By Dr. Mark P. Kling
When a police department adopts new technology, the hardest part often isn’t installing the equipment. It’s building the relationships and trust necessary for that technology to be used effectively. Rialto, California, offers an example of how a police department can introduce emerging public-safety technology through a structured partnership with the business community.
The Rialto Police Department uses FUSUS, a platform that allows participating businesses to connect compatible security-camera systems with law enforcement operations through its Real-Time Crime Center (RTCC). But the technology itself is only part of the department’s approach. The more important lesson is how Rialto introduces the program to businesses: establish the relationship before an emergency occurs, explain the technology before asking for participation, and give business owners a clear understanding of what participation means.
For police leaders considering real-time crime centers, privately owned camera networks or other emerging technologies, Rialto’s experience provides a practical model for building public-safety partnerships while maintaining transparency and accountability.
Start with the relationship, not the technology
Rialto has a long history of using technology as part of its public-safety strategy. In 2012, the department became the setting for one of the best-known randomized controlled studies of police body-worn cameras. Researchers examined whether equipping officers with cameras affected use of force and citizen complaints. The study found substantial reductions in both measures during the study period.
The broader lesson, however, was not simply that cameras changed police behavior. It was that technology works best when accompanied by policy, training, supervision, accountability and communication. That lesson continues to influence Rialto’s approach to emerging technology.
Rather than waiting until a crime occurs to discover that a nearby business has useful surveillance video, the department works to establish relationships with businesses before an incident occurs. Rialto’s camera-registration program provides one example. Businesses and property owners can register camera locations with the department, allowing officers and investigators to know where potentially useful video may be available without automatically giving the department live access to those cameras. Knowing where evidence may exist is different from having unrestricted access to it.
Make education part of the process
Rialto incorporated education about its camera-sharing program into the city’s Development Review process. As part of the process for a new commercial development, the business owner, property owner, tenant or another individual with decision-making authority must participate in a meeting with representatives of the Rialto Police Department before occupancy. The meeting includes a review of the approved security-camera system and information about the department’s camera-sharing program.
Rialto’s Development Review requirements distinguish between the required security-camera system and voluntary participation in the program. Commercial developments must have security-camera systems that meet specified requirements, and the location, placement and technical specifications of those systems are subject to review by the Rialto Police Department. Connecting that camera system to the department’s camera-sharing platform, however, is entirely voluntary.
The purpose of the required meeting is to explain how the program operates, the safeguards and privacy protections associated with it, the department’s access capabilities, and how voluntary participation may assist the business and responding public-safety personnel during emergencies, criminal investigations and other public-safety incidents.
This distinction between education and mandatory participation is important. Participation in the meeting is a required component of the Development Review process; enrollment in or connection to the department’s camera-sharing platform is entirely voluntary. Participation in the program is not a condition of project approval, issuance of permits, issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or commencement of business operations.
To date, no business has been denied a business license or operating permit for declining to participate in the program. That approach allows the police department to have a conversation with business owners without making participation in the technology the sole focus of the relationship. It also gives business owners an opportunity to ask questions and understand the system before deciding whether participation is appropriate for their organization.
For police leaders considering a similar approach, the lesson is straightforward: If you want businesses to participate in a public-safety technology program, educate them before you ask them to participate. Emphasize how customer and employee safety can be improved by developing relationships with police before an emergency occurs.
Participation can grow from education
Rialto’s experience demonstrates that education can lead to voluntary participation. According to current Rialto Police Department records, 75 businesses are participating in the camera-sharing program through memorandums of understanding (MOUs).
Those businesses represent two paths into the program. Thirty-eight were existing businesses that independently requested to join, while 37 entered the program while going through the Development Review process for a new business.
That distinction is significant.
The Development Review process gives the department an opportunity to explain the program to businesses that are new to the community. At the same time, existing businesses are independently recognizing potential value in participating. The program, therefore, is not dependent solely on requiring businesses to participate; education creates an opportunity for voluntary partnerships to develop.
For police leaders, this provides a useful way to think about technology adoption. Instead of asking, How can we get more cameras? ask: How can we create enough understanding and value that businesses want to become partners?
Give businesses a reason to participate
Police departments naturally view technology from the perspective of public safety: This will help us solve crimes. That may be true, but it is only one side of the partnership. A business owner may reasonably ask, What’s in it for my business?
The answer can include improved situational awareness, safer environments for customers and employees, faster access to video following an incident, assistance identifying suspects or vehicles and a direct relationship with local law enforcement. Rialto’s approach also recognizes that not every business will have the same needs or concerns. A business may want to register cameras so officers know where video is located, while another business may determine that sharing camera access with police provides additional value during emergencies or investigations.
The objective should not be to maximize the number of connected cameras simply for the sake of having more cameras. The objective is to develop a network of willing partners who understand the technology and its public-safety purpose.
In that sense, Rialto’s approach represents a 21st-century extension of familiar policing strategies such as Neighborhood Watch and Business Watch programs. The technology is different, but the underlying principle is the same — public safety improves when police and community members establish relationships and share information before a crisis occurs.
Real-time information can change the first few minutes
The operational value of privately owned cameras becomes most apparent during the first few minutes of an incident. A dispatcher may know that a crime is occurring, and responding officers may know the address. But video can potentially answer additional questions: Are customers or employees in harm’s way? How many suspects are there? Are they armed? What are they wearing? Is the suspect still inside? What vehicle are they using? Which direction did they travel?
