However, my job is to save my clients money and do the right thing for my clients. I tell everyone of my clients get Video Surveillance because in the last couple of years i have seen one client save a quarter Million Dollars with an ugly lawsuit. He can prove from the video when the person walked in the club and they were staggering when they came in and when they came out and they were beat up god knows where. They were able to prove it with the video. On new years day, my client had the best sophisticated surveillance and there had been a homicide down the street on new years day and this Video Surveillance was able to go outside, isolate a camera and zoom in on that person that walked in the liquor establishment and pretty much finger a murder and that murderer is off the street. There is really good reason to have video if you have a place, but where i draw the line is this part about whether its to be kept for 30 days and made available to the police on demand, wrong. Thats a lit
Video when the person walked in the club and they were staggering when they came in and when they came out and they were beat up god knows where. They were able to prove it with the video. On new years day, my client had the best sophisticated surveillance and there had been a homicide down the street on new years day and this Video Surveillance was able to go outside, isolate a camera and zoom in on that person that walked in the liquor establishment and pretty much finger a murder and that murderer is off the street. There is really good reason to have video if you have a place, but where i draw the line is this part about whether its to be kept for 30 days and made available to the police on demand, wrong. Thats a little over the line on the big brother and i think you have to have a situation where they voluntarily give it up or get a search warranty from the judge. This is a time for the police to respond. I am going to the take responsibility for crafting that language and it was
Businesses should bear the cost or not bear the cost of cameras instead of the city bearing the cost. I think the city should have cameras. There are places where that is useful. Having cameras near registers can save many dollars. If you believe your clientele is potentially violent on damaging in terms of graffiti cost, you can have many reasons to have cameras. If a business wants to install their cameras and use them, they should bear that cost. If footage exist that Law Enforcement wants access to, there is a process that allows the Law Enforcement access to that. So, if a business wants to install cameras, absolutely they should bear the cost, but having Law Enforcement require cameras, that cost should not be passed onto the business. I have very mixed feelings about cameras but i tend to lean to what berry is talking about. We seem to be karening willie and nilly to this camera side. We are crossing the line now between reasonable, Video Surveillance in public being a reasonabl
Question or concern about how anything goes. You can ask my office and i will get back to you personally and i wish everybody a super successful year until next year at the next summit. Thank you. [ applause ] i have to say that greg is one of the most approachable Police Chiefs that we have. I also have to say the restaurant is now opening one in dc and that it is a direct descendants of your family. Hes been in the business before he was born. Okay. Unless someone from the panel wants to make further comments on either the last call 4 00 a. M. Or the cameras, anybody . I will open the floor to questions. Cmon up one at a time, keep them short. Hello, berry . Im berry, im an advocate for the club owners and club goers. Im very concerned about the camera issue. Because the board of supervisors nixed the idea of getting a requirement for Entertainment Permit by having these security and surveillance cameras. The police had to go another route by making it a condition on the liquor licen
Cost. I think the city should have cameras. There are places where that is useful. Having cameras near registers can save many dollars. If you believe your clientele is potentially violent on damaging in terms of graffiti cost, you can have many reasons to have cameras. If a business wants to install their cameras and use them, they should bear that cost. If footage exist that Law Enforcement wants access to, there is a process that allows the Law Enforcement access to that. So, if a business wants to install cameras, absolutely they should bear the cost, but having Law Enforcement require cameras, that cost should not be passed onto the business. I have very mixed feelings about cameras but i tend to lean to what berry is talking about. We seem to be karening willie and nilly to this camera side. We are crossing the line now between reasonable, Video Surveillance in public being a reasonable part of the policing or Police Action and you get into the unreasonable police infringement of