners from license applicants has nothing to do with deadbeat dads. That was just the excuse. The goal was to establish a network of computer-linIked identification data about Americans, it is now in place. 2 The "immigration control' act (adopted the very same year as the deadbeat dads law) required standardization of all drivers licenses across the US. It was designed to accomplish the same surreptitious objective: turn the drivers license into a control document. The AAMVA was even allowed to draft the implementing regulations, This one was much more blatant and open than the deadbeat dads approach. When the American people found what was going on they objected. But not until three years too late,well after all of the standardization was already in place. Nearly every state has no unified their license documents to be in conformity with the standard. www netwodkusa org/fin pnintfr�agP4/ip-04-mgc4-winners-loseis.h[ml But what good is a national ID without authority to control the information generated by its use?Little. So the AAMVA also promoted the cleverly-mis-named "Drivers Privacy Protection Act."Now doesn't that sound like it would "protect" the "privacy" of drivers? That's exactly what you were supposed to think, as well as the gullible Congressmen who voted for it. Words do not always mean what it is intended for you to think they mean. In this case, the law only protects one thing: access to your private information by government agencies and data-mining companies who benefit from the data, either by making their job easier and giving them more control, or by direct financial gain-- huge financial gain. These two go hand-in-hand by the way. If the AANIVA's goals were operdy admitted, there would be wide-spread opposition. They are well aware of this fact. Therefore, they always use back-door approaches. But a recognizable pattern has emerged. The AANTVA has close connections with industry leaders in the areas of database prograniniing and management (we're talking about the ivorld leaders in this area), as well as the companies working on the cutting edge of identification technology. Now who do you suppose iAl be the "customers" for the new identification technology? You guessed it, state licensing agencies. (Of course, you are actually the paying customer.) And what is the best way to get those buying customers to climb on board?Well, the approach is not as straight forward as you at first might think. Companies can't rely,merely on having the "best" in their class. They must first assure that they are going to corner or,the market. The way to accomplish this is by having standards adopted with which the customers will be corripelled to comply. (What self- respecting licensing director would purchase non-standard equipment?) The way to get the desired standards adopted is through the respective associations, in this case the AAMVA. Once the standards are agreed upon, it's just a matter of time before the new standard will be universally adopted and in place (as old equipment becomes obsolete and.must be replaced) -- it's guaranteed. (Pact is, the licensing agencies could not purchase non- standard equipment even if they wanted to --no company will be producing it.) The AAR.iVA has already adopted most of the standards necessary for the national ID. And as we have already stated, most of these are in place now across the US. 3 But if they stopped there, they'd have nothing to do! More importantly,their associates -- whose companies' anti investors' fortunes depend upon their selling the "new" technologies--would be very unhappy. Presently, the AAMVA is working on fingerprint standards and facial recognition standards. They are also working on machine-readable card technologies. These technologies are designed to facilitate positive identification, and to allow information about an individual to be read by machines from the card. Once identity is verified, the maelim wrill link to your financial, vehicle ownership, medical, criminal, insurance, and tax data(as well as things such as gun ownership). The AAM-VA already provides access to members for much of this information. You will be told these measures are all to "protect your identity" and to "protect your privacy." Public safety directors will be told hoer wonderful it will be when their staff can sit at a computer and pull up every detail about a subject-citizen's life. We now see that the AAMVA is working with the United Nations through the ISO SC17 WG-10 Project for the establishment of international standards for driver license/ identification documents. Information about the "International Driver License/Identification Document Standard" is available online: http:(ltirn�avv aarfva orn/aarnvalinderl'�i eimbe "hir,.htanl They openly state: "For the past year, AAMVA has been involved with the International Standards Organisation's (ISO) SC17 WGIG effort to establish a worldwide standard for information contained on, and technologies used on, the driver license document. The standard will create a common basis for international use and recognition of driver licenses ... . There are currently 13 countries from five continents involved in this effort: Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe and North:America. AAAII IA currently serves as the Internet clearinghouse for this effort." And: "The ISO effort has recently taken a new;direction. The WGIO Working Group intends to work with the United Nations to develop standards for an International Driver License (IDL)to take the place of the current International Driver Permit (IDP). Upon development of these standards, countries that issue domestic licenses meeting t he IDL