>>> GOOD MORNING AND THANK YOU
FOR BEING HERE FOR THE
GOVERNANCE, EQUITY, AND
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE . I HAVE
TWO ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA TODAY.
ONE WOULD BE A MODIFICATION TO
OUR RULES AND PROCEDURES FOR
THE CITY COUNCIL.
THE OTHER WOULD BE A DISCUSSION
ON THE ORDINANCE RELATED TO
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY AND
PRIVACY PROTECTION.
AS USUAL, WE WILL START OFF
WITH PUBLIC COMMENT.
WE HAVE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE
SIGNED IN.
I WILL CALL YOU OUT IN ORDER IN
WHICH YOU SIGNED THE DOCUMENT.
WE HAVE McCANNA LUCKS AND
CYNTHIA SPICE. I'M NOT SURE HOW
TO PRONOUNCE THAT.
>> GOOD MORNING.
I AM McCANNA, I AM THE POSSE
COURTED HER FOR THE AMERICAN
ISLAMIC RELATIONS IN WASHINGTON
STATE.
I AM HERE TO PROPOSE A CONCERN
OF THE LICENSE PLATE READERS
AND I HOPE TO ENSURE THE
COUNCIL TAKES FULL
CONSIDERATION FROM THE WORKING
GROUP AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS.
WE HAVE SEEN THE CONSEQUENCES
BEFORE OF UNREGULATED USE OF
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY NOTABLY
WITH THE NYPD'S SURVEILLANCE OF
THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY IN NEW
YORK USING TACTICS INCLUDING
LICENSE PLATE READERS WHICH ARE
UNDER REVIEW HERE AS WELL.
IN ORDER TO PREVENT FUTURE
ABUSE WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT
CONCERNS RAISED BY STAKEHOLDERS
AND IMPACTED COMMUNITIES ARE
ADDRESSED AND STRONG
INCOMPETENCE OF WAYS.
THE SEATTLE SURVEILLANCE
ORDINANCE IS THE STRONGEST
MEASURE ADOPTED BY AMERICAN
CITY TO PROVIDE REGULATIONS IN
OVERSIGHT OF SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGIES.
WE APPLAUD THE CITY'S
LEADERSHIP AND PARTNERSHIP ON
THIS ISSUE.
AS PIONEERS IN THIS AREA WE
OBLIGATION TO OURSELVES AND THE
REST OF OUR COUNTRY WHO ARE
WATCHING US AS A MODEL TO
ENSURE RESPONSIBLE AND STRONG
EFFORTS ARE TAKEN.
WE NEED TO ENSURE THAT
COMMUNITY INPUT IS HEARD AND
VALUED.
I WOULD BE VERY IRONIC IF OUR
CAREFULLY CREATED PROCESS WHICH
AGAIN MANY OTHERS ARE LOOKING
TO AS A MODEL, RESULTED IN A
TRUST APPROACH SIMPLY IMPROVING
PROCESSES WITHOUT CONSIDERING
WHETHER SIMPLE LIBERTIES
CONCERNS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.
FOCUS GROUPS FOR FUTURE REVIEW
GROUPS SHOULD NOT ONLY BE
INCLUDED IN THE WRITEUPS BUT
RATHER SHOULD BE ADDRESSED
THROUGH CONCERTED EFFORTS TO
SET LIMITATIONS ON THE USE OF
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY, TO
CONDUCT STUDIES ON SOCIETAL
IMPACTS, REFORM TRAINING OR
CURRICULUM TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE
OR ANY OTHER EFFORT DEEMED
APPROPRIATE FOR THE TECHNOLOGY
UNDER CONSIDERATION.
WE AS A CITY NEED TO SET A
PRECEDENT OF PRODUCTIVELY
PREVENTING MISUSE RATHER THAN
TRUSTING THE AGENCY'S PROMISES
ARE SUFFICIENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> HELLO, I AM CYNTHIA.
I AM A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC, AN
INDEPENDENT SECURITY RESEARCHER
AND A SEATTLE RESIDENT.
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND THE
SURVEILLANCE WORKING GROUP HAVE
PARTICIPATE IN THE ENGAGEMENT
MEETINGS AND BUYS THE FEEDBACK
PROVIDED.
THE FEEDBACK IS NOT HAPHAZARD.
THE COUNSELOR SHOULD THOROUGHLY
HEAT ALL OF THE CONCERNS
RAISED.
TRANSPARENCY IS NECESSARY BUT
NOT SUFFICIENT.
THE PURPOSE OF THE SURVEILLANCE
ORDINANCE WAS NOT JUST TO
PROVIDE TRANSPARENCY BUT ALSO
TO ENABLE IMPROVEMENTS AND
REFINEMENTS BEING MADE
REGARDING THE USE OF THESE
TECHNOLOGIES.
THE COUNSELOR SHOULD NOT
RUBBERSTAMP THE EXISTING USAGE
OF THESE TECHNOLOGIES AS
DESCRIBED.
CONCRETE TECHNICAL AND POLICY
FEEDBACK HAS BEEN PROVIDED BUT
NOT FOLLOWED.
THE PRIVACY OF SEATTLE
RESIDENTS MUST BE ROOTED IN A
STRONG FOUNDATION OF WRITTEN
POLICY FOR THE RESPECTIVE
TECHNOLOGIES INCLUDING
EMPLOYEES TRAINED TO USE THOSE
TECHNOLOGIES.
TECHNICAL CONTROLS, SUCH AS
GRANULE AXIS CONTROL AND
LOGGING SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO
FIT THE POSSE, NOT THE OTHER
WAY AROUND.
WRITTEN CONTRACTS OR THIRD
PARTIES AS OPERABLE.
ANYONE OF THESE THREE ALONE IS
INSUFFICIENT.
THE WORKING GROUP HAS POINTED
OUT GAPS IN ALL 3 OF THESE
AREAS IN REGARDS TO THESE.
PLEASE CONSIDER THE WORKING
GROUPS BE BACK.
TO GIVE FOR YOUR TIME AND
CONSIDERATION.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER.
>> GOOD DAY EVERYONE.
I AM REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
WAY THIS NATION IS GOING AS FAR
AS, I THINK YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT, I GUESS INVADING
PEOPLE'S TRY TO SEE. I FEEL
LIKE I HAVE BEEN TREATED LESS
THAN A HUMAN BEING AND THIS IS
2019.
I THINK IT ALL IS RACE BAITED
AND SOME PEOPLE WILL SAY IT'S
NOT.
BUT I BELIEVE THAT IT IS.
BECAUSE OF THE ATTACK THAT
SEEMS TO HAPPEN ON LOW INCOME
PEOPLE.
EVERY ISSUE THAT I THINK WAS
EVER DEVELOPED WAS DEVELOPED
BECAUSE OF THE POOR PEOPLE SO
THEY TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT
KIND OF WAY THEY CAN DISRUPT
POOR PEOPLE'S LIVES AND
INTERRUPT THEM AND MAKE THEM
FEEL LIKE THEY ARE NOT A PART
OF SOCIETY.
I THINK IT'S WRONG.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU ARE
GOING TO DO IN THE END BUT I
THINK THAT THE VOICES OF THE
PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING OUT AS FAR
AS WHAT IS GOING ON.
IT TAKES A WHOLE LOT OF MINDS
TO COME TOGETHER AND COME UP
WITH OFFENSES TOWARDS PEOPLE
AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT THEY
ARE SAYING.
THERE; WHY ARE YOU SO INVOLVED
IN MY LIFE AND YOU CAN'T EVEN,
WHY DON'T YOU SWEEP AROUND YOUR
OWN FRONT DOOR BEFORE YOU TRY
TO SWEEP AROUND MINE.
SO WE ARE REALLY TRYING TO
FIGURE THIS OUT WHY YOU ARE SO
-BENT ON DISRUPTING OTHER
PEOPLE'S LIVES.
SOME PEOPLE WOULD CALL IT
FASCISM.
I JUST CALL IT LIFE BECAUSE
ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN ON LIFE'S
HIGHWAY.
ONE MINUTE WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE
SITUATION AND THE NEXT MINUTE
LIKE THE FIRE IN CALIFORNIA.
BURNING PEOPE OUT OF THEIR
HOUSES AND HOMES. THERE'S A
WHOLE LOT OF STUFF YOU'RE NOT
GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO NOTHING
ABOUT ANYWAY BECAUSE THAT'S
WHAT'S JUST GOING TO HAPPEN.
THAT'S THE WAY NATURE PLANNED
IT.
SO LIKE I SAID, I DON'T KNOW
WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO.
>> THANK YOU.
THAT CONCLUDES THOSE WHO HAVE
SIGNED UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.
AND I MISS ANYBODY THAT NEEDED
TO SPEAK?
IF NOT I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC
COMMENT SECTION AND WILL MOVE
TO OUR FIRST AGENDA ITEM.
VICE-CHAIR HERBOLD IS UNDER
THE WEATHER AND WISH WISH HER A
SPEEDY RECOVERY.
COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN COULD
ALSO NOT BE ABLE TO BE HERE
BUT HE IS FULLY ENGAGED AND
WILL FOLLOW ALONG.
LET'S READ THE FIRST ITEM INTO
RECORD.
>> RESOLUTION 31886 .A
RESOLUTION REVISING CERTAIN
GENERAL RULES AND PROCEDURES OF
THE SEATTLE CITY COUNCIL;
AMENDING ATTACHMENT 1 OF
RESOLUTION 31806, CHAPTER XI.
>> INTRODUCTIONS AND DIVE RIGHT
IN.
>> KETIL FREEMAN , COUNCIL
CENTRAL STAFF . WE WANT TO
AMEND THE COUNCIL RULES.
THE PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD
AUGMENT STANDARDS FOR CONDUCT AT
PUBLIC MEETINGS.
I WILL BRIEFLY DESCRIBE WHAT
RESOLUTION 31886 WOULD DO AND
ALSO DESCRIBE A PROPOSED
AMENDMENT FOR THAT RESOLUTION.
RESOLUTION 31886 WOULD ADD A
NEW RULE RELATED TO ABUSE OR
HARASSING CONDUCT.
THIS IS A ROLE THAT'S GENERALLY
APPLICABLE TO BEHAVIOR IN ALL
CITY FACILITIES.
SPECIFICALLY THAT WOULD SPECIFY
THAT ENGAGING IN ABUSIVE OR
HARASSING BEHAVIOR BE SUBJECT
TO IMMEDIATE EXCLUSION FROM
COUNCIL MEETINGS FOR UP TO ONE
YEAR.
THE ROLE ALSO DEFINES BEHAVIOR
THAT PERSONALLY OR RECKLESSLY
ALARMS OTHER PEOPLE AND SERVES
NO LEGITIMATE ADVOCACY PURPOSE.
THE ROLE GOES ON TO GIVE SOME
EXAMPLES OF ABUSIVE AND OF
HARASSING BEHAVIOR. THE
PROPOSED CHANGES WOULD ALSO
MODIFY CURRENT STANDARDS FOR
EXTRUSION TO ALLOW CUSTOMERS TO
EXCLUDE MAPS OF THE PUBLIC WHO
HAVE GAUGED IN DISRUPTIVE
BEHAVIOR AT MULTIPLE MEETINGS.
THE CURRENT STANDARD ALLOWS FOR
EXCLUSION FOR DISRUPTIVE
BEHAVIOR AT CONSECUTIVE
MEETINGS OR MEETINGS WITHIN THE
SAME 30 DAY PERIOD.
