Loading...
SR 06-27-2017 3E Ci ty Council Report City Council Meeting : June 27, 2017 Agenda Item: 3.E 1 of 7 To: Mayor and City Council From: Jacqueline Seabrooks, Police Chief , Police Department Joseph Cevetello, Chief Information Officer, Information Systems Department Subject: Purchase of In -Car Camera Systems and Body Worn Cameras for the Police Department . Recommended Action 1 . Award RFP #70 to Watch Guard Video, Inc., a Texas -based company for the purchase of body worn cameras and in -car cameras. 2. Authorize the Purchasing Services Manager to issue a Purchase Order in the amount of $696,488 to Watch G uard Video, Inc., a Texas -based company for the purchase of 60 in -car camera systems and 330 body worn camera systems, related accessories and supplies, and software. 3 . Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement for a total amount n ot to exceed $315,000 with Watch Guard Video, Inc, a Texas -based company for the maintenance of the in -car camera and body worn camera equipment for a period of up to five years. 4 . Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute an agreement for a to tal amount not to exceed $595,500 with Watch Guard Video, Inc., a Texas -based company for the storage of archived video fo r a period of up to five years. Executive Summary The Police Department has utilized in -car video systems since 2006. The video capt ured by the systems has been highly effective in helping to provide evidence of traffic violations and crimes, and has played a critical role in internal administrative investigations. The in -car camera system presently used by the Police Department is no longer supported by the manufacturer and is due for replacement. Although the in - car camera systems are highly effective, the use of body worn cameras in conjunction with in -car camera systems is now becoming an increasingly necessary tool for law enforc ement. The body worn camera has the unique capability of being able to capture activity that occurs away from or out of range of a police vehicle ; it is also a valuable tool for officers who utilize alternate forms of transportation such as bicycles and m otorcycles. The proposed purchase of 60 in -car camera systems and 330 body worn cameras would enable the existing in -car camera system to be replaced and establish sufficient inventory to equip all field -based Police Department staff, sworn and civilian, with a body worn camera. 2 of 7 Background The Police Department implemented its first in -car camera system in 2006. At the time, the system was considered state -of -the -art a s it was one of the only systems to utilize a wireless upload process that securely tr ansferred recorded video without user intervention. The first generation system was replaced in 2010 with the Police Department’s current in -car system. The current system is designed around an older technology platform that is not capable of capturing h igh definition video. The system is no longer supported by the manufacturer and is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain and support due to the lack of available parts. The Police Department has traditionally stored all video captured by the in -ca r camera system on a secure local storage system housed within the Public Safety Facility, accessible only by authorized staff. Based upon a combination of State law and City policy, the Police Department retains all in -car camera, and now body worn camer a video, for a period of three years. Discussion As the Police Department was preparing to begin the body worn camera pilot program, staff evaluated options for stand -alone body worn cameras versus a fully integrated solution where the body worn camera could operate as part of or independent from an in -car camera system. Staff ultimately determined that a fully integrated solution is preferred since it offers the most flexibility. A fully integrated solution would have the ability to capture activity while the officer was driving, and capture activity that occurs away from the vehicle from different angles - one being the in -car camera mounted to the vehicle and the other being the body worn camera on the officer’s uniform. Aside from having the abil ity to examine a single incident from multiple perspectives, a fully integrated system ensures synchronization for date and time while also provid ing an efficient single software application for authorized personnel to retrieve and export video footage . S taff considered various other factors when planning to replace the current in -car cameras and begin the body worn camera pilot program. Among those factors were: - Ensure that all video captured by both the in -car camera system and body worn camera would be high -definition video. - The capability of the system to stream live video from the police vehicle to the 3 of 7 Public Safety Facility while the