By Austin Fisher
KU Statehouse Wire Service
TOPEKA — A bill that would require Kansas police officers to use body-worn cameras while on duty would cost about $1.4 million in 2016 in equipment, personnel and training, the Kansas Highway Patrol estimates.
Senate Bill 18 would require every state, county, and municipal law enforcement officer to be equipped with a body camera while on patrol duty. Ongoing maintenance would cost an estimated $871,000 in 2017.
Maj. Dawn Layman, a Lenexa police officer, is in favor of body cams and was wearing one at Thursday’s Senate Corrections and Juvenile Justice Committee hearing.
“You do your officers a disservice if you don’t get the technology,” she said. “Law enforcement gets the fact that the technology is needed.”
Lenexa has used body cams since 2009. However, Layman opposes a statewide mandate, saying smaller departments facing budget challenges need to have a say in what equipment they use. She said the camera she was wearing costs $900.
Police could seek grants and other funds from the federal government, and other public or private sources to cover costs. Layman, who plans to testify to the Senate Corrections and Juvenile Justice Committee with other opponents to the bill on Monday, said federal funding has been reduced in recent years.
Rep. Gail Finney (D-Wichita) asked the committee to consider asset forfeiture, DUI penalties, and penalties under Jessica’s Law to help fund the mandate.
“Nobody likes unfunded mandates but I think if we’re really concerned and we really want to ensure some type of transparency and accountability of law enforcement, we will find a way to find the money,” she said.
For Rev. Ben Scott, president of the Topeka NAACP, funding is secondary to compassion for victims.
“The cost of putting up the tapes for three years is far less than a life that’s out on the street,” Scott said. “Try to put yourself in the shoes of some of us,” he said. “It’s not easy.”
Body camera videos would be kept on file for three years if the recorded incident involves the use of force, leads to detention or an arrest, or may be useful in a criminal case. Otherwise, videos would be deleted after two weeks.
Micah Kubic, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Kansas, asked the Senate committee to extend the time police would hold on to video to four weeks to allow more time to review the footage. He suggested that in the interest of privacy the cams shouldn’t record continuously but only when police interact with the public. Also, anyone wanting to give an anonymous tip should be able to request an officer to turn off the camera.
“We think (the bill) does a very good job of balancing competing interests of accountability, privacy, and safety,” Kubic said. “We believe that (body cams) can be a very good tool for preventing false allegations against police officers.”
The Topeka Capital-Journal previously reported that departments in Wichita and Riley County already use body cams, and the move to expand their use statewide has bipartisan support.
Officers wearing cams could stop recording when “engaged in a personal matter” like a personal discussion or when using the bathroom, or upon request of a resident whenever the officer enters the resident’s home. Officers would also need to notify citizens that the camera is recording.
While body cam video would be exempt from the Kansas Open Records Act, anyone recorded in the video, their parents, legal guardians, or attorneys could request a copy.
Walt Chappell, vice chair of the Racial Profiling Advisory Board of Wichita (RPAB), said he hopes the bill will allow police to review their actions, policies, and training in order to de-escalate interactions with citizens before they become violent confrontations.
Confrontations that result in deadly action are often muddled by conflicting accounts and lies, says Djuan Wash, communications director of Sunflower Community Action and member of the RPAB.
Wash said body cams would have helped establish the facts in the Wichita police shooting death of John Paul Quintero on Jan. 3.
“Had the officers that responded had on a body camera, the family and the police department would know what happened, versus the messiness of a he-said, she-said argument” Wash said.
The committee only had time to hear proponents of the bill Thursday, and will meet on Monday to hear testimony from opponents.
Austin Fisher is a University of Kansas senior from Lawrence majoring in journalism.