SO THAT'S WHAT RESOLUTION 31886
WOULD DO.
THOSE WHO PROPOSED THE
AMENDMENT TO THE RESOLUTION
CAUGHT THIS IS VERSION 2 THAT
IS ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA.
THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WOULD
VERIFY IT IS NOT THE ONLY THING
AND IF THE BEHAVIOR MEETS THE
ELEMENT OF THE CRIME THE
COUNCIL MAY ALSO PURSUE
CRIMINAL SANCTIONS.
>> VERY GOOD.
THAT'S PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD.
DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS YOU
LIKE TO MAKE?
>> I WANT TO SAY THANKS TO YOU
AND YOUR LEADERSHIP FOR
ADVANCING THESE POLICY CHANGES.
OVER THE LAST YEAR OR YEAR AND
HALF, WE HONESTLY KNOW THAT
WHEN WE GET ELECTED WE SIGN UP
FOR BEING THE TARGET OF PUBLIC
COMMENT.
WE WANT PEOPLE TO COMMENT,
SHARE THEIR EXPRESSIONS OF
THEIR INTERESTS AND POLICY
CHANGE CAUGHT THEIR
FRUSTRATIONS WITH WHAT THEY
WOULD LIKE TO SEE CHANGE IN THE
CITY.
THIS IS ALL ABSOLUTELY COVERED
WITHIN FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS.
BUT WHAT WE DIDN'T SIGN UP FOR
IS TO BE THE TARGETS OF SEXUAL
VIOLENCE AND THE TARGETS FOR
HARASSMENT AND INTIMIDATING
LANGUAGE.
WHEN WE SET UP YOUR ABOUT TWO
MONTHS AGO AND HAD TO BE
SUBJECT TO THREATS OF SEXUAL
VIOLENCE, I THINK THAT IS WHERE
FOR ME, WE REALLY HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DRAW A LINE IN
THE SAND.
YES WE WANT TO HEAR FROM
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC AND
ABSOLUTELY I WANT TO HEAR FROM
PEOPLE WHO DISAGREE WITH ME.
I DON'T WANT ANYBODY INCLUDING
MYSELF OR ANY OF MY STAFF
MEMBERS TO BE THE SUBJECT OF
VIOLENCE OR INTIMIDATION AND I
THINK THAT'S TRUE FOR ANYBODY
WHO IS COMING TO BEST BUY IN
THESE COUNCIL CHAMBERS AS WELL.
THIS IS A PLACE FOR PUBLIC
POLICYMAKING.
IDEALLY IT'S A PLACE FOR CIVIC
DISCORD AND IDEALLY IT'S A
PLACE FOR US TO DISAGREE BUT NOT
BE ATTACKING INDIVIDUALS OR
THREATENING INDIVIDUALS.
I THINK THAT THIS DOCUMENT
HELPS US BOTH PROTECT
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE BEEN
ELECTED, OUR STAFF, AND MEMBER
OF THE PUBLIC WHO HAVE COME AND
WANT TO SHARE THEIR OPINION AND
TO DO SO IN A WAY THAT IS BOTH
HEARD AND BEING RESPECTFUL.
I APPRECIATE THIS AND I DO
THINK THAT THIS SENDS A MESSAGE
THAT INTIMIDATION, HARASSMENT,
ASSAULT, AND THREATS OF SEXUAL
VIOLENCE WILL NO LONGER BE
TOLERATED IN THESE CHAMBERS.
I APPRECIATE YOU ADVANCING
THESE EFFORTS.
>> THANK YOU AND WELL
ARTICULATED.
WE HAVE NINE DIFFERENT
COUNCILMEMBERS AND MAR AND I
SUPPOSE THAT IN PUBLIC MEETINGS
THEY HAVE DIFFERENT STYLES AND
I HAVE ALWAYS TRY TO ERR ON THE
SIDE OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND
FREEDOM OF OPINION.
BUT WITH ZERO TOLERANCE TOWARDS
THREATENING BEHAVIOR.
ZERO TOLERANCE.
THESE ARE WELL-PLACED POLICIES
AND I LOOK FORWARD TO
SUPPORTING THEM.
I WILL ADVANCE THEM FOR A BOAT
AND WE WILL BRING IT TO THE
FULL COUNCIL.
I DID WANT TO ASK STAFF TO LOOK
AT THE ISSUE OF WHAT TOOLS
COMMISSION CHAIRS AND BOARD
CHAIRS HAVE AT THEIR DISPOSAL
AS WELL.
BECAUSE ONE OF MY CONCERNS AND
I TALKED TO PEOPLE ON THE
WOMEN'S COMMISSION AS AN
EXAMPLE THAT AS THEY CONTINUE
AND THESE ARE VOLUNTEERS, OFTEN
MEETING IN A PUBLIC PLACE LIKE
THIS BUILDING, THEY COULD BE
SUBJECT TO THE SAME KINDS OF
CONDUCT.
SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THEY
HAVE THE TOOLS SO WHETHER WE
HAVE TO PASS A RESOLUTION OR
FAS HAS TO PASS AN ORDINANCE OR
WE HAVE TO PASS AN ORDINANCE ON
THEIR BEHALF, I WANT TO FIND
OUT SO WE MAKE SURE THEY HAVE
ADEQUATE TOOLS.
I'M NOT SURE OF THAT.
SO THIS WILL BE SOME MORE WORK
WE LOOK INTO OFF-LINE.
OKAY SO I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN
AMENDMENT BECAUSE WE DID THE
CONCEPT BASED ON SOME FEEDBACK,
TO ALERT THE PUBLIC THAT IN
ADDITION TO EXCLUSION THERE
COULD BE CRIMINAL SANCTIONS.
THAT IS THE AMENDMENT 1. SO I
WILL AMEND THE RESOLUTION AND I
WILL CALL IT AMENDMENT 1 THAT'S
RIGHT THAT OFFICIAL LANGUAGE
THAT IS IN THE AMENDMENT
TALKING ABOUT THE FACT THAT
THERE COULD BE CRIMINAL
SANCTIONS IN ADDITION TO
EXCLUSION.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
THE JASON CAMBRIDGE HAVE IT.
SO I WILL MOVE TO PASS
RESOLUTION 31886 AS AMENDED.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR?
THE AYES HABIT . AGAIN THIS IS
A MATTER OF POLICIES.
WE SEND THESE DOCUMENTS OVER TO
THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION AND
OTHERS, OR MAYBE NOT THAT ONE
BUT WE DID, OR SOME OF THE OTHER
MISSIONS.
EVEN ON SOMETHING WE THINK
SHOULD BE WELL SUPPORTED, WE
DON'T TAKE THAT FOR GRANTED SO
WE OUTREACH.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T
HAVE ANY OPPOSITION TO THIS.
WILL PRESENT THIS AT OUR NEXT
MEETING.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK, KETIL
REEMAN FOR STELLAR WORK .
>>> NOW WE WILL READ OUR NEXT
COUNCIL BILL INTO THE RECORD.
>> COUNCIL BILL 119519 .AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY
IMPLEMENTATION; AUTHORIZING
APPROVAL OF USES AND ACCEPTING
THE 2018 SURVEILLANCE IMPACT
REPORTS FOR THE SEATTLE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION'S
USE OF CLOSED-CIRCUIT
TELEVISION TRAFFIC CAMERAS AND
LICENSE PLATE READERS.
>> I WILL WAIT FOR EVERYBODY TO
GET SETTLED.
I WILL ASK THAT YOU YOU THAT IF
A COUNCILMEMBER DOES COME I
WILL ASK YOU TO MOVE DOWN SO WE
HAVE THE COUNCILMEMBERS
TOGETHER.
BUT I THINK THIS IS THE FULL
HOUSE.
LET'S START WITH INTRODUCTIONS.
>> GREG DOSS , COUNCIL CENTRAL
STAFF . GINGER ARMBRUSTER . JIM
LOTER CAUGHT SEATTLE
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
DEPARTMENT, SAM ZIMBABWE ,
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION . JASON
CAMBRIDGE , SEATTLE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION . COMMUNITY
SURVEILLANCE WORKING GROUP ,
COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY
BOARD .
>> I HOPE I DON'T VIOLATE ANY
HIP IT ISSUES BY SEEING GREG,
THANK YOU FOR COMING IN.
YOU HAVE A COLD SO YOU ARE A
TROOPER TODAY.
ARE YOU GOING TO BE ABLE TO
HANG WITH US?
>> I AM, I'M JUST GOING TO BE
BRIEF AND LET THE DEPARTMENT DO
MOST OF THE SPEAKING.
>> WHY ARE YOU SITTING ON THIS
AND?
>> WE WORKED ON THIS INITIATIVE
.
>> I TOLD THEM, I WAS WILLING
TO POSTPONE IT.
OKAY, GREG, WHY DON'T YOU TEE
IT UP AND WE WILL DIVE INTO THE
ORDINANCE.
>> COUNCIL BILL, COUNCIL BILL
119519 IS BEFORE YOU TODAY
PURSUANT TO THE SURVEILLANCE
ORDINANCE THAT WAS PASSED 2
YEARS AGO.
A REQUIRES THAT AN EXISTING OR
NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT CAN BE
CONSIDERED SURVEILLANCE COME
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
APPROVAL.
WE HAVE BEFORE YOU TODAY TO
TECHNOLOGIES, SDOT TRAFFIC
CAMERAS AND SDOT A LPR, THE
LICENSE PLATE READERS.
BOTH OF WHICH THE DEPARTMENT
WILL GO INTO HOW THEY USED THE
DEVICES AND INTO SOME DEPTH
ABOUT HOW DATA IS MAINTAINED,
RECORDED, AND SECURITY IS
PROVIDED.
YOU ALSO HERE TODAY FROM THE
WORKING GROUP CHAIR WHO HAS A
SOME GENERAL CONCERNS ABOUT THE
SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE AND SOME
SPECIFIC CONCERNS ABOUT THE
TECHNOLOGY.
WITH THAT I WILL STEP BACK AND
LET SEATTLE I.T.
TELL YOU ABOUT THE TECHNOLOGY.
>> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT
INTRODUCTION.
THE WAY I THOUGHT THIS COULD
PROCEED, THERE IS A LOT OF
DISCUSSION HAD ABOUT THE
PROCESS BUT THESE ARE THE FIRST
2 OF MANY SO I WANT TO RESERVE
THAT MORE OVERARCHING
CONVERSATION UNTIL THE
DEPARTMENTS HAVE PRESENTED THE
FIRST TWO TECHNOLOGIES AND
LET'S TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS
AND WHERE IT CAN IMPROVE AND
FREE FLOW FROM THERE IF THAT'S
ACCEPTABLE.
>> THAT'S GOOD.
I WAS GOING TO LEAVE THIS OFF
WITH A PRESENTATION.
DO WE NEED TO HAVE SOMEBODY
BRING THAT UP FOR US?
IT'S RIGHT THERE.
THE MAGIC OF TECHNOLOGY.
WE ARE GOING TO TAKE A COUPLE
OF SLIDES TO REVIEW WHAT WENT
INTO BUILDING THESE SO YOU
UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE DOING TO
BE COMPLIANT WITH THE LAW.
I WILL START OFF, GINGER
ARMBRUSTER TELLING YOU WHAT
OUR TEAM HAS BEEN UP TO.
I LIKE TO START WITH THE FACT
THAT THE PRIVACY OFFICE WAS
TASKED WITH TAKING THE CTO'S
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ORDINANCE
IN GETTING THESE COMPLETED.
