Grand Jury

MARIN COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY 2017-2018 • OCTOBER 2018 MARIN COUNTY CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT SUMMARIES 8 BODY-WORN CAMERAS AND MARIN LAW ENFORCEMENT: A Follow Up Report Four years ago, the Grand Jury recommended that all Marin law enforcement agencies acquire and use body-worn cameras. Since then, all Marin law enforcement agencies, with the exception of Sausalito, are using this technol- ogy. e Grand Jury continues to recommend that Sausalito acquire and use body-worn cameras. To enhance public trust and transparency, body-worn camera policies should be available to the public, posted on each agency's website. Much of the adverse publicity about body-worn cameras stems from the failure to activate them during critical interactions, espe- cially those involving use of force. e Grand Jury recommends that all Marin police agencies acquire camera systems with automatic activation. Before public release, images must be edited to hide or blur images. is protects the privacy of those not involved in the ac- tion, and the protection of victims, witnesses, and minors.To accom- modate the increased demand for editing that use of body-worn cameras would bring, the Grand Jury recommends advanced cam- era systems with semi-automated editing features be acquired. To address the substantial cost of audiovisual technology, the Grand Jury recommends that Marin agencies investigate sharing of re- sources. A county-wide purchasing group might allow smaller juris- dictions to employ more advanced technology than they could afford on their own. RECOMMENDATIONS R1. e Marin Housing Authority (MHA) should create and communicate an accelerated timeline, against which progress can be measured, for the rehabilitation of GGV. R2. e Marin County Board of Supervisors (BOS) should appoint and empower a coordinator independent of the MHA to lead the efforts to improve GGV, including the physical construction, social programs, and the coordina- tion of public and private resources. R3. e MHA should proceed to develop alternative financial plans. R4. e BOS should proceed immediately to engage an es- tablished firm that can work to create an atmosphere of trust between the residents of GGV and the MHA. R5. e BOS, in conjunction with the MHA and GGV residents, should develop high priority programs that go beyond the housing needs of the community. R6. e MHA should pass a binding resolution addressing GGV tenants' rights to remain in GGV during and aer renovation and what it means to be a tenant in "good standing." R7. MHA should develop HUD compliant but compassionate best practice programs to assist residents in resolving the issues such as being over-housed, off- lease, or in rent arrears to minimize displacement as GGV residents transition to new housing. RECOMMENDATIONS R1. Sausalito should implement body-worn cameras. R2. Marin law enforcement agencies that have not posted their body-worn camera policies to their websites should do so by October 1, 2018. R3. All Marin law enforcement agencies should seek to employ automated activation of body- worn cameras based on that agency's choice of activation modes. R4. All Marin law enforcement agencies pursuing new or improved video technology should explore cooperative negotiating and resource sharing with other agencies to reduce costs. R5. e County of Marin should work with the law enforcement agencies to form a county-wide buying group. housing and market-rate units. A major objective of the consultants' approach is to ensure that no tenants in good standing are displaced from the GGV property while their homes are rehabilitated. e Marin County Civil Grand Jury supports the consultants' recommendation, although the financial risks of this approach have not been entirely resolved. A program to address trauma in the community must work in concert with the physical rehabilitation. e Marin Housing Authority (MHA) Board has begun to address the GGV is- sues; however, the County now faces a time-sensitive situation as the buildings suffer from deferred maintenance. Mis- trust and communication is- sues with some residents have delayed, and continue to delay, a course of action. Given the financial risks of the consultants' approach, the County should be prepared with alternatives if the capi- tal needed for this approach cannot be raised. Given the clear and documented physical deterioration of the buildings, the clock is ticking. Video Podcast: https://goo.gl/6Cosrj Video Podcast: https://goo.gl/K6Q1VP Golden Gate Village continued from page 7 Photo Credit: Carley Partridge (Axon Enterprise)

• Cover