Berkeley council votes to allow police scanner encryption

Berkeley Council Gives Police Department Permission to Encrypt Radio Communications, Limiting Public Access to Scanner Activity.

The Berkeley City Council has voted 8-1 to allow the police department to encrypt its radio communications, effectively limiting public access to scanner activity. The decision reverses a city policy adopted in 2021 that prohibited encryption in most cases.

Police Chief Jennifer Louis cited state and federal privacy requirements, officer safety concerns, and the need to prevent potential suspects from evading arrest as reasons for the change. She also pointed out that switching between encrypted and unencrypted channels would be challenging due to staffing shortages and the need to protect sensitive information.

Opponents of full encryption, including pedestrian and bike advocates and independent police oversight organizations, expressed concern that the decision would strip away a valuable tool for monitoring police activity and remain informed during emergencies. Andrea Prichett, founder of Berkeley Copwatch, echoed these concerns, stating that the public's access to information about police activity was being taken away.

However, the council ultimately sided with the police department after Louis presented a compromise proposal that would provide near real-time logs of incident types, times, and general locations using the department's computer-assisted dispatch system. The proposal was also supported by Councilmember Cecilia Lunaparra, who had initially planned to support the policy change but decided to vote against it after listening to public input.

The decision has sparked debate about the balance between officer safety and transparency in policing. While some council members expressed concerns about the potential for crime in Berkeley if other cities remain unencrypted, others emphasized the importance of maintaining open lines of communication with the community.

As the city moves forward with implementing encryption, it remains to be seen how this will impact public access to scanner activity and the level of transparency in policing.

Can't believe what's going on here... I mean, I get that police need some level of security, but full-on encrypting their comms? It's like they're saying "we can't be bothered with the public having a peek into our operation". And don't even get me started on the compromise proposal - near real-time logs? That sounds like just enough to keep us in the dark. What's next, encrypted social media posts?

I'm kinda low-key disappointed about this decision, ya know? I get that security is a thing, but at the same time, scanners are like, super useful for keeping an eye on stuff that's going down in the community. And now it sounds like we're gonna have to rely on some fancy computer system to get info - that's just not the same as having actual real-time access to what's happening. Plus, I feel like this is like, a slippery slope... next thing you know, they'll be encrypting everything and it'll be super hard for us to keep tabs on what's going on.

omg u guys!! i'm literally freaking out over this news! so the cops are gonna encrypt their radios and it's like they're taking away our right to know what's going down in berkeley lol but at the same time, i get why they need to do it, safety first, you know? but like, isn't that just a excuse for them to keep us in the dark? i mean, the council voted 8-1 so it's not like there was a lot of opposition or anything... but still, i think this is a super bad idea. what if we need to know something's going on and they're all like "can't tell you"? anyway, i'm gonna keep an eye on this and see how it plays out

I'm all for public access to scanner activity being limited, tbh It's like, what's the harm in just knowing if there's a cop car on the way or not? We're already living under surveillance as it is . And let's be real, encryption is not the answer to everything . I mean, come on, we're just gonna make up new ways for cops to hide info from us now ? It's like they're trying to play detective instead of serving the community . What's next? Encrypting our own conversations so no one can see what we're saying ?

[Image of a police officer with a sad face ]

[ GIF of a megaphone with a "silenced" sound effect ]

[Image of a city map with a "locked" symbol ]

[Animated meme of a person trying to escape from a police car, but getting caught ]

[Image of a clock ticking away ]

I'm kinda worried about this one . If they're encrypting their radio communications, that means us regular folks are gonna have a harder time keeping up with what's happening on the streets. Like, I get it, officer safety is important and all that, but isn't transparency part of being a public servant? It feels like we're losing a key piece of information that could help keep us safe too.

I'm also curious about how this is gonna play out in other cities. Are they just gonna follow suit or what's gonna happen? I mean, it's not like encryption is a new thing, but it seems like it's becoming more common and we're losing access to all the info that used to be freely available. It's like, isn't that kinda weird?

I'm not entirely sure about this one... I mean, I get why they want to encrypt their radios, especially with all the craziness going around - safety concerns are legit. But at the same time, it feels like we're sacrificing too much transparency here. As a community, shouldn't we be able to know what's happening when we need to know? It's not like they're hiding anything juicy, just keeping some info private. And yeah, I get that encryption can help prevent bad guys from getting away... but what about when the bad guy is actually a pedestrian or cyclist trying to report an issue?! We need to find a balance here, you know? Maybe they could've found another way to protect sensitive info without stripping us of this valuable resource. I just hope it doesn't lead to more secrecy and less accountability...

This is super weird . I mean, who doesn't want to know what's going on in their city? Police scanners have been a thing for ages , and now it's all encrypted ? It feels like they're hiding something . But at the same time, I get why they wanna keep stuff private . Officer safety is key . And what about the whole "transparency" thing? Is that gonna suffer because of this decision? Not sure .

I guess it's all about finding a balance , but I'm not sure where they drew the line . It feels like they're weighing safety against transparency , and that's a tough one . What do you guys think?

Ugh, I'm all about keeping our community informed . I just don't get why the council decided to go with encryption for the police department's radio comms . We're already living in a surveillance state as it is, and this just makes it harder for us to know what's going on when it comes to public safety. And now we have to rely on logs of incident types from the dispatch system? Like, I get it, officer safety is important, but don't we want our cops to be able to respond quickly to emergencies too? This feels like a step backward to me

I'm tellin' ya, back in my day we used to think that the cops should be transparent about what they were doin', but now it seems like they wanna keep everything under wraps . I mean, I get why they wanna encrypt their radios, safety and all that jazz, but don't they think the public has a right to know if there's a problem brewin' in the city? It's like, we're not tryin' to pry into every single police activity or nothin', just keep an eye on things so we can stay safe too .

