Officials with the City of Hollister approved an ordinance Monday that will continue and enhance the use of surveillance cameras in the downtown area.
The move by officials April 20 authorized a supplemental appropriation of a fund for the downtown video project and executed a contract with SurveillanceGrid Integration Inc.
Maria Sumnicht, a co-founder of the Morgan Hiil company, told BenitoLink that the company does not directly manage the system; rather, it provides the hardware. She added that the company does not specifically offer surveillance for traffic violations.
Hollister in May 2014 awarded a contract to SurveillanceGrid Integration, Inc. for the installation of video cameras in the downtown area. “Since then, the project was built, cameras were installed and impressive positive results were realized after implementation,” according to a staff report. “The cameras have proven to be a valuable tool for the Hollister Police Department in enforcing laws and regulations of the City and State.”
The augmented project, according to the staff report, will supplement the system currently in place, replacing rented cameras with higher-definition cameras and connecting those cameras to the existing infrastructure.
In an interview last year by Luis Burgillo, Hollister Mayor Ignacio Velazquez expressed both concern and support for public surveillance.
“I think that it’s a good idea, a good concept. I voted against it only because of the ongoing cost. I think that it’s very important to have a record of what’s going on in the city.”
The California Public Records Act, according to the California Government Code, provides that recordings by state and local governments are “open to inspection at all times during the office hours of the state or local agency and every person has a right to inspect any public record.” The code exempts a small number of law-specific types of disclosures of particular records, such as recordings of crimes. In the event of public surveillance of an incident in which no crime is committed, that incident — including any previously alleged crime — could be subjected to a request for the freedom of information.