City Council places camera ordinance on April ballot

The ordinance would increase the number of cameras downtown.

By Will Guldin

Published Dec. 8, 2009

Concerns about cost, effectiveness and increased government surveillance figured heavily in the City Council's discussion Monday night of a petition to place more cameras downtown.

During the meeting, the council voted against an ordinance that would have given the police chief the authority to deploy "safety cameras" in the downtown area. But because this ordinance was part of a petition receiving more than 2,500 signatures, it has been placed on the April 2010 ballot for a public vote.

Mayor Darwin Hindman said downtown Columbia has seen success many cities don't see, but he said it is fragile.

"It's important that we, as a city, be perceived as doing all that we can to make downtown a desirable place as possible," Hindman said.

The drive for more downtown cameras began in September when Columbia resident Karen Taylor began a petition to increase the number of security cameras downtown. This petition was prompted in June when Taylor's son was robbed and beat by a group of seven people in the Tenth and Cherry Street parking garage. Security cameras in the garage captured the crime, and the Columbia Police Department has five suspects in custody.

"Even one violent crime, like what happened to my son, is too much for our community," Taylor said. "Now its time to let the public speak."

Carolyn Matthews, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney, said there were several concerns with the legislation. She said because the videos will be a public record, they will fall under the Sunshine Law, meaning any citizen can request a specific video. Matthews said this could become a costly process. She also raised concerns over privacy.

"Anytime there is records that include surveillance there's an intentional possibility you're going into that territory, down into that potential slippery slope that surveillance leads into," Matthews said. "Invasion of privacy can lead to all kinds of problems with our personal liberties."

Fifth Ward Councilwoman Laura Nauser said there is little or no evidence these additional cameras would reduce crime, and she said people have a personal responsibility to help keep themselves safe.

"I would advocate private citizens to have security," Nauser said. "I have security in my home, I have security in my business -- I don't expect taxpayers to fund when my building gets broken into. I rely on the police department to come and help me, but I know they cannot be there to protect me at all times."

If voters approve the ordinance, downtown cameras will have some restrictions. According to city documents, the cameras must be conspicuous, capture images only in areas in public where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy and the cameras will not capture audio without court authorization.

Fourth Ward Councilman Jerry Wade said the downtown cameras were not a silver bullet to reduce crime in the downtown area.

"The defining issue for me, is not the privacy issue or civil rights, it is what we lose if we buy the camera service," Wade said. "The expense would be $50,000 every year we contract the service. The cameras don't work to predict crime. They don't increase public safety."

Columbia citizen Larry Bossaller said safety overrides privacy concerns.

"I'm stunned by the controversy here," Bossaller said. "It's a no brainer. Human life is worth more than anything."