vehicle is in motion or stopped at an incident. - The system would support the ability to securely and without an y user intervention, wirelessly upload video captured by the vehicle to the secure central storage system in the Public Safety Facility. - The body worn camera would synchronize with the in -car camera system so that audio captured by the body worn camera w ould be interlaced with the video captured by the in -car camera system, without the need for the officers to carry an additional microphone device. - The form factor (physical size) of the body worn camera would be appropriately sized for use by officers a nd contained within a single device. - Battery life capability of the body worn camera was sufficient to for the device to be utilized for an entire shift (up to 12 hours). In September 2016, the Police Department embarked upon a body worn camera pilot pro gram. The pilot program was used to assess a body worn camera program from various perspectives, including the public’s perception of the use of body worn cameras, staff member feedback , and technology. The operational phase of the pilot program conclude d in March 2017. The operational phase of the pilot program included the deployment of 80 body worn camera devices to various staff operating in different capacities including Police Officers, Jailers, Animal Control Officers, Pier & Harbor Services Offic ers, Traffic Services Officers, and Public Services Officers. Following an RFP process, the Police Department utiliz ed Sta t e Citizens' Options for Public Safety (COPS) funding to purchase the 80 cameras from Watch Guard Video, Inc. for the pilot program . The costs for the body worn camera pilot program did not exceed the threshold requiring Council approval and therefore equipment was purchased through Purchase Orders. As part of this current purchase, the Police Department will be able to return the 80 body worn cameras initially purchased for the pilot program to receive credit towards the purchase of 330 of the newest model available. The findings of the pilot program are outlined in an Information Item published to Council on June 19 , 2017. As the body worn camera pilot program progressed and the average amount of video captured on a daily basis was analyzed, it was determined that the Police Department’s existing video storage system would not adequately support the projected growth that would resu lt from implementing the proposed replacement in -car camera s ystem and 4 of 7 the full deployment of body worn cameras. Extrapolating the preliminary findings resulting from the body worn camera pilot program to a proposed full deployment of 330 cameras , and tak ing into consideration the Department’s experience with the current in - car camera system, it is anticipated that both systems will generate in excess of 250 hours per day o f recorded video. The Police Department worked with the Information Systems Departme nt to identify a viable solution to support the storage needs of both the proposed new in -car cameras and body worn cameras. The proposed solution would enable video captured by either camera system, in -car or body worn , to continue to be securely transfe rred to a local storage server housed with the Public Safety Facility. The video would be stored locally for up to 90 days a fter which the video would then be automatically archived to a secure cloud -based solution integrated within the proposed in -car ca mera and body worn camera back -end system. The secure cloud -based storage system is hosted by Microsoft using their Azure Government Cloud platform which exceeds FBI standards for security. This proposed hybrid approach to video storage best meets the lon g -term needs of the Police Department . There is instant access to events occurring within 90 days and there is slightly slower access to events older than 90 days ; the older footage would be archived to a secure cloud storage solution for up to the mandat ory three -year retention period. Access to the video, regardless of its age, would continue to be limited to authorized staff only as determined by the Chief of Police. Vendor/Consultant Selection In February 2016, the City issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for body worn camera s for the pilot program and the potential full implementation of a body worn camera program in addition to the replacement of the in -car cameras for the Police Department. The RFP was posted on the City’s online bidding site and notices were advertised in the Santa Monica Daily Press in accordance with City Char t er and Municipal Code provisions. Four firms responded and Purchase Orders were issued for the initial purchase of equipment as the costs did not exceed the threshold req uiring Council approval. Responses to the RFP were reviewed by a selection panel of staff from both the Police Department and