Does Santa Rosa police’s plan to boost public surveillance cross a line? Local leaders weigh in on controversial tech

The Santa Rosa Police Department’s recent announcement that it will ramp up public surveillance isn’t sitting well with some.

The agency secured $898,000 in federal funds in March to establish a Real Time Crime Center, which will likely use some contentious technology to gather data in the hopes of curbing violent crime.

Some jurisdictions, such as Elk Grove and Baltimore, Maryland, have decided the risks are worth the investment, spending millions to incorporate the technologies into their departments.

While some support the effort locally, other leaders have raised questions about the project, including why this technology is being implemented, how it will be regulated, if it will be effective and whether it unfairly harms local groups.

Will it work?

Santa Rosa Police Chief John Cregan said the technology for the Real Time Crime Center will help police respond faster to gunshots and more quickly identify suspects and where they are fleeing.

“One thing that I really want to focus on is our police officers and our dispatchers being more efficient when we're responding to calls and more effective when responding to those calls,” Cregan said. “That's exactly what the Real Time Crime Center does, it focuses on using technology for efficiency and effectiveness.”

The project’s goal is to reduce gun-related violence, he said, though data shows it is already decreasing locally.

Santa Rosa police seized 170 illegal guns in 2021, 251 in 2022, and 255 in 2023. Shootings decreased from 106 to 51 in those three years, said department spokesperson Sgt. Patricia Seffens.

In 2023, fewer firearms were used in other cases, such as aggravated assault and battery, than in 2022.

This year, from Jan. 1 to April 11, Santa Rosa police seized 169 guns for evidence. During that time, there has been a 67% decrease in shootings, based on preliminary data, Seffens said.

“Though the numbers are trending down, the fact that there are that many illegally possessed firearms still out there is alarming, and if not for the enforcement efforts of the officers and problem-oriented policing strategies such as the RTCC, those numbers would sure be swinging the other way,” Seffens said.

But Cregan also wants to use the technology to reduce general violent crime, improve traffic safety and address sideshows.

More than 148 cities — nine in California — have implemented Real Time Crime Centers as of April, according to the Atlas of Surveillance, a project that monitors police surveillance technology.

There has been recorded success, such as in Elk Grove, where a few days into the program a man wanted for murder was apprehended by police after four different cameras caught his license plate.

Baltimore recently approved a three-year, $2.1 million project for gunshot detection technology known as ShotSpotter, which is a potential option for Santa Rosa.

But in some areas, such as Chicago, the decision to use the technology has been tested and found not viable. Specifically, the use of the gunshot detection sensors has been scrutinized because of the system’s inaccuracy and misuse.

In Chicago, a 2021 report conducted by the Office of the Inspector General concluded that ShotSpotter “rarely produces documented evidence of a gun-related crime, investigatory stop, or recovery of a firearm” and that “some officers, at least some of the time” used the quantity of ShotSpotter alerts as an additional reason to initiate stops or pat-downs.

In March, the city of Chicago said it would not continue its contract with ShotSpotter, now named SoundThinking.

A Houston Chronicle investigation found ShotSpotter systems actually delayed response times instead of curbing violence in the city, due to the overwhelming number of alerts produced by the system.

Another report published in 2021, in the peer-reviewed Journal of Urban Health, analyzed the effect of ShotSpotter in 68 metropolitan counties from 1999 to 2016 and concluded the technology didn’t have a significant impact on firearm-related homicides or arrest outcomes.

The Santa Rosa Police Department has yet to decide which gunshot detection technology system it will purchase, but Cregan listed Flock and ShotSpotter among the options.

He said the department will model its Real Time Crime Center after that of Elk Grove.

Despite criticism, Cregan said he believes the sensors will allow the department to respond with more efficiency and effectiveness.

“There could be changes in what technology I use for that, but what I’m looking at is what are available tools that give dispatchers and our officers a quicker understanding of what is occurring when we receive a 911 call,” he said.

Transparency and trust

Early last year, Cregan made a presentation to the city’s public safety subcommittee about automated license plate readers. He has since spoken broadly about using more surveillance technology and identified equipment, including gunshot detection sensors, he planned to use.

On March 6, the Santa Rosa Police Department hosted a community meeting, attended by about 60 residents, to present and listen to feedback on different aspects of policing, including parts of the Real Time Crime Center.

Still, some community leaders feel as if there could have been more information released leading up to the announcement of the allotment of federal funds.

Kelsey Vero, a member of the North Bay Organizing Project’s police accountability task force, said she felt the decision was “handed down” without enough community input. The money she said, potentially could have been used to address what she identified as the root causes of crime, including poverty and mental health, but instead it went to policing.

