Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.
The online Comment window has expired
Agenda Item
5 24-0648 Subject: OPD ShotSpotter Contract
From: Oakland Police Department
Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution Authorizing The City Administrator To (1) Renew The Agreement Which Expired June 30, 2024 With Soundthinking Inc. For Gunshot Location Detection Subscription Service Coverage For Three Years In An Amount Not To Exceed Eight Hundred Forty-One Thousand Six Hundred Seventy Dollars ($841,670) For Each Year For A Total Not To Exceed Two Million Five Hundred Twenty Five Thousand Ten Dollars ($2,525,010) For The Period Beginning July 1, 2024 And Ending June 30, 2027; And (2) Waiving The Competitive Process Requirements, And Local And Small Local Business Enterprise (L/SLBE) Program Requirements For Information Technology Agreements
As a D3 resident, I strongly oppose renewing the ShotSpotter contract. Even OPD and ShotSpotter themselves do not claim a benefit in deterrence of gunshots or gun violence while the technology only reinforces racist and illegal practices of public safety. At a steep cost of $2.5 million at a time when the city is facing budget crises, there is no justifiable reason to renew the usage of this ineffective, expensive technology with the best interests of Oakland in mind.
D1 resident here voicing adamant opposition to renewing the ShotSpotter contract. The technology is ineffective, costly, and dangerous. Oakland's own data shows 80% of ShotSpotter alerts resulted in false alarms, and only 0.3% were for homicides. As other commenters have noted, it is expensive - $2.5M over three years. With Oakland's alarming budget crisis, it is a frankly foolish to be considering spending such a large sum on something that does not work. Finally - most importantly - ShotSpotter poses an active threat to our Black and Brown communities, leading law enforcement to accuse, imprison, and terrifyingly kill the wrong person.
Council is elected to protect Oakland's people and protect Oakland's resources. ShotSpotter does neither. Let's invest in programs that actually work for Oakland!
The City of Oakland needs to end its contract with the ineffective and dangerous ShotSpotter technology. Data shows that ShotSpotter is a failed program, and it also actively harms Black and Brown communities. A ShotSpotter alert led to the dispatch of the Chicago Police Department officer who killed 13 year-old Adam Toledo in 2021. Michael Williams spent eleven months in jail after CPD officers wrongly accused him of murder based on ShotSpotter data. The Chicago Inspector General concluded that the Department was using aggregate ShotSpotter data to justify stop and frisk in marginalized communities. Silvon Simmons, a Black man in Monroe County, NY, was falsely accused of shooting at an officer after prosecutors inappropriately relied on ShotSpotter recordings.
As commented for Item 4, ShotSpotter is ineffective. We want to spend funds in ways to prevent crime, not throw away money ineffectively responding to it. It will waste $2.5M of Oakland taxpayers money over the next three years. Dozens of cities, including Chicago and Detroit, have canceled ShotSpotter, finding the technology ineffective and inaccurate. ShotSpotter profits off of the existence of violence, why would it want to reduce it?
As an Oakland resident and a civic technologist, I strongly oppose the renewal of the ShotSpotter contract because I don't want microphones being embedded into my community without my consent. Let's put the $2.5 million dollars towards programs that help empower our communities and prevent gun violence instead.
I am a concerned Bay Area resident writing to strongly urge you to cancel the city's contract with Shotspotter. While I have my own concerns about safety, the research is clear that this technology doesn’t cut gun violence. It wastes taxpayer money yearly but is ineffective. I am also concerned about its effect of increasing surveillance and policing of Black and Brown neighborhoods in Oakland. Many cities, like Chicago and Detroit, have eliminated Shotspotter as ineffective and wasteful, and I hope that Oakland will do the same. Please reallocate Shotspotter funding to the many community programs which prevent violence before it occurs and actually improve people's lives.
As a D3 resident, I strongly oppose renewing the ShotSpotter contract. Even OPD and ShotSpotter themselves do not claim a benefit in deterrence of gunshots or gun violence while the technology only reinforces racist and illegal practices of public safety. At a steep cost of $2.5 million at a time when the city is facing budget crises, there is no justifiable reason to renew the usage of this ineffective, expensive technology with the best interests of Oakland in mind.
D1 resident here voicing adamant opposition to renewing the ShotSpotter contract. The technology is ineffective, costly, and dangerous. Oakland's own data shows 80% of ShotSpotter alerts resulted in false alarms, and only 0.3% were for homicides. As other commenters have noted, it is expensive - $2.5M over three years. With Oakland's alarming budget crisis, it is a frankly foolish to be considering spending such a large sum on something that does not work. Finally - most importantly - ShotSpotter poses an active threat to our Black and Brown communities, leading law enforcement to accuse, imprison, and terrifyingly kill the wrong person.
Council is elected to protect Oakland's people and protect Oakland's resources. ShotSpotter does neither. Let's invest in programs that actually work for Oakland!
The City of Oakland needs to end its contract with the ineffective and dangerous ShotSpotter technology. Data shows that ShotSpotter is a failed program, and it also actively harms Black and Brown communities. A ShotSpotter alert led to the dispatch of the Chicago Police Department officer who killed 13 year-old Adam Toledo in 2021. Michael Williams spent eleven months in jail after CPD officers wrongly accused him of murder based on ShotSpotter data. The Chicago Inspector General concluded that the Department was using aggregate ShotSpotter data to justify stop and frisk in marginalized communities. Silvon Simmons, a Black man in Monroe County, NY, was falsely accused of shooting at an officer after prosecutors inappropriately relied on ShotSpotter recordings.
As commented for Item 4, ShotSpotter is ineffective. We want to spend funds in ways to prevent crime, not throw away money ineffectively responding to it. It will waste $2.5M of Oakland taxpayers money over the next three years. Dozens of cities, including Chicago and Detroit, have canceled ShotSpotter, finding the technology ineffective and inaccurate. ShotSpotter profits off of the existence of violence, why would it want to reduce it?
As an Oakland resident and a civic technologist, I strongly oppose the renewal of the ShotSpotter contract because I don't want microphones being embedded into my community without my consent. Let's put the $2.5 million dollars towards programs that help empower our communities and prevent gun violence instead.
I am a concerned Bay Area resident writing to strongly urge you to cancel the city's contract with Shotspotter. While I have my own concerns about safety, the research is clear that this technology doesn’t cut gun violence. It wastes taxpayer money yearly but is ineffective. I am also concerned about its effect of increasing surveillance and policing of Black and Brown neighborhoods in Oakland. Many cities, like Chicago and Detroit, have eliminated Shotspotter as ineffective and wasteful, and I hope that Oakland will do the same. Please reallocate Shotspotter funding to the many community programs which prevent violence before it occurs and actually improve people's lives.
Sincerely,
Steve Kanofsky