Should Nashville police have access to private surveillance cameras? Tell us.
Nashville-Davidson County's Metro Council is soon scheduled to vote on a second of third reading of a bill that would expand police access to surveillance cameras.
The "community camera safety network" would allow willing private entities (i.e., property owners or business owners) to let Metro Nashville Police Department tap into cameras for the purpose of solving crimes.
The council in December rejected, by one vote, a bill to enter into contract with law enforcement surveillance company Fusus to allow MNPD to use private cameras of willing participants. Backers of this latest proposal say it creates guardrails to address critics' concerns.
Opponents say more surveillance invites violation of privacy and intimidates marginalized communities, including Black residents, the LGBTQ community and immigrants. A new aggressive federal deportation effort adds fuel to their arguments.
Proponents, however, say the system will help prevent crime and allow MNPD to solve crimes better. While violent crime has dropped over the last two years, property crime is up. Moreover, citizens have expressed alarm over mass vehicle break-ins and antisemitic incidents.
Opinion: Nashville violent crime might be dropping, but many citizens don't feel safer
The first vote of the community camera legislation took place on Jan. 21 and the second reading is scheduled for the council's March 4 meeting. If it passes, it will move on to a third and final vote.
Tell us what you think about crime and safety in Nashville. Take our poll below. This is an unscientific survey for the purpose of gauging reader sentiment. If you have any trouble viewing the poll below, click on this link for the survey.
Direct any questions to Opinion and Engagement Director David Plazas at dplazas@tennessean.com.
This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Nashville debates police surveillance. Do you feel safe? | Opinion
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Bold vision': Johnson tapped as FAMU president after 'overwhelmingly negative' feedback
Several months of vehement opposition and some powerful support at Florida A&M University have resulted in one of four presidential finalists being named FAMU's new Rattler-in-chief: Marva Johnson. FAMU's Board of Trustees met virtually and in person May 16 in the Grand Ballroom on campus, selecting Johnson to serve as the university's 13th president following an 8-4 vote. The meeting came just days after she visited the "Highest of Seven Hills" and stood in the firing line of concerned community members who strongly opposed her candidacy as the contentious presidential search neared its end. 'Florida A&M University has long stood as a beacon of excellence and empowerment," Johnson said in a statement released by the university hours after the vote. "To be considered for the opportunity to lead this storied institution is the honor of a lifetime. I will approach this role with bold vision − focused on student success, innovation, and national prominence − while building strong bridges with the FAMU community and honoring the legacy that makes this university so special." The conclusion was no surprise to some in the FAMU community, including board member Belvin Perry, who believed the fix was in for the woman who has been a close ally to Governors Rick Scott and Ron DeSantis. "It is a foregone conclusion as to the result of this vote today," Perry said. "That's the truth." Many view Johnson's ascension as the latest example of DeSantis reshaping the higher education landscape in his political mold – this time at the nation's No. 1 public HBCU (historically Black college or university). How the vote went down: Recap: Florida A&M University picks Marva Johnson as new president amid 'MAGA' drama While Johnson currently serves as group vice president of the internet and cable TV company Charter Communications, she is now the second woman in university history to be named president of FAMU. The other is the university's 11th President, Elmira Mangum, who served 2014–16. The selection of Johnson to serve as FAMU's new leader comes after former President Larry Robinson stepped down last year in the aftermath of a major donation debacle, which led to interim President Timothy Beard stepping in to serve in the role since August for a one-year term. As the winning presidential candidate, Johnson was the board's pick over University of Maryland Eastern Shore Provost and Vice President for Academic Affairs Rondall Allen, University of Central Florida Senior Vice President for Administration and Finance Gerald Hector and FAMU's Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer Donald Palm. Palm was lauded by many in the FAMU community and even confidently declared himself the university's "next president" in a May 15 campus interview with trustees. Board Chair Kristin Harper, as well as Perry, Craig Reed and FAMU Student Body President Zayla Bryant made up the minority of trustees who voted for Palm instead of Johnson; Allen and Hector got no votes. 