THE OFFICE WAS CREATED IN 2015
TO POLL THE PRIVACY PRINCIPLES
OF THIS BODY VOTED IN BY
RESOLUTION.
THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE DO.
WE WERE TASKED WITH THIS.
THE ORDINANCE ITSELF TOOK
EFFECT IN 2017 AND WAS AMENDED
LETTER TO INCLUDE AN EXTERNAL
WORKING GROUP.
THE COUNCIL REVIEWS OUR
CONTINUED USE OR OPPOSITION
ANYTHING DEEDED TO BE A
TECHNOLOGY OF SURVEILLANCE.
ANY THING THAT OBSERVES
INDIVIDUALS IN A MANNER THAT IS
REASONABLY LIKELY TO RAISE
CONCERNS ABOUT CIVIL LIBERTIES,
RACIAL EQUITY OR SOCIAL JUSTICE.
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE SLIDE
IS WHAT WE FOUND.
WE DID AN EXTENSIVE AUDIT.
THAT WAS A SELF AUDIT BY
DIFFERENT APARTMENTS AND WE
FINISHED WITH FINAL
TECHNOLOGIES THAT WE CONSIDERED
COULD BE POSSIBLY SURVEILLANCE.
THIS IS WHAT WE LANDED ON.
ARE 20 NONE OF THEM.
THREE IS A LIKE A FIVE IN
SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, THREE IN THE
SEATTLE FIRE DEPARTMENT AND 20
IN THE SADDLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT.
HALF OF THOSE ARE IN THE
SPECIAL INVESTIGATION UNIT
REALLY SPECIFIED FOR CERTAIN
USES.
WE GROUPED THE PRESENTATION OF
THESE TECHNOLOGIES PER COUNSEL
REQUEST.
THE IDEA OF PUTTING ONE PER
MONTH SEEMED OVERWHELMING TO
THIS BODY SO WE GROUPED THEM TO
A LOGICAL GROUPING.
IT HAS CHANGED A COUPLE OF
TIMES BY OTHER REQUESTS.
SPECIFICALLY BY THE WORKING
GROUP TO START OFF WITH
SOMETHING A LITTLE EASIER AND
SMALLER TO DIGEST SKUS TO THIS
PROCESS.
THE FIRST TWO ARE FROM SR.
THERE WERE TWO THAT WERE GOING
TO BE FROM FIRE BUT WE DID
INVITE SOME HOLES IN THE POLICY
AND SUBMITTED MATERIAL.
THE VERY 1st OF THESE WERE
SUPPOSED BE SENT IN LAST YEAR.
IT'S BEEN SITTING ON THE SHELF
FOR A WHILE.
WE NEED TO UPDATE TO REFLECT
RECENT POLICY CHANGES.
THOSE WILL BE LATER.
BUT THIS IS BASICALLY WHAT IT
LOOKS LIKE.
THIS IS THE FIRST ROUND IN MAY.
WE HAVE MORE IN JULY.
WE HAVE MORE IN NOVEMBER THAT
ARE PLANNED AND THEM FROM THEIR
THE LAST GROUP.
THANK YOU.
SO WHAT IS THIS?
THEY ARE LONG.
WE HAVE BEEN REMARKING ON THAT
OVER THE LAST COUPLE DAYS.
THERE LONG BECAUSE OF THE
REQUIREMENTS IN THE ORDINANCE.
WE DID NOT DO THIS TO YOU TO
GIVE YOU A LOT OF NIGHTTIME
READING AND GIVE YOU POUNDS OF
MATERIAL TO READ.
THEY ARE LONG BECAUSE OF THE
INFORMATION REQUIRED.
WE PROJECT MANAGERS CAUGHT THIS
IS THE INFORMATION, WE HELP
MANAGE THIS SO WE MAKE SURE YOU
HAVE A REPEATABLE PROCESS AND
DOCUMENT THAT WE BELIEVE IS
COHERENT AND HITS ALL THE
BASES.
THE FIRST PART OF THIS IS A
PRIVACY IMPACT ASSESSMENT.
IT'S WHAT WE DO FOR ANY
TECHNOLOGY THAT HAS SERIOUS
PRIVACY RISK ASSOCIATED WITH
IT.
IT'S A SERIES OF QUESTIONS THAT
ARE OUTLINED IN THE ORDINANCE.
EVERYTHING ABOUT DATA THAT IS
COLLECTED, MANAGED, SHARED,
NOTICED OR NOT NOTICED, ALL OF
THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD LOOK
AT TO SEE HOW THE DATA IS
MANAGED AROUND PRIVACY
PRINCIPLES.
THAT IS THE FIRST PART OF THIS.
IS PROBABLY THE MEAT OF IT AND
RANGES 30-50 PAGES.
THAT'S WHAT THAT IS, IT'S
DOCUMENT THE POLICIES THAT
REGULATE AND THE USE CASE
INFORMATION THAT IS INCLUDED.
THE NEXT PART IS ALSO REQUIRED
BY THE ORDINANCE AND THAT IS
FINANCIAL INFORMATION.
SOME OF THIS IS DIFFICULT TO
GET FOR TECHNOLOGIES THAT HAVE
BEEN PLACE FOR A WHILE BUT WE
DID OUR BEST TO GIVE YOU AN
IDEA WHAT IT COST TO MAINTAIN
AND ACQUIRE THE TECHNOLOGY.
IT WILL BE EASIER WHEN WE HAVE
NEW THINGS TO DO THIS BODY.
THE NEW THING WE HAVE ADDED IS
WAYS TO GET ACT SOME OF THE
RACIAL EQUITY DISPARATE IMPACTS
OF THE TECHNOLOGY WHEREVER WE
CAN.
WE HAVE A PROCESS AT THE CITY
FOR LOOKING AT THAT THROUGH
TOOLKIT AND SOME OF THE SCORES
AND WE HAVE ADAPTED FOR THIS
PURPOSE.
THE NEXT THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
I WILL GET INTO DETAIL OF THAT
IN A MOMENT.
THE NEXT IS A PRIVACY AND CIVIL
LIBERTIES IMPACT ASSESSMENT.
FINALLY THE APPENDICES AND
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION.
THIS IS WHERE THE POLICIES
LIVE.
THIS IS WHERE THE DETAIL,
PUBLIC COMMENTS LIVE.
THIS IS ALL THE MATERIALS WE
USE IN PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
THAT'S WHAT ALL OF THAT IS.
ALL THIS TAKES A LONG TIME TO
CREATE.
I WANTED TO MAKE THESE POINTS
SOMETHING YOU UNDERSTAND.
THIS IS A PROCESS WE HAVE BEEN
WORKING ON FOR ALMOST 2 YEARS
NOW.
THE FIRST PART OF THIS PROCESS
TAKES 2-3 MONTHS WORKING
DILIGENTLY WITH DEPARTMENTS TO
ANSWER ALL OF THE QUESTIONS
REQUIRED IN THE ORDINANCE.
THAT'S THE FIRST PART.
THAT IS BACK AND FORTH PROCESS
AS WE REALIZE POLICIES ARE NOT
PRESENT, THINGS ARE NOT CLEAR,
THIS DOES NOT WORK FOR ME,
LET'S MAKE THIS IN BETTER
ENGLISH CALL THOSE KIND OF
THINGS.
THE SECOND IS A PUBLIC COMMENT
PERIOD.
THIS IS A 30 DAY TYPE THING
WHERE WE GET THE PUBLIC AN
OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT.
WE DO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT WHICH
IS ALSO REQUIRED BY ORDINANCE.
AT LEAST ONE MEETING NEEDS TO
BE NOTICED AND NEEDS TO BE
INTIMATION PROVIDED IN MULTIPLE
LANGUAGES.
SO THE COMMENTS CAN BE GATHERED
AND INCLUDED IN THE BODY.
>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION?
WHEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PIECE IS
CONDUCTED, ARE WE GOING OVER
MULTIPLE OR ONE AT A TIME?
>> WE HAVE TRIED TO GROUP THEM.
WE HAVE CONDUCTED SEVERAL OF
THESE NOW.
WE FIND THAT INDIVIDUAL HOT IF
I JUST TALKED ABOUT ONE
TECHNOLOGY, NOT VERY MANY
PEOPLE WILL SHOW.
IF I THINK ABOUT SURVEILLANCE
IN GENERAL AND HAVE SEVERAL
TECHNOLOGIES TO TALK ABOUT
CAUGHT THAT GETS MORE INTEREST
FROM THE PUBLIC.
WE TRY TO GROUP THAT SOME FROM
POLICE, SOME FROM OTHER GROUPS,
WE TRY TO GROUP THEM IN A
MEANINGFUL WAY.
I WILL TALK MORE ABOUT WHAT
GOES INTO THAT IN A MOMENT.
PUBLIC COMMENT ANALYSIS, WE TRY
TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE THEMES
ARE.
WHAT ARE SOME OF THE THINGS
THAT CAME UP IN THE COURSE OF
PUBLIC COMMENT IF WE HAVE SOME.
THE WORKING GROUP DOES A RADIO.
THAT'S A SIX WEEK ORDINANCE AND
HAVE THE OPTION TO TAKE AN
ADDITIONAL TWO.
I THINK WE MOSTLY SEEN EIGHT
WEEKS FOR THIS AS THEY HAVE
GOTTEN THEMSELVES UP AND GOING
WITH THAT TAKE SOME TIME FOR
THEM TO REVIEW.
THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO
HAVE A CTL RESPONSE.
WE WEDGED THAT IN AT THE END.
AND FINALLY CAUGHT THAT ALL
HAPPENS BEFORE IT GETS TO YOU
GUYS FOR YOUR REVIEW.
A GOOD 6-7 MONTHS.
NOT A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM IN
TERMS OF MAKING IT SHORT.
I WANT YOU TO BE AWARE OF THAT.
ENGAGEMENT, I WANT TO SPEND A
MOMENT ON.
ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT PARTS
THIS OR DOES WAS TO BUY
TRANSPARENCY.
N OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC
TO COMMENT AND PROVIDE THEIR
PERCEPTION OF THESE
TECHNOLOGIES.
THE FIRST ONE UP THERE, IT WAS
ON POLICE TECHNOLOGIES AND IT
SPOKE TO A VARIETY OF
TECHNOLOGIES.
I THINK THIS WAS AT THE
LIBRARY.
SO WE DO PUBLIC MEETINGS AND
INTERVIEWS WHERE WE TRY TO GET
OUT TO FOLKS THAT WE HOPE WILL
COME AND SHARE THEIR
PERSPECTIVE.
IN ADDITION TO THAT, EXCUSE ME
I AM GETTING OVER THE COLD YOU
HAVE.
COMMUNITY MEETINGS FOR ANY
DEPARTMENT THAT HAS STANDING
MEETINGS.
SO PLEASE TALK SDOT COST SOME
OF THE DEPARTMENT HAVE EXISTING
COMMUNITY MEETINGS WHERE WE
HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET THEM
TO THE PUBLIC MEETINGS WE ARE
HAVING OR GET COMMENT GENERATED
THERE.
THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR'S DID
SOME FOCUS GROUPS FOR US TO HAD
SOME COMMUNITY GROUPS COME THAT
MAY NOT HAVE BEFORE.
WE HAVE A WEBSITE WE ARE
REQUIRED TO DO SO WE CAN
PUBLICLY POST OUR DRAFTS.
WE ALSO INCLUDED VIDEO AND
VARMINTS DISCUSSING THE USE OF
TECHNOLOGY.