standards would be able to use their license as an IDL." Surprise, you already have an international ID whether you like it or not. That is of course, unless you refuse to renew your h^ense next time it comes due for renewal. You see, you've gradually allowed the drivers license to be metamorphosed into an identification document rather than proof of ability to drive. That's Any they called it a "drivers license" and not and "identification card." Rest assured, the AAMVA sees drivers license as identi ication cards. That was the first deception. Then they began "offering" photos on licenses. Initially, these were voluntary. People were told that the photos would protect therm should someone find a lost license and try to use it to cash a bad check. Once the A OAVA established standards for license photos, they became mandatory. All along, the AAMVA and the DOT saw the benefit to them for mandating photos. Now the technology exists(and is being used)where computers can "recogrvze" 4 a digital copy of your photo and associate information about you with your "identity." Now, all licensingjurisdictions are using digital photo equipment. And the DPPA allows your digital photos to be used for many purposes other than what youve been told or are aware of. Next came the machine-readable capability. No one complained. Gradually, fingerprints or some other biometric identification technology will migrate into the licensing program. At first, only a few states(,.:here objections are not too great) will adopt the requirement. As momentum builds, the remaining states will contend: "Well, there are Xx states using this now and they are realizing all kinds of wonderfid benefits, we need there too." The AAMVA will provide unlimited amounts of positive statistics to use in justifying to their legislature the new equipment that drill be needed. And who doesn't like to have new toys. You'll think it's just a driving license, but the state will know that soon they'll be able to locate you, and find out everything about you with the click of a button. So the question remains: What motivates these people? Now lets look at vdiat concerned parties are trying to do about it. Subject Statement cn SSNs Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:57:18 -0400 Friends, I thought you might be interested in th.e following statement Congressman Paul submitted for the subcommittee on Social Security hearing on the abuse of the Social Security number on May 22: <http://r5n,nv house.n,�o�/pauUcon�rec/consree200t/cr05220fl IrtHn> May 22, 2001 Hearing before the House Ways and Means Social Security Subcommittee Protecting Privacy and Preventing Misuse of Social Security Numbers I wish to thank the subcommittee on Social Security of the Ways and Means Committee for holding this hearing on the misuse of the Social Security number. The transformation of the Social Security,number into a de facto uniform identifier is a subject of increasing concert,to the American people. This is, in large part, because the use of the Social Security number as a standard identifier facilitates the crime ofidentit=f theft. Today, all an unscrupulous person needs to do is obtain someone's Social Security number in order to access that person's bank accounts, credit cards, and other financial assets. Many Americans have lost their life savings and have had their credit destroyed as a result of identity thelt. The responsibility for the rususe of the Social Security number and the corresponding vulnerability of the American people to identity crimes lies squarely,rrith the Congress. Since the creation of the Social Security number, Congress has authorized over 40 uses of the Social Security number. Thanks to Congress,today no American can get a job, open a bank account, get a professional license, or even get a drivers' license without presenting their Social Security number. So widespread has the use of the Social Security number become that a member of my staff had to produce a Social Security number in order to get a fishing license! 5 Because it was Congress which transformed the Social Security number into a national identifier, Congress has a moral responsibility to address this problem. In order to protect the American people from government-mandated uniforin identifiers which facilitate identity crimes, I have introduced the Identity Theft Prevention Act(HR 220). The major pro-6sion of the Identity Theft Prevention Act halts the practice of using the Social Security number as an identifier by requiring the Social Security A dniinistrati m to issue all Americans new Social Security numbers within five years after-the enactment of the bill. These new numbers will be the sole legal property of the recipient and the Social Security Administration shall be forbidden to divulge the numbers for any purposes not related to the Social Security program. Social Security numbers issued before irniplementation of this bill shall no longer be considered valid federal identifiers. Of course, the Social Security Administration shall be able to use an individual's original Social Security number to ensure efficient transition of the Social Security system. This act also forbids the federal government from creating national 11) cards or establishing any identifiers for the purpose of investigating, monitoring, overseeing, or regulating private transactions between American citizens, as well as repealing those sections of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 that require the Department of Health and Human Services to establish a uniform standard health identifier. By putting an end to goverment-mandated uniform IDs, the Identity Theft Prevention