I'm also kinda concerned about this whole "compromise proposal" thing. If they're only gonna give us near-real-time logs of incidents, what's the point? It's like they're offerin' us a participation trophy or somethin' . I mean, don't get me wrong, I appreciate that Councilmember Lunaparra was listenin' to public input and all, but it seems like they made up their minds anyway.

I just hope this whole thing doesn't lead to more secrecy and less transparency in policing. We need to be able to trust our cops, not just feel like we're bein' kept in the dark .

I'm not really sure I agree with this decision ... I mean, don't get me wrong, officer safety is super important and all that, but at the same time, having a way for the public to stay informed about what's going on during emergencies feels like it could be kinda lifesaving, right? Like, if there's an accident or something and we need emergency responders ASAP, wouldn't it be awesome if we could still get info on how they're doing it? I know the police department is saying it's all about keeping sensitive info safe, but can't we just have some kind of compromise where we can still get bits and bobs of info while keeping the actual convo encrypted? It's like, I get that everyone has to be on the same page sometimes, but does this really feel like the right call to me?

think its kinda weird that they're giving the police more power to keep stuff private now... I mean, isn't that what we want in a democracy - transparency? but at the same time, i get why they need encryption too, especially with all the sensitive info and stuff. it's like, do you sacrifice one for the other? officer safety vs public access? maybe this compromise thing is a good middle ground tho... near-real-time logs are kinda cool! but what if those logs get hacked or something?

encryption and openness are like two sides of a coin - one protects our personal info, but also limits our understanding of what's happening around us... can't have one without the other? this decision is making me think about the value we place on knowledge and transparency in our communities... if we can't see what's going on, how do we hold those in power accountable? it's like a delicate balance between safety and openness, but which one should be prioritized?

omg u guys i'm lowkey concerned about dis new policy ... like i get its 4 officer safety n all but cant we jus have a lil balance btw? u cant just take away our right 2 know whats goin on in our city and now they're talkin bout havin encrypted radio comms which means no more scanner activity for us poor ppl ... it's like they think we r just gonna forget we got the right 2 know what's goin down in berkley

but at da same time i feel 4 councilmember lunaparra 4 tryna do whats rite n compromise ... that near real-time log thing sounds kinda cool maybe it'll be a lil better dan nothin... still not sure tho, think we need 2 keep talkin bout dis topic 'n find a solution dat works 4 EVERYONE

I'm low-key worried about this decision . Like, I get that officer safety is a thing, but can't we find another way to keep them safe without taking away our right to know what's going down? It feels like the police are getting more power and less accountability . And what's with the "we need to protect sensitive info" vibe? Can't they just use secure protocols like everyone else? It's not like we're trying to intercept their personal secrets . I'm all for transparency, even if it means some info gets shared . Let's keep the lines of communication open, you know?

meh, i'm all for officer safety and all but encrypting the police radio communications seems like a total overreach to me . what's next? hiding the city budget from the public? it's already super hard to get info out of the cops anyway with the way they're always so cagey about certain stuff. i mean, yeah, maybe it'll prevent some rogue cop from broadcasting their evil plans but i highly doubt that's gonna happen more often than someone just messing around for kicks

and don't even get me started on the compromise proposal . near real-time logs of incident types and times? that's not transparency, that's just a bunch of redacted data if you ask me. it's like they're trying to keep us informed but still not really bein' open about what's goin' down.

i'm all for keeping the community safe but we need to make sure we're doin' it in a way that's transparent and accountable

this is a good thing? i dont think so... encryption is like, super important for keeping us safe and informed during emergencies. what if there's an accident or something and we need to know whats happening ASAP? but i guess police chief louis made some good points about officer safety and stuff... maybe this compromise with logs will be okay... idk

I think this is a super worrying development , especially for people who want to stay informed about what's going on in their community . Encryption limits our ability to listen in on police radio chatter, which can be super useful during emergencies ⚑️. It's also a bit dodgy that the council is siding with the police department without really considering the impact on transparency .

I mean, think about it - what happens when there's a big incident and people need to know what's going on? The police are saying they'll just send out a report via their computer system ️, but that's not the same as getting real-time updates from the scanner . It's like having a fire alarm that only tells you when the fire department arrives - not when it's happening in the first place .

I'm also curious about why the city decided to reverse its policy . Was it just a case of politics getting in the way? Did some council members get pressure from the police union or other interests? I don't know, but I do know that this decision is going to have some serious consequences for our community .

Overall, I think we need to be super careful about how we balance officer safety with transparency and accountability . We can't just let the police department decide what's best without considering the impact on the public . This is a big issue, and we need to make sure we're thinking it through

Ugh, I'm literally shaking with rage right now ! I mean, I get it, officer safety is a thing and all, but come on, can't we find a better balance between that and keeping our communities informed? I'm so tired of these city councils making decisions that prioritize the police department's needs over ours. It feels like they're just trying to hide something from us.

And don't even get me started on this compromise proposal . Near real-time logs of incident types, times, and general locations? That's not transparency, that's just a watered-down version of the truth . I want to know what's going on in my city, not some vague summary of it.

And Andrea Prichett's words really resonated with me . The public's right to know is being taken away from us and it's just not fair. What's next, are they gonna start censoring our news outlets too?

I'm so frustrated with the lack of accountability in this decision . Where was Cecilia Lunaparra when she first planned to support the policy change? Did she really think through the consequences or was she just swept up in the momentum?