Erica Pandey Photo
Lt. Cain at alders’ briefing.
New Haven is ready to outfit all its police officers with a second pair of “human eyes.”
After a pilot program, the police department has decided to outfit all 452 of its sworn officers with those extra “eyes” — body cameras — a step other Connecticut departments, including Branford and Hamden, have already taken.
The department plans to send out a request for proposals within the week asking potential vendors to present camera models as well as costs of data storage, Lt. Racheal Cain reported at a City Hall hearing Monday night of the Board of Alders Public Safety Committee. She said the department needs to make the purchase by June 30, 2017, to qualify for full state reimbursement of cameras and related equipment and one year of storage. If the department misses this deadline, the state will reimburse only 50 percent of the equipment cost.
Interim Police Chief Anthony Campbell said the city’s police union has informally agreed to body cameras, but the details of implementation are still in flux. The only reason the union is hesitant is uncertainty of how a potential change in department leadership might affect body camera policy, he said.
Campbell said he is in favor of purchasing cameras that are only as good as the “human eye,” an approach another chief might disagree with. If an officer is judged based on camera footage, the camera should be able to see only what that officer saw at the time of the incident, he said. Otherwise the officer would be judged on factors beyond his or her control.
With about $500,000 in grant money accumulated over the past two years, the police department has the money to pay for the cameras, which would cost about $300,000 in total, Campbell said.
The real cost burden will be storing the footage. Cain estimated the cameras would generate between 80 and 90 terabytes of data yearly. That’s equivalent to nearly 2,000 standard smart phones worth of data.
The department has two options for data storage: a cloud system hosted by a company that might cost around $200,000 annually with a multi-year deal; or an on-premises system that would present up-front hardware costs but low yearly fees. Either method would require the department to hire civilian personnel to manage data and oversee freedom of information requests, Cain said. An on-premise system could require four to six additional employees, while the Cloud option might only need one or two people, she added.
Fair Haven Alder Ernie Santiago asked whether officers might hesitate to do their jobs with the added pressure of the body cameras.
Cain said that cameras have become almost “second nature” for officers at other departments around the state. Still, she said, the New Haven department will have a grace period of around 90 days during which they will allow officers to adjust to the rules of turning cameras on and off at the right times.
Campbell with Alder Brian Wingate.
Campbell said he isn’t interested in “bells and whistles.” But while he prefers straightforward equipment, he will look out for some features in company proposals. Certain companies produce cameras that will automatically turn on when officers are dispatched or when their overhead lights are activated. Other models have functions that allow officers to review and tag their footage from the field, without making any alterations. These, among other qualities, are important to consider, Campbell said.
Police officials will appear once again before the Public Safety Committee to seek approval for the state’s reimbursement grant after purchasing the cameras. Campbell said he hopes this will be done by February 2017.
Police union President Craig Miller, who was not present at the hearing, said Wednesday that officers recognize that body cams are coming. He said the union’s main concern is that the details worked out with the city stay in place if Mayor Toni Harp chooses someone other than Campbell to become the next permanent chief. Campbell is serving on an interim basis pending the results of a search.
I am all for the police department getting body cameras. Long overdue as far as I'm concerned, my concern is the overhead costs after the initial purchase. As a taxpayer I don't want to have to bear the brunt of that cost.