“We see this kind of thing as essentially a new toy and a form of security theater,” Vero said. “And then when we do ask for community-based programs and things that would support people and potentially create greater wellness that might solve poverty crimes and mental health and all of that, then there's no money.”

Because purchasing and implementation of this new technology is just the first step, the program could cost more down the line. Cregan said he aspires to incorporate more technology, like in Elk Grove where drones will soon respond to 911 calls, and to have dispatchers dedicated solely to the crime center.

Considering law enforcement already takes up the highest percentage of the city’s annual budget – about 36% of $201.6 million – Katrina Phillips, chair of the Commission on Human Rights, said she doesn’t believe a larger investment down the line will be worth it. Especially when, comparatively, housing and community services collectively get about 0.05% of the 2023-24 city budget.

“That money could definitely be used to start helping kids in school, so they don’t turn to a life of crime,” Phillips said, adding she believes it also could have been put toward further training for police.

Tim Smith, a member of the local chapter of Brady: United Against Gun Violence, said he sees the implementation of this technology as an experiment. And if the trial gets positive results, he hopes more funding will follow. If not, then the experiment ends.

Smith said that while there may be some false positives that occur with the gunshot detection system, it may be better to still have police respond quickly in case there is an emergency.

“If something happened, then it’s better to have a response as soon as possible,” Smith said. “And if this can help make our community safer, I’m OK with that.”

In December 2023, Cregan met with attorneys from the American Civil Liberties Union to discuss the possibility of a surveillance technology ordinance, such as one adopted in Sebastopol. The ordinance would allow city government to regulate the technology instead of the police department doing so internally and would require the agency to compile an annual report detailing how the technology was used.

Cregan said later in an interview with The Press Democrat that he is not interested in pursuing an ordinance because he has and plans to incorporate ideas from community members, into an internal rule book for the technology.

Currently, the Santa Rosa police manual has a section about automated license plate readers. Cregan has drafted another section for “Public Safety Video Surveillance System” which has yet to be added to the manual but will be in effect by the time the Real Time Crime Center is functional.

“I'm hoping our community could have trust in me as our chief of police that we're going to be using technology in our community to enhance our level of policing,” he added. “I can’t continue to ask our council for more and more police bodies. We have a limited budget as a city. But what I can do it make sure that we have the technology to police smarter.”

City Council member Jeff Okrepkie, who is also chair of the Santa Rosa City Council’s public safety subcommittee, said he agrees that an internal policy is the best route.

“This policy would be designed to ensure transparency, accountability, and oversight of any surveillance technology used by the department,” he said. “It would be flexible enough to adapt to evolving technology and community needs, and it would be subject to regular review and community input.”

Cregan said he is also planning a “transparency portal,” such as the one created by Piedmont police that will list ways the agency will use public technology, the ways it won’t ― including facial recognition and biometrics ― and include the department’s technology policy.

Is it legal?

Legally speaking, this type of technology is going to be criticized and challenged for years to come, said Robert Weisberg, law professor and faculty co-director of the Stanford Criminal Justice Center.

Technically, under current law, the use of this technology does not infringe on people’s privacy rights. But it is questionable because while the information gleaned from surveillance technology can be hypothetically obtained by officers, the amount of data collected can cross the line into invasive, Weisberg said.

“This is the Wild West of law and technology, and it is going to continue to be fascinating and vexing for a long time,” he said.

But that trust is not something that police have with some community groups, Phillips said.

“Police are here to serve and protect,” she said. “What is happening is not serving and protecting because BIPOC people do not feel safe on the streets.”

Real Time Crime Centers have been criticized for their use in policing historically marginalized communities, specifically regarding the placement of gunshot detection sensors.

The location of these devices and license plate readers will be based on where the most reported and unreported shootings are and where officers have seen the most violence, Cregan said. Police will then narrow down the possible locations and discuss them with neighborhood groups.

“We're not going to arbitrarily put them throughout the city of Santa Rosa,” Cregan said. “We're going to use data to put them where we think it's going to have the biggest community impact.”

“The Santa Rosa Police Department has taken extraordinary steps to build trust in our community so all community members can have confidence in our unbiased response,” Cregan said in an email.

Cregan plans on moving forward with creating the Real Time Crime Center while listening to community feedback on the matter.

“I’m continuing to learn from each one of the community conversations that I have,” he said.

You can reach Staff Writer Madison Smalstig at madison.smalstig@pressdemocrat.com. On X (Twitter) @madi.smals.