Those answers can affect officer safety, the response to the incident and subsequent investigative decisions. Rialto has reported using its camera-sharing technology to provide officers with remote access to participating businesses’ surveillance systems during investigations and critical incidents. In one documented incident, officers used information obtained through the system to help identify a suspect vehicle, locate the vehicle and take a suspect into custody.
Technology does not replace witnesses, patrol officers, detectives, evidence collection or traditional investigative techniques. What it can do is reduce the time between an event and the availability of potentially useful information. That can be especially important when the information concerns an armed suspect, a fleeing vehicle or an unfolding emergency.
Transparency has to be built into the program
Any police technology involving privately owned cameras raises legitimate questions about access, privacy and accountability. Police leaders should be prepared to answer those questions before implementing the program.
Businesses should understand what cameras are available to law enforcement, when officers can access them, whether access is continuous or incident-based, who is authorized to access the system, what information is retained, how access is monitored, what safeguards prevent inappropriate use and what control remains with the business owner.
Those are not questions that should be answered after a controversy occurs. They should be part of the initial conversation.
Rialto’s Development Review requirements also establish boundaries around surveillance. Commercial camera placement must be designed to avoid recording restrooms, designated break rooms, changing or locker areas and other locations where employees or patrons have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
The requirements also distinguish between lawful access to recorded footage and voluntary cooperation. Businesses must comply with applicable warrants, subpoenas, court orders or other lawful processes, while other requests for footage remain voluntary except in a bona fide emergency involving imminent danger to life or public safety.
Rialto’s camera-registration program is another example of creating different levels of participation. Registering a camera identifies its location to police without automatically providing live access to the camera. The department explains that registration allows officers to more quickly contact the camera owner and request recorded video following an incident. For police executives, the larger lesson is that accountability should be designed into the program from the beginning rather than added after implementation.
Five lessons for police leaders
Rialto’s experience offers several practical takeaways for police executives looking to build similar partnerships. The following five lessons can help agencies introduce new technology while maintaining trust and accountability:
- Build the relationship before the emergency. Do not wait until investigators need video to meet the business owner. Establish the relationship before something happens. Rialto uses its Community Engagement Team to help establish and maintain these relationships with local businesses.
- Make education part of the implementation strategy. Give business owners an opportunity to understand the technology, its benefits and its limitations before asking them to participate.
- Clearly distinguish requirements from voluntary participation. If an agency has a development-review or permitting process, explain precisely what is required and what remains voluntary. Clarity builds credibility.
- Measure partnerships, not just technology. The number of cameras connected is easy to report. A better measure is whether businesses understand the program, participate willingly and receive value from the relationship.
- Build accountability into the system. Policies governing access, authorization, auditing, retention, training and appropriate use should exist before the technology is deployed. Once implemented, those policies must be consistently followed and periodically reviewed to maintain accountability.
Technology is the tool; partnership is the strategy
Police agencies will continue to adopt new technologies. Real-time crime centers, automated license plate readers, drones, artificial intelligence and privately owned camera networks are changing how departments collect and use information. But every new technology creates the same leadership challenge: How do we use it effectively while maintaining the trust of the people we serve?
Rialto’s experience with its camera-sharing program suggests that the answer is not simply buying better technology. It is building better relationships around the technology.
The department’s experience demonstrates that education does not have to mean coercion. A city can require a business owner to learn about a public-safety technology without requiring that business to participate in it. When business owners understand the technology and its potential benefits, they can make informed decisions about becoming partners.
The results are reflected not simply in the number of participating businesses, but in how those businesses entered the program. Existing businesses have independently requested to participate, while others have chosen to join after learning about the program during the Development Review process.
For police leaders, the larger lesson extends beyond camera sharing. Technology may provide the information, but relationships determine how effectively that information serves the community. The most successful public-safety technology programs will not necessarily be the ones with the most equipment. They will be the ones in which police, businesses and community members understand the technology, understand the rules and understand that they are working together toward the same public-safety goal.
References
1. Ariel B, Farrar WA, Sutherland A. The effect of police body-worn cameras on use of force and citizens’ complaints against the police: a randomized controlled trial. J Quant Criminol. 2015;31(3):509-535. doi:10.1007/s10940-014-9236-3
2. National Institute of Justice. Program profile: police body-worn cameras (Rialto, Calif.). CrimeSolutions. Published November 28, 2016.
3. Rialto Police Department. Rialto PD uses advancements in technology to combat crime. Published July 21, 2022.
4. Rialto Police Department. Camera registry. Accessed October 8, 2026.
5. City of Rialto Police Department and Planning Division. Security cameras (FUSUS): commercial developments. Development Review requirements. Date not provided.
About the author
Dr. Mark P. Kling has 38 years of law enforcement experience, including 19 years as a police chief. He has taught public administration and criminal justice for 26 years and currently serves as the Criminal Justice Program Lead at California Baptist University.
After retiring from law enforcement, Dr. Kling returned to public service in 2017, as chief, assisting the Rialto Police Department in redesigning its policing strategies, increasing staffing levels and developing a new generation of executive leadership. He also played a leadership role in the design and construction of a new state-of-the-art police headquarters incorporating modern public-safety technologies and concepts into the department’s operational environment.
He can be reached at mkling@rialtopd.com or mkling@calbaptist.edu.