Information Systems Department. The following four firms submitted proposals: 5 of 7 Watch Guard Video, Inc. Digital Ally Panasonic Tas er The proposals were evaluated using the following selection criteria: body worn camera integration with the in -car camera system ; form factor (unit size) of the body worn camera ; battery life ; video recording buffer , and video quality. Based on these cr iteria and the criteria in SMMC 2.24.07 2 , staff recommends Watch Guard Video, Inc. as the best qualif ied firm to provide 330 body wo rn cameras and 60 in -car cameras . Staff’s recommendation is based on the well -designed and operationally functional integra tion between the body worn camera and the in -car camera systems , the body worn camera ’s f orm factor , battery life, video recording buffer , and video quality. The Police Department and Information Systems Department has determined that the RFP issued in Fe bruary 2016 remains valid as there has been no substantive changes to the technology beyond minor software improvements. 6 of 7 Financial Impacts and Budget Actions The Purchase Order to be issued to Watch Guard Video, Inc. is for an amount not to exceed $696,48 8 . Funds are available in the FY 2016 -17 budget in the Police Department and Capital Improvement Program . The Purchase Order will be charged to the following accounts: C019150.589000 $464,815 01304.533580 $231,673 The contracts to be awarded to Watc h Guard Video, Inc. are for an amount not to exceed $910,500 . Funds of $119,100 are included in the FY2017 -18 Proposed B udget in the Police Department and Information Systems Department. The contract will be charged as follows: Fiscal Year 01304.533580 01243.533580 Total FY2017 -18 $44,100 $75,000 $119,100 FY2018 -19 $166,350 $75,000 $241,350 FY2019 -20 $172,350 $75,000 $247,350 FY2020 -21 $72,600 $75,000 $147,600 FY2021 -22 $80,100 $75,000 $155,100 The annual fees include $119,100 per year for unlimit ed video storage for all of the proposed body worn cameras and in -car cameras. The purchase of the body worn cameras include s a one year warranty. Costs for an extended warranty for two additional years , which includes support and replacement of damaged devices, are included in FY2018 -19 and FY2019 -20 costs above. There is no option for extended warranty for the body worn camera beyond the third year. The purchase of the in -car cameras includes a one year warranty. Costs for extended warranty for the i n -car cameras for four additional years is included above. There is no option for extended warranty for the in -car cameras beyond the fifth year. Future year funding is contingent on Council budget approval. 7 of 7 Prepared By: Eric Uller, Systems Analyst (Lea d) - Public Safety Approved Forwarded to Council Attachments: A. Staff Report - Digital Patroller B. Staff Report - Panasonic C. Oaks - Watch Guard 2017 D. Written Comments 1 Vernice Hankins From:Marcy Winograd <winogradteach@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, June 27, 2017 11:41 AM To:Council Mailbox; Clerk Mailbox Subject:I support (3-E) SMPD use of body camera s -- as well as ACLU recommendations re: cameras ACLU RELEASES DETAILED BEST PRACTICES FOR POLICE BODY CAMERAS Dear Council Members: I support (agenda item 3-E) funding for police body worn cameras and urge the City to adopt the ACLU's re commendations for be st practices with body cameras. https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-releases-detailed-best-practices-police-body-cameras Below are relevant portions: RECOMMENDED POLICIES CAN BE ADOPTED BY STATE LEGISLATURES, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND POLICE DEPARTMENTS "... videos would have a short default rete ntion period of six months, followed by automatic deletion. Certain videos — including ones showing the use of force, commission of a felony, events leading up to an arrest fo r a felony, or an encounter that resulted in a civilian complaint — would be retained for thre e years. Whether or not videos are available for public release is base d on the same criteria. Strict rules would control when officers must turn their cameras on an d off. Officers would not be allowed to watch footage before filing initial reports about an incident, because v iewing videos may influence officers’ recollectio ns or enable officers to conform reports to what was or was not recorded. The proposal also includes privacy exceptio ns for filming. Crime victims, anonymous crime tipsters, and people who are inside a ho me when there is no warrant or emergency have the right to request that cameras be turned off. ----------------------------- Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Item 3-E 06/27/2017 1 of 2 Item 3-E 06/27/2017 2 Marcy Winograd 2447 3rd Street Santa Monica, CA 90405 Item 3-E 06/27/2017 2 of 2 Item 3-E 06/27/2017 REFERENCE:    Agreement  No. 10481  ‐  10482   (CCS)