Skip to content
Grand Jury Hub
← Back to this finding in the response audit
Public discussion · Finding F26-12

Cameras and Community Safety footage

What should residents consider about Finding F26-12: Cameras and Community Safety footage, and the County’s response?

City of Oakland City Administration and City CouncilResponse dated 2026-07-31Audit assessment: Addressed
Participate in this discussion

Audit context

What the response says and how it was assessed

Response says

Agrees and describes camera-system expansion funded by the action plan and Crankstart; the reproduced finding continues on page 10.

Audit analysis

Agreement covers the full finding; a named plan and funder support the expansion claim, but operational explanation is limited.

Finding-response score

Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.

9/10

4/4

Statutory elements

Stated position
2/2
Applicable disagreement elements
2/2

5/6

Public usefulness

Coverage
2/2
Reason specificity
1/2
Support traceability
2/2

Agreement covers the full finding; a named plan and funder support the expansion claim, but operational explanation is limited.

Scoring confidence: high

Public participation

Discuss the finding and response

Use Pol.is to discuss both the Grand Jury finding and the County’s response, see where participants agree, and add a perspective for others to consider. Participant statements do not alter this audit or verify factual claims made by any participant or source document.

Loading the Pol.is conversation...
Open on Pol.is