RIGHT BELOW WHERE THAT PICTURE
IS, THAT THE SCREENSHOT OF OUR
PUBLIC FACING WEBSITE WHERE WE
HAVE PUT COMING EVENTS CALL
KINDS OF RESOURCES AND LINKAGES
TRANSLATED ETC.
FOR FOLKS TO ACCESS.
WE ALSO AN OPPORTUNITY FOR
COMMENT ON SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGIES.
I WILL SAY THAT COMMENT AND
PROBABLY GIVES MORE PUBLIC
COMMENT THEN WE HAD ANY OTHER
WAY.
IT'S BEEN A GOOD OUTREACH.
THE VIDEOS WERE AVAILABLE ON
YOUTUBE COST DELL CHANNEL HELP
US OUT.
WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF HITS.
PEOPLE REALLY GET A CHANCE TO
SEE WHAT THE TECHNOLOGIES WERE
IF THEY DID NOT COMMIT.
SOCIAL MEDIA ADVERTISING WE DID
OUTREACH THAT WAY AND GOT A FEW
MORE PEOPLE TO COMMENT AND SHOW
IT.
WE ALSO HAVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
EMAIL AND ACTUAL LETTERS.
WE GOT A FEW LETTERS FROM
FOLKS.
SO THAT'S WHAT PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT LOOKS LIKE.
IT'S A BIG-TIME COMPUTE
CONSUMING EVENT.
WE MADE IT LONGER IF WE REQUIRED
THAT.
WORKING NUMBERS, YOU ARE
FAMILIAR WITH EVERYONE.
NIKKI WILL BE MOVING ON SO
THERE WILL BE A SPACE
AVAILABLE.
THESE ARE THE FOLKS THAT ARE
NOW CONTRIBUTING TO THE WORKING
GROUP.
WHAT HAVE WE BEEN UP TO SINCE
2017?
WE HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD IN
THE BACK ON TO GET THINGS DONE.
THE FIRST PART OF 2017, OR LAST
PART WAS A SURVEILLANCE
ORDINANCE AUDIT WHICH I
EXPLAINED TO YOU.
WE WENT FROM HUNDREDS OF
TECHNOLOGIES DOWN TO THE 29 WE
DETERMINED.
WE SUBMITTED THE FIRST VERSION
OF THE MASTER LIST TO THE CITY
CLERK AT THE END OF OCTOBER OR
NOVEMBER.
THEN WE CREATED A TEMPLATE AND
AGAIN OUR MANAGEMENT OF EACH
DEPARTMENT.
IN 2018 WE HAD OUR FIRST
QUARTERLY REPORTS.
THOSE ARE GOING INTO THE CITY
CLERK AND ARE AVAILABLE.
THOSE ARE THE REPORTS REQUIRED
BY THE LAW THAT ASKED US TO
LOOK AT EVERYTHING WE HAVE
ACQUIRED THAT WAS NOT
SURVEILLANCE SO YOU HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY TO DECIDE IF YOU
STILL WANT TO BE CONSIDERED.
WE CREATED THE PUBLIC WEBSITE.
THEN THE WORKING GROUP
AMENDMENT HAPPEN.
WE WERE CONSIDERING HAVING THE
WORKING GROUPS SO WE HAD A FEW
MONTHS OUT.
THAT WE HAD THE FIRST ONES
DELETED IN THE BEGINNING OF
PUBLIC REVIEW IN SEPTEMBER AND
THE FIRST PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
MEETING WAS SEPTEMBER.
WE WERE ABLE TO SUBMIT ONE AND
PART OF 2 TO THE WORKING GROUP.
FINALLY GROUP 1 CONSISTING OF 2
TECHNOLOGIES IS READY TO GO TO
COUNSEL.
THIS IS WHAT OUR ACTIVITY HAS
BEEN TO DATE.
I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS OR COME TO YOU LATER
ABOUT DETAIL YOU REQUIRE.
WITH THAT I WILL TURN THIS OVER
TO COLLEAGUES AT SDOT.
>> I WILL SPEND A SECOND TO SET
THE CONTEXT AND THEN JASON WILL
DIVE INTO SOME OF THE TECHNICAL
DETAILS.
WE ARE VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE AS
PART OF THIS.
I THINK IT'S BEEN A LOT OF WORK
BY STAFF AS GINGER MENTIONED, A
LOT OF WORK ACROSS CL
GOVERNMENT TO GET TO THIS
POINT.
BUT VERY HAPPY TO HAVE GOTTEN
TO THIS POINT.
WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO
TECHNOLOGIES TODAY THAT ARE
VERY FOCUSED ON TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT AND INCIDENT
MANAGEMENT TO KEEP SEATTLE
MOVING.
WE ARE THE FASTEST RATE OF
GROWTH OF ANY CITY IN THE
COUNTRY.
ONE OF THE 50 LARGEST CITIES
WITHOUT EXPENDING OUR ROADWAY
CAPACITY TO HANDLE THAT.
WE HAVE HAD TO LOOK AT ALL THE
DIFFERENT WAYS WE CAN TO MANAGE
TRAFFIC, MANAGE THE FLOW OF
PEOPLE AND GOODS THROUGHOUT THE
CITY.
AT THE SAME TIME WE HAVE HAD
INCREASING EXPECTATIONS FROM
THE PUBLIC ABOUT THEIR ABILITY
TO PLAN THEIR TRIPS AND PLAN
FOR RELIABLE EFFICIENT
TRANSPORTATION THE MATTER HOW
THEY ARE GETTING IT.
WE HAVE ALSO SEEN AND WE WILL
CONTINUE TO SEE EVENTS THAT
CHANGE OUR TRAFFIC PATTERNS ON
A DAILY AND A LONGER-TERM
BASIS.
WE HAVE MANAGED THROUGH THE
BILE DUCT CLOSURE, BUSES COMING
OUT OF THE TRANSIT TUNNEL, AND
WE ALSO MANAGE INCIDENTS ON A
DAILY BASIS AND CORDATE OUR
RESPONSE TO THOSE.
WE'RE TRYING TO USE TECHNOLOGY
IN A RESPONSIBLE WAY THAT
MANAGES THROUGH THESE DAY-TO-DAY
CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE.
YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT LIGHT.
SO THERE ARE TWO TECHNOLOGIES
WE HAVE HERE TODAY FOR REVIEW.
OUR TRAFFIC CAMERAS AND LICENSE
PLATE READERS.
THESE ARE PRIMARILY TO PROVIDE
SITUATIONAL AWARENESS TO OUR
STAFF AND ACROSS SEATTLE
GOVERNMENT AND BE ABLE TO
RESPOND QUICKLY AND
TRANSPARENTLY TO THESE
INCIDENTS AS THEY COME UP.
THEY HAVE BEEN VERY CRITICAL
FOR US IN PROVIDING US
INFORMATION BUT ALSO PROVIDING
THE GENERAL PUBLIC WITH
INFORMATION ABOUT DAY-TO-DAY
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.
JASON IS REALLY THE TECHNICAL
EXPERT ON A LOT OF THE STUFF.
I LET HIM DIVE INTO THE
DETAILS.
BUT I LOOK FORWARD TO QUESTIONS
ABOUT HOW THIS INTEGRATES INTO
ALL OF THE THINGS WE ARE DOING
AT SDOT.
>> THANKS SAM.
AT S THAT WE HAVE A DEDICATED
STAFF WORKING 24 HOURS PER DAY
SEVEN DAYS PER WEEK TO KEEP THE
TRAFFIC IN OUR CITY MOVING.
THERE USING A VARIETY OF
METHODS TO UNDERSTAND THE
PREVAILING CONDITIONS ON OUR
STREETS.
LISTENING TO POLICE SCANNERS,
SEEING A FEED FROM COMPUTERIZED
DISPATCH, WORKING WITH THE STATE
D.O.T.
AND THEIR MANAGEMENT CENTER.
MONITORING SOCIAL MEDIA, ALSO
BENEFITS THAT ARE IMPACTING OUR
STREETS AND WORK IN A
CORRELATED EFFORT TO CLEAR
THOSE INCIDENTS AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE.
ONE OF OUR TOOLS IS THE USE OF
TRAFFIC CAMERAS.
WE ARE NOT ALONE IN USING
COVERT CAMERAS IN THIS WAY.
VIRTUALLY EVERY D.O.T.
IN EVERY STATE LOSES THEM IN A
SIMILAR FASHION.
WITH 241 CAMERAS INSTALLED
THROUGHOUT THE CITY ON OUR
MAJOR CORRIDORS WHICH ARE
REMOTELY CONTROLLABLE FROM OUR
CENTER.
WE ALSO SUPPORT ADDITIONAL USERS
IN OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND OTHER
REMOTE SDOT FACILITIES.
WE HAVE A USER IN A SPECIAL
OPERATIONS CENTER FOR SPD AND
ANOTHER FOR THE FIRE
DEPARTMENT, EXECUTIVE
PROTECTION UNIT IN THE MAYOR'S
OFFICE, OUR EMERGENCY
OPERATIONS CENTER THAT IS
ACTIVATED DURING LARGE
REGIONALLY IMPACTFUL EVENTS.
>> I THINK YOU ARE GETTING
READY TO ANSWER THE QUESTION I
HAVE BUT LET ME JUST BE CLEAR
IN MY QUESTION.
SO THE 241 CAMERAS WHETHER THEY
HAVE CAPABILITY OR NOT, THERE
ARE OTHER CAMERAS IN OUR RIGHTS-
OF-WAY AND IN OUR STREETS NOT
OWNED BY US, OWNED BY THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, CORRECT?
OR LET ME TO STOP THERE.
THERE ARE OTHER CAMERAS OUT
THERE.
YOU CAN CHIME IN TOO.
YOU'RE LOOKING AT ME WITH --
>> THAT WOULD NOT BE A PROGRAM
I WOULD BE INVOLVED WITH SO I
DON'T KNOW.
>> I KNOW THAT'S OUTSIDE OF YOU
. I'M TRYING TO GET THE LAY OF
THE LAND OF WHAT'S OUT THERE IN
THE REAL WORLD.
I UNDERSTAND THIS COVERS THE
241 CAMERAS.
LET'S TALK ABOUT CAUGHT THERE
ARE OTHER CAMERAS OUT THERE
OWNED BY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL
AGENCIES THAT ARE STILL DEALING
US, CORRECT?
>> YES PRESIDENT HARRELL.
WE HAD HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT
OTHER CAMERAS.
I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS THIS
COMMITTEE BUT THE ISSUE HAD
COME UP AND THESE CAMERAS HAD
APPEARED IN AN ALLEY.
WE DID SOME INVESTIGATION.
IT WAS CLEAR THAT THEY WERE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAMERAS BUT
BEYOND THAT, IT SEEMED AS IF
THE RULES APPLYING TO THE
CAMERAS WERE NOT CLEAR AND
BEYOND THE CONTROL OF THIS BODY.
PRIVATE COMMERCIAL OWNERS ARE
FREE TO INSTALL CAMERAS FACING
OUTWARD OF COURSE AS LONG AS IT
DOESN'T HAVE RECORDING OR AUTO
AUDIO RECORDING IS WHAT I
UNDERSTAND.
BUT THERE ARE HUNDREDS OF
THOUSANDS OF CAMERAS OUT THERE.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
WE WOULD SAY THAT THE LEGAL
QUESTION OF FOR EXAMPLE,
WHETHER YOU CAN SIMPLY FACE
YOUR RING CAMERA OUT ONTO THE
STREET AND RECORD EVERYBODY WHO
IS THERE IS SUPPOSED TO
SOMETHING APPROACHING YOUR DOOR
IS UNSETTLED.
