Suspicious activity reporting requirements spark contention

Berkeley City Councilmember Jesse Arreguin wanted to restrict when city law enforcement has to report suspicious activity to local intelligence centers regarding criminal and terrorist activities.

At the Feb. 14 Berkeley City Council meeting, Arreguin proposed an amendment to do just that.

Arreguin wanted to alter an agreement between the city and the Northern California Regional Intelligence Center, or NCRIC, an intelligence headquarters to which information of possible criminal or terrorist activity is submitted.

His proposed amendment called for the city to “limit the submission of Suspicious Activity Reports to only those individuals/groups that have been charged with a crime” while permitting “the submission of Suspicious Activity reports in cases where the Police Department has become aware of criminal acts that have not been linked to a specific individual or group.”

The agreement — which the city approved without Arreguin’s amendment — is one of five contentious mutual aid agreements the council looked at during its February meeting. Mutual aid refers to agreements between Berkeley and other security and law enforcement agencies that provide outside aid when one agency lacks sufficient resources to address a situation.

Two of the five amendments will be reviewed by the city’s police review commission and come back to council in May for further discussion. The remaining three were approved Feb. 14.

“(NCRIC) is probably the most problematic agreement that we have,” Arreguin said. “It enables a very broad investigation and reporting and enables the police department to do intelligence gathering and reporting of people who may not have committed any crimes at all.”

According to Zahra Billoo, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations San Francisco Bay Area chapter, the suspicious activity reporting initiative has become more common in the Bay Area in recent years.

“Berkeley doesn’t have as large problems as other cities around country have regarding (suspicious activity reporting),” said George Lippman, chair of the city’s Peace and Justice Commission. “We are mostly trying to prevent these problems from spreading to Berkeley.”

The city has filed two suspicious activity reports to the center in the last two years, according to Lippman.

The first report was sent following a suspect being arrested and charged with stealing license plates. The second report was a case in which people were observing a secure but unnamed facility in the city, which according to Lippman, illuminates the fact that suspicious activity reporting is highly subjective and leads to the interrogation and harassment of innocent citizens.

“As a white person … taking a picture of (a facility), that’s normal — but somebody in a turban that looks like a Muslim could be suspicious,” Lippman said. “Nothing is in writing — (your information) can get into a national database and will never get out again, and even the FBI can interview you.”

But according to George Perezvelez, chair of the city’s Police Review Commission, only a very limited number of Berkeley community members have a problem with the NCRIC agreement, not the city’s population at large.

“There isn’t a public outcry on this — these are the same group of concerned individuals every time who want to protect civil liberties,” Perezvelez said. “This not a citywide concern.”

Suspicious activity reports are submitted through a chain of command by the Berkeley Police Department in which a first level sergeant will review the submitted information and send it to a second lieutenant who determines whether the incident meets the standard of reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. If the incident passes these criteria, the information will be submitted to the intelligence center as a suspicious activity, according to Arreguin.

Suspicious activity reporting has been unrolling nationally in the years since 9/11, according to Billoo, who said that Los Angeles was one of the pilot cities where the program was spearheaded by local officials and the police department.

“The national (suspicious activity reporting initiative) has been widely criticized in law enforcement and the civil liberties world as over collecting information and impinging upon First Amendment-protected activities,” said Veena Dubal, a civil rights attorney and UC Berkeley graduate student. “Suspicious activity reports as defined by the federal government include activities that are completely innocuous, like taking pictures — someone who looks like me is more likely to be reported on than someone who looks like the chief of police.”

Anjuli Sastry covers city government.

Please keep our community civil. Comments should remain on topic and be respectful.
Read our full comment policy
  • VINTAGEDUSTYROSE

    ALLOW THEM TO GET AWAY WITH THIS BY NOT RAISING YOUR VOICES AND NEXT THEY WILL BE BREAKING DOWN YOUR DOOR TO YOUR HOME PERHAPS CARTING YOU AND YOUR FAMILY AWAY TO A CONCENTRATION CAMP HERE IN AMRICA.

     JESSE VENTURA STATED THAT MANY MILITARY BASES HAVE BEEN CLOSED AND OUR GOVERNMENT HAS MADE THEM INTO  CONCENTRATION CAMPS WITH DISPOSABLE COFFINS FOR AMERICAN CITIZENS………………………..TRUE?

    YOU GOT TSA DOING ILLEGAL SEARCH AND SEIZURES AGAINST THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS BECAUSE AMERICANS DID………….. NOT………………… SPEAK ………………UP

    WHAT’S NEXT?

    AMERICA IS BECOMING MORE AND MORE LIKE NAZI GERMANY ………………..IE:  THE BROWN SHIRTS.
    THEY TURNED IN THEIR PARENTS/FRIENDS FOR NOTHING WHO WERE KILLED ON MANY OCCASIONS.

    WE SHOULD ABIDE BY THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS AND NOT ALLOW ANY ONE TO TRY TO TAKE THEM AWAY OR TAKE THEM AWAY. 

    THERE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY BE NO SURVEILLANCE OF AMERICAN CITIZENS AT ALL.

    THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA SHOULD REMIND ALL OFFICIALS THAT IT IS WE 
    THE PEOPLE THEY WORK FOR AND NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.

    OUR FOREFATHERS KNEW THE GOVERNMENT WOULD INFRINGE ON THE PEOPLES RIGHTS WHICH IS WHY THEY ADDED TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION THE BILL OF RIGHTS.

    ALL  AMERICANS NEED TO DO IS RAISE THEIR VOICE.

    WITHOUT THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND THE BILL OF RIGHTS……………….THERE……….. IS…………. NO …….AMERICA

    SO AMERICANS…………………..RAISE YOUR VOICES AS LOUD AS YOU CAN………………….AND TELL OUR GOVERNMENT THAT THIS IS NOR WILL IT EVER BE NAZI GERMANY.

    9/11 SHOULD HAVE NEVER CHANGED OUR WAY OF LIFE HERE IN AMERICA…………………BUT YOU ALLOWED THAT TO HAPPEN AS WELL BY NOT SPEAKING UP

    SO NOW AMERICANS HAVE HOMELAND SECURITY WHICH HAS TAKEN AWAY SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MANY RIGHTS OF AMERICAN CITIZENS FOR NO REASON AT ALL  BECAUSE NO ONE SPOKE UP.

    WHAT’S NEXT?

    YOU WILL BE THE ONE TO DECIDE BY SPEAKING UP OR BY STAYING SILENT LIKE LAMBS TO THE SLAUGHTER.

    PLEASE READ ABOUT OUR FOREFATHERS FOR WITHOUT WHICH THERE WOULD BE NO AMERICA.

    GOD BLESS AMERICA

  • Canary131

    The City of San Francisco has already passed legislation to address increasing federal surveillance and control of local people.  http://www.baycitizen.org/policing/story/sf-supes-raise-concerns-about/  
    Some “concerned individuals” in Berkeley agree with the City of San Francisco, and across the U.S. — our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to be free from SEARCH is under attack

  • Stan De San Diego

    Once again, the clueless are trying to dictate federal policy.