'The students have spoken, the alumni have spoken, faculty and staff have spoken,' Bryant said. 'History has its eyes on us, and I would be remiss if I were to take my position in vain and not vote to be the voice (for students) ....' As frustrations have run high in the past few weeks leading up to the board's decision, Johnson – a Winter Garden native – endured a heated presidential candidacy. She was heavily criticized by some vocal opponents as "MAGA Marva." Many alumni said her Republican political ties would put the university in danger and maintain she lacks experience due to her background outside of academia. 'I believe in the values of this institution – accountability, transparency, integrity and inclusion,' Harper said ahead of her vote against Johnson. 'Your voice matters, and leaders can't lead if there's no one who is following.' At the top of the board's meeting, about 20 people – including FAMU students and alumni – spoke against Johnson during the meeting, both virtually and in person. Having run out the 15 minutes for public comment, Harper extended by another 25 minutes, given the gravity of the decision. 'A decision to vote in favor of Marva Johnson reflects a reckless disregard for the stakeholders who have placed their trust in you,' said FAMU alumna Amy Wheeler, a 1995 graduate. FAMU's Student Body Vice President Kennedy Williams said the university needs a leader who recognizes that the school is 'more than just a business venture.' But despite the concerns, Johnson remained optimistic about securing the presidency during her May 14 campus visit, saying that she will make efforts to give FAMU 'a seat at the table.' 'I was not sent here to dismantle FAMU," said Johnson, who served as a co-chair on one of DeSantis' transition committees and was Board of Education chair for eight years under Scott. "I would love the opportunity to work with you and to grow FAMU." More: 'I am not a Trojan horse': FAMU community grills president finalist Marva Johnson While FAMU trustee Natlie Figgers did not attend the May 16 trustee meeting, the remaining eight trustees – including Raphael Vazquez, who was appointed to the board May 15 ahead of the presidential selection – cast their votes in support of Johnson. That came after Harper went over an analysis of feedback from campus stakeholders. The overall response to Johnson was "overwhelmingly negative," the summary showed, with many expressing "distrust and opposition." The consensus was Johnson was "not in alignment with the university's needs." Some even had "fundamental concerns about FAMU's institutional integrity" were she to become its leader. 'I respect the viewpoints expressed, but respectively – and it's proven by data – the skill sets and strategies that we have used to get here may not be the same strategies that we'll take to move us forward,' trustee Nicole Washington said, 'and I'm excited for new leadership who is going to be capable of navigating these complex challenges.' The presidential search results come after speculation that board vice chair Deveron Gibbons, who chaired FAMU's search committee, insisted on adding Johnson to what was initially a list of three final candidates. Gibbons has repeatedly denied such claims during previous meetings. Ahead of the trustees' vote, FAMU trustee and Faculty Senate President Jamal Brown, as well as other board members who voted for Johnson, said the university needs a leader who has 'access and political connections" to garner the kind of funding the university needs. Washington expressed how the landscape of higher education "is changing, and the role of a president is changing" with more university leaders focused on finance and fundraising than academics. Following three trustees who indirectly spoke in favor of Johnson back-to-back before voting, Gibbons touched on the need for FAMU stakeholders to focus on improving their fundraising efforts. 'We should do better in giving and fundraising – we, meaning us Rattlers,' Gibbons said. 'We should not be pointing fingers at other people about nonsense that doesn't matter and trying to attack people's integrity and impugn them.' During the meeting, trustees also approved a compensation range of $450,000 to $750,000, which Gibbons said was recommended by the university's presidential search committee. This comes after Johnson asked for a $750,000 salary in her application for the job, where she left out how much she currently makes in her position at Charter Communications. But what led to the board's implosion later in the May 16 meeting was FAMU trustee Michael White's proposal to delegate to Washington the authority to negotiate a contract with Johnson − a move that breaks the usual procedure of the board's chair handling the contract for a new president. "This is so interesting. This could be a Lifetime movie," Harper said, later adding more seriously, "I take personal offense at what is happening." In a 6-4 vote in which the