>> THAT'S A GOOD POINT.
BUT I THINK IT'S UNSETTLED FROM
A LEGAL STANDPOINT BUT I THINK
THAT EVEN THE RING ITEMS YOU
CAN GET AT COSTCO OUTWARDLY,
THOSE RECORD AUDIO AS WELL BY
THE WAY.
SO IN ANY EVENT, DO WE KNOW IF
THE PORT OF SEATTLE, PROTECTING
THE PORTS CARD TODAY USE CAMERA
TECHNOLOGY AS WELL WITHIN OUR
CITY?
DOES ANYONE KNOW?
>> WE KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF
SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS OUTSIDE OF
THIS ORDINANCE.
SECURITY CAMERAS THAT ARE USED
FOR PROPERTY.
>> THE REASON I AM GOING DOWN
THIS LINE OF QUESTIONING IS, I
WANT THE PUBLIC TO KNOW THAT
WHILE WE ARE LOOKING AT THESE
241 CAMERAS AND TRY TO PROTECT
FIVE SEE, WE ARE DOING IT
SOMEWHAT IN THE CONTEXT OF I
THINK THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF
CAMERAS STILL OUT THERE THAT
ARE NOT COVERED UNDER THIS
PRIVACY WORK THAT WE ARE DOING.
I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
CONTEXT TO HAVE AS WE LOOK
FORWARD.
I GO BACK TO WHAT WE HAVE AS
THE CITY OF SEATTLE, JASON, YOU
ARE SAYING, THE 241 WITH
CAPABILITY, I THOUGHT YOU WERE
SAYING THERE ARE OTHER CAMERAS
BY OUR EMERGENCY CENTERS ARE
ALL THOSE CAMERAS YOU ARE
REFERRING TO COVERED UNDER THE
241?
>> ALL THE CAMERAS ARE COVERED.
LICENSE PLATE READERS CAN ALSO
BE DEFINED TECHNICALLY AS A
CAMERA.
>> THANK YOU.
PLEASE PROCEED.
>> SO ALL THE USERS THAT I WAS
DESCRIBING GO THROUGH A
TRAINING PROGRAM AND ARE
PROVIDED OUR POLICY WHICH
STATES THEY MUST CONTACT THE
OPERATION CENTER WIRE TO
OPERATING ANY PARTICULAR
CAMERA.
WE TRY TO BE COMPLETELY
TRANSPARENT IN OUR USE OF THESE
CAMERAS AND PROVIDE INFORMATION
TO THE PUBLIC ON OUR WEB MAP AS
LIVE STREAMING VIDEO.
DURING THIS PAST WINTER SNOW
EVENT WE SAW A REQUEST FOR THAT
"UP 1000% WHICH IS EVIDENCE
THAT THE PEOPLE ARE USING THESE
CAMERAS TO TRY AND MAKE MORE
INFORMED AND SAFER DECISIONS.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA HAS A
QUESTION.
>> CAN YOU ELABORATE ON THE
TRAINING?
YOU SAID SOMETIMES IT'S NOT ALL
INCLUSIVE?
PERKS UP A WE HAVE A EFFORT WE
ARE TRYING FOR WITHIN OUR OWN
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT.
IS ABOUT 15 MINUTES ONLINE.
THAT'S NOT ACTUAL TRAINING THAT
SINKS AND WITH FOLKS.
SO WHAT'S THE TRAINING LIKE?
>> IN THE ONBOARDING OF A NEW
OPERATOR, IT'S A 30 DAY
PROCESS.
I HAVE A LIST OF ALL THOSE
REQUIREMENTS AND A DAILY
OUTLINE OF WHAT THEY ARE
LEARNING EACH PARTICULAR DAY.
THEY ARE SHADOWING A SENIOR
OPERATOR DURING THAT TIME WHO
IS ALSO GIVING THEM THE
KNOWLEDGE ON HOW TO CONDUCT
THEIR DAY-TO-DAY OPERATIONS.
WE ALSO HAVE POLICY AROUND THE
USE OF THE CAMERAS THEY ARE
TRAINED ON DURING THAT TIME.
I WAS GOING TO GET TO THAT
LATER BUT THEY ARE SIMPLY
TRAINING TO AN EXTENT WHERE
THEY CAN DETERMINE A PERSON OR
LICENSE PLATE OR USING THE
CAMERA IS SIMPLY FOR USE TO
CONDUCT TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.
THE OTHER USERS WE GO AND TRAIN
THEM ON HOW TO USE THE SYSTEM
AND PROVIDE THEM THE SAME
POLICY.
IT'S NOT THE SAME 30 DAY
ONBOARDING BECAUSE THEY ARE
WORKING FOR OTHER DEPARTMENTS.
BUT WE TRY AND STAY IN CLOSE
CONTACT WITH THEM IF THERE IS
NEW SOFTWARE UPDATES, ETC.
WE INFORM THEM ABOUT THAT.
WE ALL COLLABORATE TO MAKE SURE
WE ALL UNDERSTAND HOW THE
CAMERAS SHOULD BE USED.
>> THANK YOU.
>> SO WE USE THEM TO DETECT
INCIDENTS AND VERIFY THEIR
SEVERITY.
WE CAN THEN RIGHT SIZE OUR
RESPONSE BY DETERMINING IF IT
IS A SHORT OR LONG-TERM EVENT
AND ACTED PROPERLY.
THEY WE THEN START TAKING
ACTION.
MESSAGES ON SIGNS DOCUMENT IT
USING SOCIAL MEDIA AND OTHER,
MEDICATION TOOLS, AND
CORRELATING WITH THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT, FIRE DEPARTMENT,
STATE, AND METRO TO HELP CLEAR
THE INCIDENT AS QUICKLY AS
POSSIBLE AND TO INFORM
TRAVELERS ABOUT UPCOMING
CONGESTION.
WE ALSO USE CAMERAS TO DISCOVER
NEW DETOUR ROUTES AND THEN
CREATE DEVOTIONAL PLANS AND
MONITOR THOSE ROUTES AND MAKE
SURE THEY ARE BEHAVING AS WE
EXPECT.
THEY ARE ALSO INCREDIBLY USEFUL
DURING LARGE PLANT EVENTS LIKE
THE BALL GAMES AND WE CAN USE
THE CAMERAS TO DO TRAFFIC
PATTERNS AROUND THE STADIUMS,
TO SEND AND UPDATE MESSAGING
AND MODIFY TIMING TO HELP
ALLEVIATE CONGESTION DURING
THOSE LARGE EVENTS.
THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL USES AS
WELL FOR THE DEPARTMENT.
WE CAN VERIFY THE MESSAGES ON
OUR SIDE ARE DISPLAYING AS WE
INTENDED.
ALSO WE WORK VERY CLOSELY WITH
THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL TEAM IN S.SO
WE CAN USE THEM AFTER YOU GET
NOTIFY THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS ARE
NOT FUNCTIONING AS EXPECTED FOR
EXAMPLE, WE WERE INFORMED THAT
SOME TRAFFIC SIGNALS HAD GONE
DARK.
WE VERIFIED THAT WITH THE
TRAFFIC CAMERAS.
THAT DISPATCHED ELECTRICIANS
WHO ARE ARMED WITH GENERATORS
TO GET THEM UP AND FUNCTIONING
AND TO HELP MITIGATE THAT TO A
SAFE SITUATION.
AGAIN THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING
ENGINEERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR
MAKING SURE THE TIMING OF MOST
OF OUR PRIMARY CORNERS IS
FUNCTIONING OPTIMALLY AND THEY
CAN SUBSEQUENTLY LOOK AT THE
HAVE TO IMPLEMENT A NEW TIMING
CHANGES AT THE CAMERAS TO MAKE
SURE THAT INDEED THEY ARE
FUNCTIONING AS WELL AS THEY
CAN.
A COUPLE QUICK EXAMPLES OR
INCIDENTS THAT WE HAVE MANAGED.
ONE WITH VISUAL VERIFICATION
CAPABILITY AND ONE WITHOUT.
THE FIRST ONE HERE IS A TRUCK
THAT IS A NOTORIOUS EVENT THAT
HAPPENED IN 26 AND.
WE LEARN FROM DISPATCH AT 2:30
9 PM THAT THERE WAS AN INCIDENT
ON THE VIADUCT.
IMMEDIATELY USING A CAMERA WE
VERIFIED THAT, I SEMI TRUCK HAD
PULLED OVER ONTO THE BARRIER.
WITH TWO MINUTES WE WERE
PROCEEDING IS USED TWEETING
ABOUT THE INCIDENT GOING
THROUGH ALL OF OUR PROTOCOL AND
UPDATING THE APPROPRIATE
PERSONNEL ABOUT THE INCIDENT.
BECAUSE WE VISUALLY CONFIRMED
THAT IT WAS A SEVERE WE
DISPATCHED A RESPONSE TEAM
IMMEDIATELY AND THEY ARRIVED AT
THE TEAM AT 2:50.
WITHIN 11 MINUTES WE HAD A TEAM
A FULL ASSESSMENT OF THE SCENE
AND CONTINUE COORDINATING A
RESPONSE FROM THERE.
>> DID THE CRAB SURVIVE?
>> THE CRAB WERE FROZEN.
NO.
THEY DID NOT MAKE IT.
HERE IS A SITUATION WHERE WE
DID NOT HAVE THE SAME
VERIFICATION.
LATE LAST YEAR A SEMI TRUCK
HAULING STEEL BALL BEARING'S
LOST HIS LOAD ON SOUTHWEST
GENESEE ST. AND WEST SEATTLE.
THE INCIDENT APPEARED ON
DISPATCH FEET AT 4:16 BUT OUR
RESPONSE TEAM DOES NOT
PRIORITIZE INCIDENTS LIKE THIS
WITH NO VISUALS BECAUSE IT CAN
BE DIFFICULT TO DETERMINE THE
SEVERITY OR THE TRAFFIC IMPACT
SIMPLY BY USING THE CAD FEED.
THEY HAD TO WAIT FOR TRAFFIC
CONTROL ASSISTANCE.
AFTER RECEIVING THAT REQUEST
THEY ARRIVED AT THE SCENE AT
5:OH 4 PM AND ONLY THEN DID
THEY SEE THAT THE ROAD WAS
CLOSED TO TRAFFIC AND SENDING
MESSAGES.
SO THIS LACK OF VISUAL
CONFIRMATION DELAYED OUR
RESPONSE CREATING A 50 MINUTE
AREA OF LAG. WE DO HAVE A
COUPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES TO
ENSURE THAT PEOPLE'S PRIVACY IS
PROTECTED THROUGH THE USE OF
THE TECHNOLOGY.
THE PERSON WILL DO IS TAKE
ADVANTAGE OF THE PICTURE THE
CAMERA CALLED PRIVACY MASKING.
YOU CAN GO INTO THE SOFTWARE
AND DRAW A POLYGON ONTO THE
VIEW THAT WILL OBSCURE WHATEVER
IS BEHIND IT.
SO IN THIS SLIDE SHOWS CAMERA
THAT IS INSTALLED AT FIFTH AND
MADISON.
IT IS INSTALLED A PRESIDENTIAL
POWER.
WE PUT IN THIS PRICEY MASKING
AS APPROPRIATE.
