San Diego Union-Tribune (Sunday)
Census data help with camera questions
San Diego has installed cameras on thousands of streetlights throughout the city, a revelation that stoked fears of surveillance and targeting of communities of color.
Using census data, reporters Lyndsay Winkley and Teri Figueroa took a closer look at where the lights are, how they ended up where they are and who lives around them.
Q:
Why did you decide to look at this issue?
A:
A few years ago, San Diego upgraded a few thousand streetlights with LED lighting, to save energy and money, as part of a “smart-city” platform. But it turned out that the plan also called for installation of high-tech sensors and cameras on the lights, to measure the movement of cars and people, as well as collect environmental data. Last year, the public learned of the cameras and that police were accessing them. With this project, we wanted to look at where the cameras are and who lives near them. We also took a look at the locations where police have accessed the cameras.
Q:
Some information about smart streetlights is available on the city’s website. How does the story differ from that?
A:
While the city does provide a map that shows the locations of some smart streetlights, it doesn’t include census data, and therefore demographic data, associated with those locations.
It also doesn’t show readers where police are accessing streetlights or any information associated with those cases, which has been a topic of interest among some community members.
Q:
How did you conduct the analysis?
A:
In an effort to get a better sense of the demographics surrounding smart streetlight cameras, we first had to figure out where they were.
City officials were able to provide the locations of 2,846 streetlights with cameras, a total that was accurate as of August 2019. Since then, more streetlights have been added, but officials did not say where they are.
The San Diego Police Department also provided a list of cases that involved accessing streetlights. Nineteen of the locations associated with those cases were not disclosed and another three came with incomplete addresses, so they aren’t included in our analysis.
Once we cataloged the locations, we determined which census block group each streetlight fell within. Census block groups, which are assigned by the U.S. Census Bureau, are small in area, generally making up a few city blocks.
We were able to get a sense of the racial and economic profiles of these areas using the census data associated with these block groups.
Q:
Did any of the findings surprise you?
A:
We were most surprised that the streetlights were so well-distributed throughout the city, both racially and economically, despite the fact that the city did not appear to put a lot of forethought into the racial or economic breakdowns of these areas.
Also surprising was that there was no apparent scientific data — such as analysis based on known traffic counts — behind plotting the locations of the smart streetlights. The city said locations were selected after a joint assessment between city staffers and GE Current, which San Diego has partnered with on the smart-city project.
Q:
What’s the next step in reporting this issue?
A:
There are several questions still to be explored. When, where and how will the city decide to deploy the remaining 1,000-plus cameras it has? We also will keep an eye on a still-under-construction city ordinance that could govern the program and all surveillance matters.
Push back against the cameras has taken two general paths that we can follow in future stories. Aside from concerns of public surveillance and any potential targeting of communities, some critics question what happens with the data that San Diego gathers and how it could be used.
Plus, the cameras are part of a larger question about the collision of privacy, public safety and technology. From front-door cameras on private residences to automated license plate readers in private communities, how — and to what extent — are we being watched?