board OK'd Washington dealing with the contract, Perry said 'it strikes me strange that a motion was made as if someone had discussed this beforehand, but it is very typical of what's been going on.' "It's quite apparent that lightning struck and hit here at FAMU," Perry said, backing Harper to negotiate the contract. "I find it horrible that in an institution that values love and charity, there is no love and there is no charity." Although the FAMU trustees voted for Johnson, her official naming as the new president is subject to an interview and confirmation by the Florida Board of Governors, which oversees the state's university system. "FAMU's culture and impact are unmatched, and I am committed to upholding and amplifying that legacy as we move forward together,' Johnson said in a statement. Tarah Jean, higher education reporter for the Tallahassee Democrat, can be reached at tjean@ Follow her on X: @tarahjean_. This article originally appeared on Tallahassee Democrat: New Florida A&M president Marva Johnson embraces 'honor' amid outcry
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Letter: Democrats should be careful about hyping election wins
The other day I saw several articles extolling the results of a special election for South Carolina's 50th House District in which a young Democratic candidate beat his Republican opponent by a 70% to 30% margin in heavily Republican South Carolina. Since this result appeared several times in my scrolling, I decided to find more information regarding this potential watershed event, perhaps heralding the beginning of a Democratic comeback from the wilderness. I found out that the 50th District has voted Democratic forever, and the previous holder of that seat ran unopposed on occasion. The last time he had a Republican opponent, he won by 20 percentage points. Furthermore, in the Democratic primary for this seat this year, the winning candidate won his place on the ballot by a mere seven votes in an election that required a recount to confirm his win. Winning candidate Keishan Scott, is a 24-year-old town council member and will be the youngest member of the South Carolina Legislature. He is Black, and his Republican opponent is white. The district population is about 90% Black and 10% white and Hispanic, so Scott's victory is not quite a watershed event. A whopping 14% of eligible voters took part in this special election, and Scott received 2,572 votes. The Democrats are desperate for good news, but hyping this 'victory' is more pathetic than uplifting. Robert Brems Wyomissing
Yahoo
40 minutes ago
- Yahoo
A repeat of Rodney King? Local leaders say L.A.'s latest unrest is nothing like 1992
The clashes between National Guard troops, police and protesters in recent days have evoked memories for some Angelenos of the deadly riots that erupted after LAPD officers were acquitted of brutally assaulting Black motorist Rodney King in 1992. But leaders who were involved in dealing with the uprising more than three decades ago say what has unfolded with President Trump's deployment of soldiers to Los Angeles and surrounding communities bears no resemblance to the coordinated response that took place then. 'It's not even close,' said former LAPD chief and city councilman Bernard Parks, who was a deputy chief in the police department during the 1992 unrest. 'You get a sense that this is all theatrics, and it is really trying to show a bad light on Los Angeles, as though people are overwhelmed." The chaos of 1992 unfolded after four LAPD officers who were videotaped beating King the prior year were not convicted. It took place at a time of deep distrust and animosity between minority communities and the city's police department. Federal troops and California National Guard units joined forces with local law enforcement officers to quell the turmoil, but not without harrowing results. More than 60 people were killed, thousands were injured and arrested, and there was property damage that some estimate exceeded $1 billion. What has played out recently on the city's streets is significantly more limited in scope, Mayor Karen Bass said. 'There was massive civil unrest [then]. Nothing like that is happening here,' Bass said on CNN on Sunday. 'So there is no need for there to be federal troops on our ground right now.' As of Wednesday evening, several hundred people had been arrested or detained because of their alleged actions during the protests, or taken into custody by federal officials because of their immigration status. On Tuesday, after the 101 Freeway was blocked by protesters, buildings in downtown Los Angeles were vandalized and businesses ransacked, Bass imposed a curfew in the city's civic core from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. that is expected to last several days. Read more: Bass enacts curfew in downtown L.A. to stem chaotic protests Zev Yaroslavsky, who served on the City Council in 1992, recalled that year as "one of the most significant, tragic events in the city's history." He described