Trending
STEUBENVILLE -- Councilman Royal Mayo's continued demands for the removal of the city's license plate-reading cameras were met with watchful silence from the rest of council Tuesday.
LPRs, better known as "Flock" cameras, have gained notoriety across the nation recently over concerns that the data they record can be too easily misused.
The city has 11 of them. Police use them to identify vehicles involved in Amber Alerts for endangered children and vehicles involved in crimes of violence, as well as stolen vehicles.
Mayo wants the LPRs taken down immediately, claiming that since council never voted to add them to the police department's crime-fighting toolkit in the first place, they don't need to take a vote to remove them now.
Law Director Costa Mastros, however, disagreed, saying it "would need to go to a vote for that."
"I think Mr. Johnson (city manager Mike Johnson) said it best ... This council has every right to not have them in the city by a vote."
"I agree with what you just said," Mayo replied. "But if we need a vote to take them down, wouldn't we by the same theory have needed a vote to put them up?"
Mastros disagreed, saying putting them up "was more an administrative decision. However, if you guys want to take them down you guys can take them down."
Mayo complained that neither council nor the public at large had a chance to weigh in before the cameras were put up.
"They were up and nobody on the council knew it," he insisted. "So my thing is, I think they should come down the same way. And then if we want them up, then we should vote to put them up, not vote to take them down."
"I would disagree with that, but you have every right to vote to not have them in the city anymore," Mastros replied. "That's my opinion."
Mayo questioned why no one else on council had spoken up, describing himself as "the only people's voice in here. Have anything to say about that?"
Councilman Dave Albaugh pointed out that, up to that point, only Mayo and one resident had voiced concern.
"You're the only two people that's ever said anything in here about that," he said. "You have not brought anybody else in. Nobody else has come -- we've never had anybody else in here to complain. I see no issue with them, Royal. And that information (they gather) leaves in 30 days, it deletes."
Early on, Mayo had erroneously believed city funds had been used to purchase the LPRs without council's prior approval. Councilman-at-large Joel Walker, a retired police officer, previously pointed out the cameras were funded with grant funds awarded to the department.
At that same meeting, Johnson had cautioned against trying to micromanage departments, pointing out operations would slow to a crawl if department heads had to get council's blessing before they do anything.
"At some point, you'll just slow everything down," he'd told Mayo.
Later, Mayor Ralph Petrella said the cameras "are a good tool" and that he'd talked with Chief Wes Crawford about safeguards that are in place.
"My concern is what this (company) does with the data once it's collected," Fletcher said. "Are they making money off of it? Can the data be sold to a third party? But I do think they are a good tool in solving crimes, especially Amber Alerts (for endangered children), because of the system-wide aspect. I think they're really important (for those alerts) but I do have my concerns about what happens to that data when it's in Flock's hands and where it goes after that."
Engineer Mike Dolak, meanwhile, told council the accident Saturday repairs to the signal box controlling the light at the State Route 7 ramp to Sunset Boulevard and Veterans Bridge (U.S. 22 East), as well as the railroad crossing at Marina Road (Labelle Avenue), will cost around $40,000.
The box was destroyed in a two-car collision Saturday evening, forcing motorists to use a detour to get on the bridge or Sunset Boulevard.
"We're going to have to put a permanent box in there -- the one they put there is just a temporary fix," he said. "It's a pretty sophisticated device, it handles (vehicular) traffic and railroad pre-emptions."
Mastros said letters have already been sent to all involved advising them to contact their insurance companies, "if they have insurance. I'm not sure the owner of the (at fault) vehicle or driver (who was cited) had insurance."
The man who was cited was already under suspension.
"We're going to pursue that," Mastros said.