THOSE THAT ARE INSTALLED NEAR
PRIVATE PROPERTY WE PUT IN
PRIVACY MASKING.
MOST IMPORTANTLY, WE TRAIN
EVERYBODY LIKE I SAID TO NEVER
ZOOM INTO AN EXTENT WHERE THEY
CAN ZOOM IN TO IDENTIFY A
PERSON OR VEHICLE.
>> I WANT TO GO BACK TO THIS
SLIDE AS WE HAVE A MORE
CONVERSATIONAL PIECE.
I WILL SHARE A PIECE OF
INFORMATION THAT YEARS AGO WHEN
WE WERE ALARMED BY THESE
TECHNOLOGIES IN OUR PORT AND
WHETHER IT ROTATED OR NOT IN TO
RESIDENCES, I SAID THAT OUTSIDE
OF MY OFFICE HERE AT CITY HALL,
LESS THAN 10 FEET OUTSIDE OF MY
WINDOW, IT HAS NO BLINDS OR THE
BLIND IS ALWAYS UP, THERE IS A
CAMERA.
IT IS ON ME EVERY MINUTE OF THE
DAY.
I ASKED, WHO IS WATCHING ME
EVERY DAY?
IT'S ONE OF THESE CAMERAS AND I
WAS TOLD THAT IT IS SHADED LIKE
THAT.
I SAID, WHO CONTROLS IT?
HE OR SHE COULD PUSH A BUTTON
THAT IS AN SHADED, CAN'T THEY?
INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH THAT
CAMERA HAS SINCE BEEN REMOVED
WITHIN THE LAST YEAR.
IT WAS THEREFORE 7-8 YEARS.
BUT THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT
INTERSECTION RIGHT HERE BECAUSE
YOU HAVE THE MUNICIPAL TOWER,
POLICE DEPARTMENT AND CITY HALL.
IT WARRANTS A SAFETY MEASURE SO
I WAS NOT COMPLAINING ABOUT THE
CAMERA.
BUT IT WAS WORKING ONLY 10 FEET
AWAY FROM THE CAMERA ONLY FOR
24 HOURS PER DAY.
>> WE CAN PUT A FISCAL BARRIER,
LIKE A BLANK SIGN, AND MAKE IT
IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE CAMERA TO
VIEW BEYOND THAT POINT.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA DO
YOU HAVE A QUESTION ? YOU
PROBABLY HAVE A CAMERA BY YOUR
OFFICE TOO.
>> I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT
DISTINCTION.
WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON SEATTLE
CITY LIGHT'S, GUIDANCE FOR THE
AMI READERS, THE ADVANCED
READER TECHNOLOGY, WE CONTINUE
TO HEAR EXAMPLES LIKE THAT.
WE DON'T DO THAT IN PRACTICE.
IN PRACTICE WE PUT THIS
PROTECTION IN PLACE.
THAT'S THE CRUX OF THE
CONVERSATION.
WHAT DO WE DO IN PRACTICE
VERSES WHAT ARE WE PUTTING IN
POLICY SO THAT NO MATTER WHO IS
IN YOUR POSITION AS DIRECTOR OR
IN OUR POSITION AS COUNCIL
MEMBERS OR COMMUNITY AS KIDS,
THAT OUR POLICIES ARE VERY
CLEAR.
I THINK THAT UNDERSCORES MY
QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS AS WE
MOVE FORWARD.
YES WE HAVE GOOD PRACTICES IN
SOME CASES. QUESTION NO
PRACTICES IN OTHERS.
WHAT THE POLICY IS OUR GUIDING
DOCUMENT.
SO THAT WILL BE THE FOCUS OF MY
QUESTIONS.
>> GREAT.
SO WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE CAMERA
DATA?
OUR CAMERAS ARE NOT ALWAYS
BEING RECORDED.
WE HAVE SPECIFIC RECEIVERS
WHICH ALLOW SDOT EMPLOYEES TO
ASK THE TRAFFIC CAMERAS BE
RECORDED TO CONNECT TRAFFIC
STUDIES AND NO OTHER DEPARTMENT
CAN MAKE SIMILAR REQUEST.
úWE KEEP A LOG OF THOSE
REQUESTS.
THUS FAR IN 2019 ONLY TWO
RECORDINGS HAVE BEEN REQUESTED
SO IT IS A FAIRLY INFREQUENT
EVENT.
THOSE RECORDINGS ARE KEPT ON A
SERVER THAT IS ONLY ACCESSIBLE
BY SDOT I.T.
TEAM.
THEY SHARE A READ-ONLY LINK WITH
THE USERS.
THEN THEY DELETE IT AFTER 10
DAYS OF IT BEING CREATED.
THIS VIDEO IS NEVER SHARED WITH
ANY OTHER DEPARTMENT OR USED
FOR ANY TYPE OF LAW
ENFORCEMENT.
>> WHEN YOU SAY IT'S NOT
RECORDED, IT'S RECORDED FOR 10
DAYS. IT IS KEPT FOR 10 DAYS,
THE ONES THAT ARE RECORDED.
THE ONES THAT ARE NOT
RECORDING, ARE THEY STILL ON
AND JUST BEING WATCH LIVE AND
NOT RECORDING?
OR ARE THEY OFF?
SO A HUMAN BEING IS MONITORING,
WE ARE JUST NOT RECORDING.
>> THAT IS RIGHT.
>> AND THAT CAMERA WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT AS AN EXAMPLE
THAT IS NOT RECORDING, WHY
WOULD IT NOT BE RECORDING?
ARE THERE CERTAIN AREAS WE ARE
JUST NOT RECORDING?
IS IT CERTAIN DAYS OF THE WEEK?
WHERE IS THE DECISION FOR WHEN
IT RECORDS?
>> THEY ARE ALWAYS NEVER
RECORDED.
THERE STRICTLY FOR LIFE DOING
FOR STANDING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
AND MANAGING IT IN REAL TIME.
IF IT IS REQUESTED WE CAN USE
IT A TRAFFIC STUDY.
AN EXAMPLE MIGHT BE IF THEY PUT
IN NEW TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING
AND THEY WANT TO VERIFY
FUNCTIONING AS WELL AS THEY CAN
CUT THEY CAN REQUEST 10 DAYS
WORTH OF VIDEO, WHATEVER THE
STUDY PERIOD IS, THAT IS
VIEWABLE FOR THEM FOR ONLY 10
DAYS.
WE PROVIDE THEM A LINK TO THAT
FIELD.
THEY CAN WATCH IT ON HIGH SPEED
AND SEE THE RESULTS AND CONFIRM
THE RESULTS OF THEIR ANALYSIS.
>> PART OF THIS IS VERY
EDUCATIONAL SO THANK YOU FOR
YOUR PATIENCE AT LEAST WITH ME.
SO WHERE WE LOOK AT THE
CAMERAS, THE 241 CAMERAS, I
ASSUME THERE IS A SCIENCE INTO
THAT AND CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE
BIT ABOUT SOME OF THEM ARE THEY
IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS WITH LOW
TRAFFIC?
ARE THEY ALWAYS IN FOUR-WAY
STOP SIGNS?
CAN YOU TALK ABOUT THE THOUGHT
REGARDING WHERE THEY ARE.
>> WE HAVE A CITYWIDE SPENDING
NETWORK OF INTELLIGENT
TRANSPORTATION DEVICES
INCLUDING THE TRAFFIC SIGNALS
SYSTEM. CAMERAS COME VEHICLE
DETECTORS COLLEGES A VARIETY OF
TECHNOLOGY THAT'S OUT THERE.
A LOT OF THAT DICTATES WHERE WE
CAN PLACE CAMERAS.
A LOT OF THESE CAMERAS HAVE
BEEN PLACED THROUGH THE YEARS
ACCORDING TO THE OBJECTIVES OF
VARIOUS PROJECTS, SO A PROJECT
MIGHT COME THROUGH TO ADD IDEAS
WHICH IS INTELLIGENT
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ELEMENTS
ALONG LAKE CITY WAY FOR
EXAMPLE.
THEN WE WOULD THEY A FIBER-
OPTIC CABLE. GO THROUGH ALL THE
RIGOR OF BRING IT BACK TO OUR
OPERATIONS CENTER.
THAT IS DICTATED THE LOCATION
OF MANY OF OUR CAMERAS AND
SINCE 2000 SINCE WE BEGAN
INSTALLING THESE CAMERAS IT'S
BEEN A MULTIYEAR PROCESS.
WE JUST KEEP GROWING OVER TIME.
NOW WE ARE AT THE POINT WHERE
WE HAD VERY GOOD COVERAGE FOR
MOST OF THE PRIMARY CORRIDORS
IN THE CITY.
IT WOULD NOT BE IN RESIDENTIAL
AREAS, JUST IN MAINE CORRIDORS.
WE JUST DID IN LAOS US SO WE
CAN LOOK AT BLIND SPOTS AND
STATE WE CAN'T SEE THIS OR THAT
INTERSECTION.
WE HAVE A DEN 525 MORE
LOCATIONS FOR CAMERAS THAT
SHOULD BE SUITABLE ALTERNATIVES
IN THE COMING YEARS AND
INSTALLED AS PART OF THE
SEATTLE LEVEE OBJECTIVE.
THAT'S ANOTHER PART OF THE
PROCESS IS LOOKING AT COLLISION
HISTORY.
IT WOULD BE VERY VALUABLE FOR
US TO HAVE A CAMERA WITH CRASH
HISTORY.
>> IN THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS,
ARE WE LIKELY TO AS WE HEAD
CAMERAS, JUST TO ADD MORE
CAMERAS OR DO WE TAKE SOME OF
241, SAY WE TAKE 41 DOWN AND
RELOCATE THEM.
IS IT ADDITIONAL?
>> I WOULD SAY AT A POINT WE
WILL MEET A SATURATION POINT
WHERE WE NO LONGER NEED TO ADD.
>> SO WE ARE PRETTY MUCH NOT
REMOVING CAMERAS, WE ARE JUST
ADDING AS WE SEE THE NEED FOR
TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT.
>> YES.
>> VERY GOOD.
OKAY, ONTO LICENSE PLATE
READERS.
>> WE HAVE THEM INSTALLED
AROUND LONG 15 OF OUR PRIMARY
CORRIDORS IN OUR CITY.
THE PURPLE DOTS ARE THE
STATIONS WHERE THEY ARE
LOCATED.
THERE ARE TYPICALLY TWO CAMERAS
LOCATED IN THE PRIMARY DRUGS IN
THE TRIAL.
AS YOU CAN SEE THEY ARE NOT
INSTALLED AT EVERY INTERSECTION
BUT AT DECISION POINTS WHERE
PEOPLE RECEIVE TRAVEL TIME
PERMISSION THEY STILL HAVE
OPTIONS FOR WHICH WAY TO GO
WHEN THEY ARE ARMED WITH THAT
INFORMATION.
WE PARTNERED WITH THE STATE
D.O.T.
IN THIS ENDEAVOR.
THEY HAD USED APPEARS IN THE
EXACT SAME WAY FOR SEVERAL YEARS
PRIOR TO US ADOPTING THIS SAME
METHOD.
SO OUR INTENT IS THAT AS
TRAVELERS MOVE FROM SDOT OWNED
AND MANAGED FACILITIES LIKE THE
WEST SEATTLE BRIDGE CAN'T
PROVIDE THEM INFORMATION USING
THE SAME SYSTEM.