the riots as "a massive citywide uprising," with "thousands of people who were on the streets in various parts of the city, some burning down buildings." Yaroslavsky, who was later on the county Board of Supervisors for two decades, said that while some actions protesters are currently taking are inappropriate, the swath of Los Angeles impacted is a small sliver of a sprawling city. "All you're seeing is what is happening at 2nd and Alameda," he said. "There's a whole other city, a whole other county that is going about its business." Another significant distinction from 1992, according to people who lived through it, was the bipartisan coordination among local, state and federal law enforcement agencies. Gov. Pete Wilson, a Republican, and Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley requested assistance from then-President George H.W. Bush. That's a stark contrast from what started unfolding last week, when Trump's administration sent ICE agents to Los Angeles and federalized the state's National Guard without request by the state's governor, which last happened in the United States in the 1960s. "The biggest difference is that the governor requested federal help rather than having it imposed over his objection," said Dan Schnur, a political professor and veteran strategist who served as Wilson's communication's director in 1992. "There were some political tensions between state and local elected officials. But both the governor and the mayor set those aside very quickly, given the urgency of the situation." Loren Kaye, Wilson's cabinet secretary at the time, noted times have changed since then. "What I'm worried about is that there aren't the same incentives for resolving the contention in this situation as there were in '92," he said. Then, "everyone had incentives to resolve the violence and the issues. It's just different. The context is different." Parks, a Democrat, argued that the lack of federal communication with California and Los Angeles officials inflamed the situation by creating a lag in local law enforcement response that made the situation worse. 'You have spontaneous multiple events, which is the Achilles heel of any operation,' he said. 'It's not that they're ill-equipped, and it's not that they're under-deployed,' Parks said. 'It takes a minute. You just don't have a large number of people idly sitting there saying, okay, we are waiting for the next event, and particularly if it's spontaneous.' Protests can start peacefully, but those who wish to create chaos can use the moment to seek attention, such as by burning cars, Park said. The end result is images viewed by people across the country who don't realize how localized the protests and how limited the damage was in recent days. 'The visuals they show on TV are exactly what the folks in Washington want to be seen,' Parks said. On Monday, the president deployed hundreds of Marines from Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center in Twentynine Palms. State leaders have asked for a temporary restraining order blocking the military and state National Guard deployments, which is expected to be heard in federal court on Thursday. Read more: California asks court for restraining order to block Guard, U.S. Marine deployments in L.A. Trump, speaking to U.S. Army troops at Ft. Bragg in North Carolina on Tuesday, said that he deployed National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles 'to protect federal law enforcement from the attacks of a vicious and violent mob.' The president descried protesters as leftists pursuing a "foreign invasion" of the United States, bent on destroying the nation's sovereignty. 'If we didn't do it, there wouldn't be a Los Angeles," Trump said. "It would be burning today, just like their houses were burning a number of months ago." Newsom responded that the president was intentionally provoking protesters. 'Donald Trump's government isn't protecting our communities — they're traumatizing our communities,' Newsom said. 'And that seems to be the entire point.' Read more: Newsom, in California address, says Trump purposely 'fanned the flames' of L.A. protests Activists who witnessed the 1992 riots said the current turmoil, despite being much smaller and less violent, is viewed differently because of images and video seen around the world on social media as well as the plethora of cable outlets that didn't exist previously. "They keep looping the same damn video of a car burning. It gives the impression cars are burning everywhere, businesses are being looted everywhere," said Earl Ofari Hutchinson, president of the Los Angeles Urban Policy Roundtable. Hutchinson, an activist from South L.A. who raised money to rebuild businesses during the 1992 riots, said he was concerned about the city's reputation. "L.A. is getting a bad name," he said. Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter. Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond, in your inbox twice per week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
