They see you, but can you see them?

They see you, but can you see them?

As Charlottesville Police Chief Tim Longo stood in front of City Council once again to make his case for installing surveillance cameras on and around the Downtown Mall, Councilor Julian Taliaferro said, “Chief Longo, I only have one question. Do you think this will make a difference?”

Longo looked up at the former fire department chief and said, “Yes sir, I think it will.” And Taliaferro nodded. “That’s all I wanted to know.”

Chief Tim Longo says Mall cameras would be part of police tactics, and therefore not subject to FOIA requests.

Longo was presenting a draft of the Public Safety Camera Policy, a document that laid out the guidelines for the use of 30 cameras. The rest of Council, however, voiced more skepticism than Taliaferro did.

After noting the policy didn’t explicitly state that it was in compliance with the U.S. Constitution, Councilor Kendra Hamilton asked whether the press or general public would have access to video from the cameras or the police log that would show who accessed video, when and for what purpose.

While the video log would be disclosed, says City Attorney Craig Brown, the reasons police viewed videos would be redacted as parts of ongoing investigations. Video data, however, would not be disclosed. Because the cameras could be programmed to pan and zoom, Longo told Council members that the video would reveal police tactics. Because of this, he would go as far as to seek a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) exemption to keep video data from the public and press.

Programmed movements, says Brown, “are the type of operational or surveillance techniques that I think would be exempt from disclosure.”

Longo confirms that his department will seek cameras with those capabilities, along with motion-sensing technology. Though Longo says that he does not have the resources to monitor manually, the proposed policy states that they may be “operated manually by a trained and authorized user,” leaving the possibility open.

John Whitehead, the president of the Rutherford Institute, has written two letters to councilors and Longo, offering assistance in drafting the legal guidelines for the cameras. In a September 13 letter, Whitehead criticized the current policy’s lack of specific safeguards, citing its vague language when addressing personnel and uses.

Whitehead also differs on the accessibility of the video. “If they video you, and you want it, our opinion is that you’ll have access to it,” he says. The Rutherford Institute’s position could signal potential FOIA requests and even lawsuits. “The thing with FOIA,” says Whitehead, “it’s so loosey-goosey. You have to fight for every shred of evidence that you get.”

C-VILLE welcomes news tips from readers. Send them to

Posted In:     News

Previous Post

Score one for crass political calculation [Online Exclusive]

Next Post

Just say no

Our comments system is designed to foster a lively debate of ideas, offer a forum for the exchange of ad hoc information, and solicit honest, respectful feedback about the work we do. We’re glad you’re participating. Here are a few simple rules to follow, which should be relatively straightforward.

1) Don’t call people names or accuse them of things you cannot support.
2) Don’t direct foul language, racial slurs, or offensive terms at other commenters or our staff.
3) Don’t use the discussion on our site for commercial (or shameless personal) promotion.

We reserve the right to remove posts and ban commenters who violate any of the rules listed above, or the spirit of the discussion. We’re trying to create a safe space for a wide range of people to express themselves, and we believe that goal can only be achieved through thoughtful, sensitive editorial control.

If you have questions or comments about our policies or about a specific post, please send an e-mail to

Leave a Reply

Notify of