úTHAT WAY OUR DATA HAS MORE OF
REGIONAL BILL AND AS PEOPLE
MOVE FROM THE CITY STREETS ONTO
THE HIGHWAY STILL HAVE THE SAME
EXPERIENCE FOR ME TRAVEL TIME
PERSPECTIVE.
>> WHO DECIDED WHERE THESE 35
LOCATIONS WERE?
>> THAT WOULD AGAIN BE PART OF
>> WHAT DEPARTMENT?
>> IS IT IS NOT SOLELY OR DO
THEY CONSULT WITH SPD OR FIRE?
>> IT WOULD BE AND AS THE
PROJECT.
THEY WOULD PLACE THE TRAFFIC
CAMERA.
LICENSE PLATE READERS, TRAVEL
TIME TECHNOLOGY WOULD ALSO BE
PART OF WHAT WE CONSIDER WHEN
OUTFITTING A CORRIDOR WITH
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEMS.
THESE ARE TYPICALLY LINKED WITH
A SIGN SO WE CAN PLACE THE
TRAVEL TIMES WE ARE RECEIVING
FROM THOSE LICENSE PLATE
READERS ON THE SCIENCE SO WHEN
YOU COME TO WHAT YOU SAY, HEY,
THESE ARE THE OPTIONS FOR
DESTINATIONS FROM THIS STARTING
POINT.
NOW I CAN TAKE THAT INTO
ACCOUNT WHEN I AM CONSIDERING
HOW I WILL MAKE THIS PARTICULAR
TRIP.
>> SO IF I WERE TO WALK DOWN A
STREET, WHAT I BE ABLE TO
VISUALLY SEE THESE ON SIGN OR
THEY PRETTY OBSCURE?
>> TYPICALLY THEY ARE INSTALLED
ON A MAST ARM THAT IS SUPPORTING
TRAFFIC SIGNAL HEADS.
SO THEY ARE VERY APPARENT.
THEY ARE NOT OBSCURED AT ALL.
>> AND THE CAMERA THAT, LET'S
SAY YOU ARE BLOCKING THE BOX IN
TRYING TO CHEAT AND MAKE THAT
LEFT TURN AND IT FLASHES AND
YOU GET A TICKET.
THOSE CAMERAS ARE OUTSIDE OF
THE 241.
THOSE ARE NOT RECORDING.
WELL I GUESS THEY ARE RECORDING
US.
>> SO THOSE ARE OUTSIDE OF BOTH
THE TRAFFIC CAMERAS THAT WE
WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT AND
OUTSIDE OF THE LICENSE PLATE
READERS.
THE LICENSE PLATE READERS ARE
SOLELY BEATING THAT REAL-TIME
TRAFFIC DISPLAY AFFIRMATION
THAT YOU SEE ON THE SCREENS
THAT JASON HAS A SHOT OF.
>> SO THOSE TRAFFIC SPEEDING
CAMERAS ARE OUTSIDE OF THE 241.
I DIDN'T KNOW IF THOSE ARE
STILL INCLUDED IN THE 241.
BECAUSE THOSE OBVIOUSLY CALL
THERE WATCHING PEOPLE MAKE THE
ILLEGAL LEFT TURNS.
BUT I ASSUME THEY ARE ALWAYS ON
AS WELL.
>> YES, THOSE ARE TRAFFIC
ENFORCEMENT AND OUTSIDE OF THE
ORDINANCE.
SO WE WERE CAREFUL TO LOOK ONLY
AT THE ONES THAT ARE NOT
INCLUDED IN THAT.
>> OKAY.
SO SORRY TO TEASE THAT OUT.
SO WE HAVE 35 LOCATIONS OF THE
LPR'S.
>> YES.
>> SO WHY DO WE USE THEM?
WE USE THEM TO PUT MESSAGES ON
THE BOARDS AS I MENTIONED AND
ALSO WE UPDATE OUR TRAVEL
INFORMATION.
THERE ALSO OUR PRIMARY
MEASUREMENT THAT INDICATES HOW
WELL OUR CORRIDORS ARE
PERFORMING AND LET'S US FOCUS
OUR ATTENTION DUE TO AN
UNEXPECTED INCREASE IN THOSE
VALUES.
WE ALSO DISTRIBUTE A DAILY
TRAFFIC REPORT THAT INCLUDES
TRAVEL TIMES TO CREATE A
CONGESTION INDEX.
WHAT IT DOES IS IT LOOKS AT
THAT PREVIOUS 24 HOURS OF
TRAVEL TIME AND COMPARES THAT
TO THE PRIOR SIX MONTHS SO WE
CAN REALLY GET A VIEW OF HOW
TRAFFIC IS PROGRESSING THROUGH
THE CITY ON THOSE MAJOR
CORRIDORS.
SOON WILL BE IN FERMENTING AN
AUTOMATIC CONGESTION SYSTEM SO
WE CAN AUTOMATICALLY CHANGE
TRAFFIC SIGNAL TIMING SO OUR
ABILITY TO ALLEVIATE DIGESTION
WILL YOU BE THAT MUCH MORE
DYNAMIC AS A RESULT.
>> I HAVE TO ASK THIS. HOW ARE
WE USING THIS THOUGH TO ADVANCE
OUR COMMITMENT TO VISION ZERO?
AND TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE IS
CONNECTED AND PROTECTED BIKE
LANES?
WE'RE TALKING A LOT ABOUT
MONITORING TRAFFIC AND VEHICLES
BUT PART OF THE THINGS WE ARE
SEEING ESPECIALLY ON 35th AS OF
THE BEGINNING OF THE LAST FIVE
DAYS OR SO, IS THESE VEHICLES
HITTING CARS.
SO WHERE ARE WE USING THIS TO
ADVANCE OUR COMMITMENT IN OTHER
AREAS OF AS NOT TO CREATE
PROTECTED BIKE LANES?
>> I THINK THIS IS ACTUALLY
PRETTY INTEGRATED WITH THAT
WITH OUR OVERALL EFFORTS TO
MANAGE TRAFFIC AND USE THE
RIGHT AWAY EFFICIENTLY.
THAT MEANS AS WE LOOK TO BUILD
OUT A NETWORK, WE ARE NOT
WINDING ROADS TO DO THAT.
WE ARE BUILDING WITHIN THE
RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THAT MEANS USING TECHNOLOGICAL
TOOLS TO HELP US MANAGE THE
TRAFFIC THAT WE HAVE AND
PROVIDE THOSE OTHER
ALTERNATIVES.
I THINK SOME OF THAT IS
PROVIDING INFORMATION OUT TO
PEOPLE SO IT'S RESPONDING
WHETHER THERE ARE INCIDENTS
THAT AFFECT OUR ABILITY TO MOVE
PEOPLE THROUGH THE CORRIDORS.
I THINK THE PLACES THAT ARE
OUTLINED AND WHERE WE ARE
TRACKING TRAVEL TIMES AND HOW
WE ARE DOING WHAT JASON TALKED
ABOUT, ARE LINKED WITH ALL OF
THAT.
WE HAVE HEARD FEEDBACK SEPARATE
FROM THIS PROCESS ON SOME OF
THE ADAPTIVE SIGNALS.
THAT'S AN ONGOING PROCESS WHICH
THIS LINKS DIRECTLY INTO OF HOW
WE USE THAT INFORMATION TO MAKE
SURE WE ARE MANAGING ALL
TRAFFIC.
>> THIS IS VERY HELPFUL FOR ME
SO I WANT TO KEEP THINKING OF
THIS.
THIS IS VERY EDUCATIONAL.
IN YOUR EXPERIENCE I GUESS YOU
HAVE WORKED IN OTHER
JURISDICTIONS.
LPR'S ARE LITTLE JARRING WHEN
YOU THINK ABOUT IT AS SOMEBODY
IS ACTUALLY TRACKING WHERE WE
ARE GOING.
I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE ON
THAT.
BUT IS THIS ALMOST COMMONPLACE
IN MAJOR CITIES NOW?
OR CAN YOU TALK ABOUT HOW LONG
IT'S BEEN AROUND?
ONE OF OUR GREAT SPEAKERS
MENTIONED THE ABUSE IN NEW YORK
CITY.
I HEARD ABOUT THAT.
DO YOU KNOW OF ANY OTHER ABUSE?
>> I DON'T KNOW OF OTHER ABUSE
SITUATIONS.
I KNOW THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
IS PRETTY STANDARD AS JASON
SAID IN DEITIES BOTH IN THE
CITY AND STATE LEVEL.
TO PROVIDE THIS KIND OF
INFORMATION AND MANAGEMENT ON
MAJOR CORRIDORS.
JASON WILL TALK A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT IS CAPTURED
FROM THE LPR AND HOW WE ARE
UTILIZING THAT BECAUSE I THINK
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
PEOPLE UNDERSTAND HOW WE ARE
UTILIZING THIS INFORMATION AND
NOT UTILIZING THIS INFORMATION.
>> HERE'S HOW THEY WORK.
WHEN A LICENSE PLATE COMES INTO
VIEW, THE LPR CREATES A DIGITAL
RECORD OF THAT AND ETHICS IS A
TIMESTAMP TO IT.
WE HAVE DONE AN ANALYSIS AND BY
LOOKING AT GENERAL-PURPOSE
TRAFFIC VOLUME WE RECOGNIZE
THAT ONLY 5-10% OF THE PLATES
THAT MOVE THROUGH THE VIEW OR
MOVE PAST THE LICENSE PLATE
READER ACTUALLY IS USED TO
CREATE A TRAVEL TIME.
WE THEN SEND THAT INFORMATION
TO THE STATE TO DO ALL OF THE
PROCESSING ON OUR BEHALF.
WHAT THEY DO IS THEY DO PLATE
MATCHING.
THEY RECOGNIE WHEN THE SAME
PLATE HAS APPEARED AT POINT A
AND AT POINT B AND THAT YOU
HAVE A TRAVEL TIME BETWEEN
THOSE TWO POINTS.
IT'S WHEN FIVE TRIPS OCCUR THEY
TAKE THE AVERAGE OF THAT AND
THAT IS WHAT IS PROVIDED BACK
TO THE CITY.
IN FACT IT'S PUBLICLY
AVAILABLE, THIS INFORMATION HAS
BEEN PROVIDED THROUGH A WEB
SERVICE AND IS AVAILABLE FOR
CONSUMPTION BY ANYBODY WHO
WANTS TO WRITE A SOFTWARE
APPLICATION OR ANYTHING.
>> I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE OPEN
DATA POLICY.
IS THAT 5-10% BECAUSE OF THE
LIMITATIONS OF THE TECHNOLOGY
OR IS THAT JUST YOUR TRYING TO
GET SAMPLES?
>> THE 510% PLATES THAT ARE
CAPTURED.
>> IT IS SAFE LIMITATION OF THE
TECHNOLOGY.
MAYBE THERE IS A SHADOW OF THE
LICENSE PLATE.
FINALLY HAVE SOME TROUBLE W█ITH
SOME OF THE SPECIALIZED PLATES,
ETC.
AS I HAVE LEARNED FROM THE
MANUFACTURER.
I GUESS THAT LEADS TO THAT.
WE KNOW THAT BECAUSE WHEN WE
RECEIVE THE TRAVEL TIME BACK
FROM THE STATE, IT SAYS NOT
SPECIFICALLY WHICH PLATES BUT
HOW MANY PLATES WERE USED TO
CREATE THAT TRAVEL TIME WHICH
GIVES US A NOTION OF HOW MANY
PEOPLE ARE MAKING THAT TRIP.
