Woodinville mulling surveillance cameras in parks, on streets
WOODINVILLE, Wash. -- The City of Woodinville is considering using a city funds to install an unknown number of surveillance cameras in the city's parks and on its streets to help investigate crimes despite public outcry over a similar plan in Seattle.
Alexandra Sheeks, assistant to the city manager, said there have been a number of crimes committed in Woodinville over the past year where the cameras would have been helpful, such as by capturing images of bank robbers or license plate numbers.
But, surveillance cameras in public places tend to raise privacy concerns from the public.
Earlier this month, the Seattle Police Department faced a backlash from residents and the Seattle City Council after it used federal grants to install cameras along the city's waterways and purchase two camera-mounted drones.
Seattle residents and councilmembers voiced concerns about the potential for the cameras and drones to spy on civilians and argued they should have been better informed before the money was spent and the cameras were installed.
In the wake of the outcry, Seattle Mayor Mike McGinn grounded the drone program and instructed the Police Department to return its two drones to the manufacturers.
Sheeks said the city has been paying attention to what happened in Seattle and has launched a public survey before purchasing the surveillance cameras.
"That's why we're going out with this public process now," she said. "We really want to know what people and businesses think."
The online survey asks residents if they think cameras would improve public safety or are an invasion of privacy, among other questions.
Sheeks said a preliminary meeting with the Woodinville Chamber of Commerce went fairly well, though she expects the city will hear both sides of the argument from its residents.
So far, the city has not figured out how many cameras it would purchase or where exactly they would be installed.
The city will continue to collect input on the plan through the end of March, at which points results will be presented to the Woodinville City Council.
Ed. Note: The City of Woodinville originally stated it would be using a federal grant to purchase the surveillance cameras. It will actually be using the city's General Fund if it decides to purchase and install the cameras.
OMG here we go again. Why do these guys think its a good thing to spy on our community. This the type of activity that got Russia, Cuba and east Germany in hot water
Oh boy, it's amazing how stories like these bring out the tinfoil hat people... No one cries abuse over cams in ATM's, gas stations, restaraunts, banks, malls, or even casinos. No one complains about satelites zipping by with powerful enough optics to read your ATM recipt from space. No one complains about the police heli's and fixed wing aircraft that have far more powerful optics than the toy drone SPD was playing with. No one whined about the parrot drone anyone and everyone can buy for their iPhone and iPads. No one protests enmasse when a 5 year old gets frisked before boarding a plane. But the sky is falling and our personal privacy is eroding away to nothing because police are setting up red light and or security cams. The police are destroying the constitution by using remote control drones as tool to catch criminals. Then some, proving the definition of irony will then ask why they couldn't catch the thief who stole their car or complain that no one was able to help catch the person responsible for the hit and run they just read about in the news...
Funny how many people whine about the method criminals are caught and not about the laws they apparently disagree with.
Woodinville is creepy and getting creepier with cameras. I moved out of it after I saw a sign in city hall that said I would be arrested if I raised my voice to a city bureaucrat. Sounded too much like the Soviet Union to me.
@MonroeMad couldn't agree more ! we moved the company out of Woodinvile for just that kind of reason. To much Big Bro for our likeing.Â
Honestly with the amount of drugs and thefts of copper from parks and such... major cities need to have surveillance... but I can also say there is a HUGE difference between cameras and Remote Control Drones!
Wow! I had no idea the crime rate in Woodinville was so bad. Guess it's worse than Federal Way, Sea-Tac, Des Moines, Renton, Kent, Belltown, Rainier Valley, Skyway, Tacoma, .......
" It also does not have any plans on how to spend the grant if the public is overwhelmingly opposed to surveillance cameras, Sheeks said."
They can't resist 'free' money. It wasn't a need driving this. Instead, they were handed 'free' money and said OK. What crap.
Â
I didn't realize the crime rate is so high in Woodinville.
Yes, maybe Belltown or Pioneer Square, but Woodinville ? ? ?
