2019 Anti-Theft Budget Vote: Difference between revisions

'''NOTE: This vote is Part 2 of 2. The other vote is [[2019 Surveillance Camera Policy Vote|here]]. At the request of some members, the two solutions presented have been split into two distinct votes. The sponsor is proposing both votes as part of a comprehensive solution to the problem of tool theft and suggests that both votes be enacted.'''

As Pumping Station: One has expanded, it has experienced an increase in tool theft. Surveillance cameras, first installed in 2015 to monitor the building entrances and exits, have limited use in preventing many thefts. A January 2019 revision to the Membership Agreement permitted expansion of cameras if approved by the Board, paving the way for recording members working inside the space (“Membership Agreement,” 2019).  In response to theft, proposals on the organization’s e-mail list have ranged from expanding camera usage to instituting criminal background checks. This vote uses an evidence-based approach to reduce tool theft by taking the following actions:

* Updating the surveillance camera policy to prohibit cameras from monitoring internal workspaces. More cameras will only waste time and money, will create privacy issues, and will only serve to distract the organization from implementing real solutions. '''This is the [[2019 Surveillance Camera Policy Vote]].'''

* Budgeting $1000 to allow a team of members to prototype and experiment with anti-theft solutions. '''This vote achieves this outcome.'''

 

'''NOTE: The rest of the text, with the exception of the vote Language, is identical between the two votes.'''

This vote explicitly limits cameras to those focused on the building’s external entrances and exits, the building’s exterior, and network, server, and camera infrastructure. Additional language was added to permit mounting cameras on the outside of the building, should this be necessary. Recording networking and computing infrastructure is necessary to capture attempts to disable the camera system; these areas do not overlap with member work areas so should not present a privacy risk. These changes preserve privacy while eliminating collection of data that PS:One cannot reasonably analyze with volunteer labor. This enables the organization to focus on real solutions while avoiding the temptation to throw more cameras at the problem.

Together, eliminating internal camera surveillance and funding research for anti-theft solutions will provide the best likelihood of reducing tool theft at PS:One. The existing cameras focused on external doors can deter theft of large, expensive tools. However, for smaller, less expensive tools, cameras are ineffective at deterring theft and will only distract the organization from solving the theft problem. Further, cameras recording internal workspaces intrude upon member privacy. Technical solutions, such as recording an alarm when a tool leaves an exterior door or requiring RFID key fobs to check out and return commonly stolen tools, should increase effort and risk for an offender to steal tools, as well as reduce opportunities for theft. By combining these evidence-based approaches, this vote, if enacted, should reduce tool theft while preserving member privacy.