Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Surveillance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to reject ShotSpotter renewal as cablecast hearing is scheduled
Summary
Multiple residents told Pittsburgh City Council Feb. 24 that ShotSpotter surveillance is costly, ineffective and prone to false positives; council scheduled a 2:30 p.m. cablecast discussion on the ShotSpotter contract the same day.
Dozens of residents who testified during public comment told Pittsburgh City Council on Feb. 24 they oppose renewing the city's ShotSpotter gunfire-detection contract and urged the council to redirect funds to community-based violence prevention.
"ShotSpotter does nothing to reduce the violent crime, is grossly expensive, and produces false positive reports that unnecessarily send police into communities that are already overpoliced," Honey Rosen Bloom said during the public-comment period, noting the city has spent $8.3 million on ShotSpotter to date. She urged council not to renew the contract and to invest instead in mental-health and community programs.
Bobby Fan, a former director of the Data Justice Project, told council staff and members that a city controller report raises questions about ShotSpotter's cost-effectiveness and response-time comparisons to 911. Fan said the data suggest ShotSpotter alerts can be prioritized in ways that may disadvantage 911 callers and that the technology has produced false positives linked to routine sounds.
Multiple speakers cited outcomes in other cities and potential civil-rights and racial-equity concerns tied to deployment in predominantly Black neighborhoods. Commenters warned of documented cases elsewhere where ShotSpotter data played a role in arrests later overturned or criticized in court.
Council President Lavell announced a 2:30 p.m. cablecast post-agenda discussion on ShotSpotter to be chaired by Councilwoman Barbara Ward, and the council noted a special hearing on the contract later the same day. The scheduled discussion provides a formal venue for additional testimony, staff presentations and questions; council also has a standing committee meeting planned the next day.
What residents asked: callers urged the council to (1) reconsider renewal; (2) demand vendor transparency and independent audits of accuracy and use for prosecutions; and (3) prioritize community-based responses to gun violence. Council took public testimony at the meeting and set a formal, televised discussion where members and staff can probe contract details and the city's cost-benefit analysis.