Seems like George Orwell's 1984 is a little late in coming but they are working on it. Camera's in the park with night vision could help stop or capture rapists and the like, but on city streets. Hello out there we do not need big brother over our shoulder. Hell, the next thing is they will want them in our house and bedrooms.Â
@LongBeachBum Actually, they read it and thought it sounded like as splendid idea. ;)
@ÐжаÑÑин Ðогилл@LongBeachBumOh yeah, right, sure, maybe in Mother Russia its ok, but not here. You must want them tracking you anytime, anywhere, and anywhen they want to without your knowledge. NOT ME FELLA. СпаÑибо
Say what you want about police abusing their power by installing cameras, but these cameras would be unnecessary if it weren't for the "no snitching" mentality that has infected the population. Every day you see a story where someone is shot, stabbed, or beaten in the middle of the day, and the end of the story is always "there were no witnesses"Â
I'm really conflicted on this one. With all of the budget cutbacks to the police it would seem a less expensive way to "patrol" the town. On the other hand I am not thrilled about a eye in the sky. If they decide to go forward with this proposal there need to be very strict rules for use and severe penalties for any abuse/misuse.
Let's see now, on page one there are furloughs and layoffs to meet a federal budget. On page two there is enough money for a federal grant to install cameras in Woodinville. hmmmm
 Indeed America has changed for the worse. It seems nearly every municipality has over extended its authority.
The combination of Federal, State, and local taxes coupled with the price of gas, food, insurance, rent... The cost of living in "civilized" America is too high for many to afford. Increased regulation of business and the masses is resulting in a lower quality of life. We need a libertarian resurgence. I sacrifice way too much of my time (FREEDOM) to government for the luxury to exist in this society. I am not receiving my moneys worth.I don't get why there is a problem. Every private business, bar, retail shop has cameras. Why is it a problem suddenly to put cameras in parks where pediphiles and other gang trash hang out. Want to use the public parks? Then you don't have the right to expect privacy in public. If you have a problem with the cameras then what are you hiding?
@CB For me it's not a matter of I'm hiding anything. I don't like that cameras are in stores either, I don't like that feeling of being watched. I go to parks to escape all that and just relax but now they want to watch you there too. Do you think a camera being on is going to stop someone from committing a crime? If so, why is there still so much shoplifting in stores that are known to have cameras? There have been murders and other crimes as well. It doesn't stop anything.
Cameras in Banks doesn't stop Bank robbers either but it does help catch the crook.
That's how I feel. If they want to watch me they are going to get bored very quickly.
1. Passive cameras seem frivolous to me. Â If the only use is AFTER a crime has occurred, I don't see the value. Â The cameras should be "manned" so someone can take action WHILE the crime is occurring . Â The thought of catching a criminal after they have done something seems silly. Â If the police see a crime on the cameras, can they even respond fast enough? If not, how are the cameras helping anyone? Â (and yes, I understand they could be used in a court case to put someone behind bars, but would you rather catch the person in the act or later when they killed someone already?)
2. If the only use of the camera is revenue generation, then this is not in the interest of the public. Once again, it is passive and assumes after the fact punishment is better than during. Â I would hate to see people get tickets for littering, dogs of leashes, etc. Â Those are not crimes worth losing our privacy over.Â
3. The public should have access to these cameras on a real time basis. Â If the police are not going to watch them actively, allow the public. Â Sure, they could be abused in some way, but I would rather have a controlled website where people can monitor the cameras (much like the DOT does) than to waste a resource because we are scared how people will use them.Â
Passive cameras bad, active cameras good, loss of privacy is bad, but if they can help prevent or intervene during a criminal act, then it is worth it. Â Otherwise, its just a waste.Â
@surebreezeWhy not go right to Pre-Cogs to stop crime before it happens?
A slippery slope for sure. Big brother is truly on the way.
It shouldn't be a problem for sheeple of Woodinville since very few lift their heads while grazing in the Peoples Republic of Woodinville..
You write that the surveillance cameras would be in the Kent parks? Â Oh, Kent has to get the cameras in place with the traffic first then later the parks.Â
Welcome to Woodinville, Amerika Comrade!
A nice place where the peeping Toms are the police!