Act will prevent millions of Americans from having their liberty, property and privacy violated by private-and-public sector criminals. In addition to forbidding the federal government from creating national identifiers, this legislation forbids the federal goverrnment from blackmailing states into adopting uniform standard identifiers by withholding federal finds. One of the most onerous practices of Congress is the use of federal finds illegitimately taken from the American people to bribe states into obeying federal dictates. Many of our colleagues will claim that the federal government needs these powers to protect against fraud or some other criminal activities. However, monitoring the transactions of every American in order to catch those few who are involved in some sort of illegal activity turns one of the great bulwarks of our liberty, the presumption of innocence, on its head. The federal government has no right to treat all Americans as criminals by spying on their relationship with their doctors, employers, or bankers. In fact, criminal law enforcement is reserved to the state and local governments by the Constitution's Tenth Amendment. Other members of Congress will claim that the federal government needs the power to monitor Americans in order to allow the government to operate more efficiently. I would remind my colleagues that in a constitutional republic the people are never asked to sacrifice their liberties to matte the job of government officials a little bit easier. We are here to protect the freedom of the American people, not to make privacy invasion more efficient. Mr. Chairman, while I do not question the sincerity of those members who suggest that Congress can ensure citizens' rights are protected through legislation restricting access to personal information, the only effective privacy protection is to forbid the federal goverimnent fi-om mandating national identifiers. Legislative "privacy protections" are inadequate to protect the liberty of Americans for several reasons. First, it is simply common sense that repealing those federal laws that promote identity theft is a more effective in protecting the public than expanding the power of the federal police force. Federal punishment of identity thieves provides old comfort to those who have suffered financial losses and the destruction 6 Y of their good reputation as a result of identity theft. Federal laws are not only ineffective in stopping private criminals, they have not even stopped unscrupulous government officials from accessing personal information. Did laws purporting to restrict the use of personal information stop the well-publicized violation of privacy by IRS oficials or the FBI abuses by the Clinton and Nixon administrations? ! The primary reason why any action short of the repeal of laws authorizing privacy violation is insufficient is because the federal government lacks constitutional authority to fore:D citizers to adopt a universal identifier for health care, employment, or any other reason. Any federal action that oversteps constitutional limitations violates liberty because it ratifies the principle that the federal government, not the Constitution, is the ultimate judge of its own jurisdiction over the people. The only effective protection of the rights of citizens is for Congress to follow Thomas Jefferson's advice and "bind (the federal government) down with the chains of the Constitution." Mr. Chairman, those members-who are=anpersuaded by the nloral and constitutional reasons for embracing the Identity Theft Prevention Act should consider the overhhellning opposition of the American people toward national identifiers. The overwhelming public opposition to the various "Know-Your-Customer" schemes, the attempt to turn drivers' licenses into National ID cards, IlI3S's misnamed "medical privacy" proposal, as well as the numerous complaints over the ever-growing uses of the Social Security number show that American people want Congress to stop invading their privacy. Congress risks provoking a voter backlash if we fail to halt the growth of the surveillance ,state. In conclusion, W. Chair:ran, I once again thank you and the other members of the subcommittee for holding a hearing on this important issue. I hope this hearing would lead to serious Congressional action to end to the federal government's unconstitutional use of national identifiers which facilitate identity theft by passing I'll-220, the ldentif j Theft Prevention Act. Also have a look at these websites: hitp://www.viisagC.corn/£acialrecog.11t'n littt)://ww=,v viisage cony/3eptember26 1997 htm http.//vv-wva.viisaae.con>/janeaary 29 20t�1 htm This is the escalating level of surveillance we will face until eventually the cameras will be in our ovna homes and then George Orwell's vision will be complete. If you don't speak up now our children will completely loose their liberty and it is happening "one slice of the bologna at a time. Best, Roger Sunpath 7 MINUTE ORDER NO. 6859 AWARDING BID FOR THE PURCHASE OF SIXTEEN (16) CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION CAMERAS, PLUS ANCILLARY EQUIPMENT FROM DA PACIFIC, PALM DESERT, CA, ON A UNIT PRICE BASIS IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $160,143.57. ------------------ I HEREBY CERTIFY that this Minute Order, awarding bid for the purchase of sixteen (16) closed circuit television cameras, plus ancillary equipment from DA Pacific, Palm Desert, CA, on a unit price basis in the total amount of $160,143.57, was adopted by the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, in a meeting thereof held on the 13th day of June, 2001. PATRICIA A. SANDERS City Clerk