Saco council tables plan to add downtown surveillance cameras after privacy, policy questions
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
The Saco City Council delayed a decision to purchase and deploy surveillance cameras downtown, asking staff to return with a written policy, camera location map and vendor terms after residents and councilors raised privacy and data‑security concerns.
The Saco City Council on July 28 tabled a proposal to buy and place surveillance cameras on downtown traffic‑signal poles after councilors and members of the public asked for more detail on policy, data storage and vendor security. The motion to table passed 7‑0.
The cameras, presented at a prior workshop by the police and information technology departments, were described by staff as tools to assist with criminal and motor‑vehicle collision investigations. IT staff said the system would not be used for facial recognition. "They do not share the videos with third parties, but they can be requested just like any other subpoena," IT Director Pinault told the council.
Public commenters and several council members said the packet lacked specifics on the devices’ capabilities, the vendor’s terms of service, and how video would be accessed and retained. Resident Colin Charr urged the council to delay action and asked whether the vendor retained or mined data and whether the system’s algorithms might be turned on later. "What are they doing with the data?" he asked.
Councilor Berman and others cited concerns about third‑party access, historical vendor security incidents and the need for clearer retention and sharing rules. Berman asked staff to include the vendor’s terms of service in the council packet and to summarize steps the vendor had taken to secure stored footage.
Police Chief Clements and IT staff said the cameras under consideration meet security standards the department requires and that the devices tested are not pan‑tilt‑zoom units and do not perform automatic license‑plate reading. Clements said past cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions had helped solve crimes and that intersection footage could save investigative hours.
Before the tabling vote, multiple councilors asked staff to return with a written policy, a prioritized list or map of proposed camera locations, and additional vendor documentation including terms of service and summaries of security fixes. City Administrator Bahanko said staff would provide the policy and a map for the council’s review and public comment. The council’s tabling motion was made by Councilor Johnston and seconded by Councilor Gunn; a later roll call to table passed 7‑0.
The council did not authorize any purchases at the July 28 meeting and directed staff to return with the requested materials so councilors and the public can review where cameras would be placed and how footage would be handled and protected.