WE COMPARE THAT VALUE TO
GENERAL-PURPOSE TRAFFIC.
THAT'S HOW WE DETERMINE IT WAS
5-10% CAPTURE RATE.
>> I AM AWARE OF THE LACK OF
FREEDOM FOR WASH.
IS THAT THE BOUNCE BACK FROM
THAT BACK TO US, IS THAT A REAL-
TIME BASIS OR A MONTH LATER OR
CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT
HOW WE CAPTURE THE PROCESS OR
THE PROCESS BY WHICH WE CAPTURE
THE INFORMATION?
>> THAT IS SOMETHING I PROBABLY
SHOULD HAVE HIGHLIGHTED MORE.
IT'S KIND OF A TECHNICAL
EXPLANATION BUT ESSENTIALLY ON
THE INTERNET THEY PROVIDE A
WEBSITE THAT HAS EXPLANATIONS
ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT TRAFFIC
RELATED DATA THAT THEY HAVE
AVAILABLE.
THEY PROVIDE INSTRUCTIONS ON
HOW TO ACCESS THAT DATA.
ONCE YOU SEE THAT DATA THEY
ALSO PROVIDE A DICTIONARY SO
YOU CAN SAY, THIS IS WHAT IT IS
REFERRING TO IN THE DATASTREAM.
SO TRAVEL TIME IS ANOTHER ONE
OF THOSE DATA STREAMS THAT IS
AVAILABLE THROUGH THE INTERNET
THAT WE ARE CONSUMING JUST LIKE
ANYBODY ELSE WOULD HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO.
>> SO I AM HEARING YOUR ANSWER
TO SAY THAT ONCE A PERSON'S
LICENSE PLATE FALLS INTO THAT 5-
10% AND THEY ARE MONITORED
GOING FROM A TO B, ALMOST ON A
REAL-TIME BASIS, WE CAN THEN
ACCESS THAT DATA TO DETERMINE
THAT A TO B TRAVEL TIME?
>> IT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO JUST TO GET A BIT DEEPER
INTO THE DETAILS, AFTER THOSE
PLATES ARE MATCHED IN THE
SERVICE, THAT RAW DATA IS
IMMEDIATELY DELETED.
THEY ARE NEVER STORING ANY THE
PLATE PERMISSION.
WE ARE NEVER STORING ANY OF THE
PLATE INFORMATION.
IT'S NOT PROVIDED BACK TO US IN
THAT DATA FEED.
THERE'S PROBABLY ABOUT A FIVE
MINUTE LAG IN THE TIME THAT
THESE TRIPS ARE BEING CAPTURED
AND TURNED INTO TRAVEL TIMES TO
THE POINT THAT WE ACTUALLY
CONSUME IT AND START PUTTING IT
ON THE PORTS, ETC.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THIS IS MY FINAL SLIDE.
JUST KIND OF AN OVERVIEW OF
WHAT I JUST SAID.
WE DELETE THAT.
WE DON'T DELETE THE PLATE
INFORMATION, WASH.DELETE TIP.
I KNOW THESE ARE A COMPLETELY
SEPARATE SYSTEM.
IT'S NEVER USED FOR ANY TYPE OF
LEGAL ENFORCEMENT.
>> I AM ASSUMING THAT IS YOUR
LAST SLIDE.
SO WE HAVE PRETTY MUCH GONE
THROUGH THE TECHNICAL
EXPLANATIONS OF THE TWO
TECHNOLOGIES.
SO WHY DON'T WE HAVE SOME
DISCUSSION.
CHUCK, I KNOW YOU HAVE A LOT,
AND I HAVE TRIED TO READ AS
MUCH AS I COULD.
YOU HAVE GROWN A LOT AT ME THIS
WEEK.
300 PAGES AND A LOT OF OPINIONS.
WHAT YOU TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE
CONCERNS THE WORKING GROUP HAS
HAD.
>> THANK YOU CHAIR HARRELL.
I APPRECIATE THIS OPPORTUNITY
AND THEY WANTED TO EXPRESS MY
ATTITUDE TO THE CITY
DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES THAT
HAVE BEEN WORKING HARD TO
IMPLEMENT THIS SURVEILLANCE
ORDINANCE.
I NOTE THAT WE ARE ALL BUILDING
THE AIRPLANE AS WE ARE FLYING
IT.
IT IS AN IMPORTANT PROCESS SO I
WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT BEFORE
GETTING INTO SOME OF THESE
CONCERNS.
I AM THE COCHAIR BY THE WAY,
NOT THE SOLE CHAIR OF THE
WORKING GROUP.
I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL,
WE HAVE HEARD THE WORK THE CITY
IS DOING TO IMPLEMENT THE
ORDINANCE.
I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT
SOME OF THE WORK THE WORKING
GROUP HAS DONE AROUND EACH OF
THESE TECHNOLOGIES AND THEN AS
YOU MENTIONED, CHAIR HARRELL,
GETTING INTO THESE TWO SPECIFIC
CONCERNS.
WHAT ABOUT THE PROCESS WHICH I
THINK REALLY INTEGRATES WHAT
THIS CONVERSATION IS ABOUT,
WHAT TO DO WITH THESE TWO
SPECIFIC TECHNOLOGIES, AND THEN
ABOUT THE TIMELINE AS WELL.
SO TO TAKE A STEP BACK, WHEN
SEATTLE FIRST INVENTED THIS
ORDINANCE IN 2013, THIS REALLY
WAS THE 1st OF ITS KIND IN THE
COUNTRY.
THE FACT THAT THE COUNCIL CAME
BACK NOT ONCE BUT TWICE TO
STRENGTHEN THIS ORDINANCE, I
THINK REALLY SHOWS THAT THIS IS
A PLACE WHERE WE BELIEVE WE CAN
HAVE OUR CIVIL LIBERTIES AND
THE BENEFITS OF TECHNOLOGY AS
WELL.
I WANT TO RESTATE BECAUSE I
THINK IT'S ALWAYS WORTH
RESTATING THAT THE ORDINANCE IS
REALLY NOT ABOUT SAYING DON'T
USE TECHNOLOGY.
THERE MAY BE SOME PARTICULAR
TECHNOLOGIES WE SAY THAT AFTER
HAVING A DISCUSSION BUT FOR THE
ONES WE JUST DISCUSSED, I THINK
IT'S THE WORKING GROUP
ASSESSMENT THAT IT'S NOT DON'T
USE THEM, ITS USE THEM WITH THE
APPROPRIATE SAFEGUARDS.
THAT'S HOW TO PREVENT THOSE
SAFEGUARDS IS REALLY THE
CONVERSATION WE WOULD LIKE TO
HAVE. LET'S USE THAT TECHNOLOGY
TO MANAGE TRAFFIC BUT HAVE THE
RIGHT REDUCTIONS IN PLACE.
OF COURSE, I THINK TO
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA'S POINT,
THE WAY TO DO THAT IS TO
FIGURE OUT SOMETHING THAT IS
CLEAR AND ENFORCEABLE AND I
BELIEVE THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL
INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.
NOT JUST TO GIVE CLARITY TO THE
CITY AGENCIES BUT ALSO CLARITY
TO THE PUBLIC SO THEY KNOW
WHERE TO GO TO FIGURE OUT HOW A
GIVEN TECHNOLOGY IS BEING USED.
THAT IS CLEAR AND POSSIBLE
POLICY AND IS THE BETTER WAY OF
LITIGATION OR OF EVEN THAT SORT
OF BATTLING IT OUT, LEGISLATIVE
PROVISION BY A LEGISLATIVE
PROVISION IS NOT THE WAY TO DO
IT.
SO THIS IS ALSO OUR OFFER OF
PARTNERSHIP. IN TERMS OF WHAT
THE WORKING GROUP HAS BEEN
DOING, WE ARE REALLY A UNIQUE
BODY IN THIS PROCESS.
I THINK THERE'S REALLY NOT
ANOTHER CITY IN THE COUNTRY
THAT HAS A GROUP THAT
SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO TURN
THIS INTO A PROCESS LIKE THIS
ORDINANCE.
I HAVE BEEN SEEING THIS PROCESS
CITED IN MORE AND MORE ACADEMIC
PAPERS AND ARTICLES.
THERE ARE A LOT OF GUYS ON
SEATTLE AS WE BUILD THIS
AIRPLANE MODEL WE ARE FLYING
AND WE BELIEVE FOR THAT REASON
IT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO BE ABLE
TO GET IT RIGHT.
I THINK THE ACTUAL GROUP WE ARE
WORKING WITH, THE WORKING GROUP
IS REMARKABLE.
THEY HAVE ENGAGED WITH THESE
TECHNOLOGIES ALTHOUGH I AM
ACTUALLY THE ONLY PERSON WHOSE
DAY JOB IT IS ON THIS GROUP TO
LOOK AT SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGIES.
BUT THEY HAVE DIVED IN.
WE WERE ONLY APPOINTED IN
FEBRUARY AND SINCE THAT TIME WE
HAVE MANAGED TO REVIEW 14
TECHNOLOGIES.
THAT'S PRETTY REMARKABLE GIVEN
THAT THIS IS THE SIZE OF ONE
SURVEILLANCE REPORT. SO THIS
GROUP HAS MANAGED TO LOOK AT 14
AT THESE I THINK MINIMALLY
ENGAGED WITH THEM.
IMPORTANTLY TO PROVIDE THESE
PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES
IMPACT ASSESSMENTS TO THE
COUNCIL.
WE SEND EACH OF THOSE DIRECTLY
TO THE COUNCIL AS WELL AS TO
THE CTO'S OFFICE WHEN WE
PRODUCE THEM AND THEY ARE
REALLY INTENDED TO BE SURVEYED,
DIGESTED, CONDENSED FORM OF
EVERYTHING THAT WE HAVE LEARNED
WHEN GOING THROUGH THESE
SURVEILLANCE REPORTS INCLUDING
VERY IMPORTANTLY, THE
RECOMMENDATIONS AS TO WHAT
MISSING.
HOW DO WE PROTECT CIVIL
LIBERTIES IN ADDITION TO WHAT
IN THE SIR.
I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO
HIGHLIGHT THIS AS WELL BY USING
A VERY SPECIFIC TEMPLATE TO
APPLY TO EACH TECHNOLOGY WHERE
WE ASKED STANDARD QUESTIONS
AROUND TECHNOLOGY.
I CAN'T PROVIDE THOSE TO YOU
BUT WE HAD A VERY UNIFORM AND
METHODICAL WAY OF LOOKING AT
THOSE TECHNOLOGIES STARTING
WITH THE KEY QUESTION OF WHAT
IS THE PURPOSE OF THE
TECHNOLOGY?
WHAT ENFORCEABLE MECHANISMS
EXIST IN POLICY TO LIMIT THE
TECHNOLOGY TO THAT PURPOSE.
WHAT DATA IS COLLECTED COCKY
QUESTION IN ANY SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGY AND IN WHAT FORM? IS
IT AGGREGATED, PERSONALLY
IDENTIFY INFORMATION, ETC.
THEN YOU CAN MATCH WEATHER DATA
IS COLLECTED AND WHETHER IT
GOES BEYOND THE PURPOSE AND
GOING BACK TO THE ANSWER OF
THAT FIRST QUESTION, WHAT IS
THE PURPOSE.
THEN YOU CAN DEVELOP POLICIES
THAT MATCHED DATA COLLECTION.
QUESTIONS ABOUT THIRD PARTIES,
HOW ARE THEY ALLOWED TO USE AND
DISSEMINATE THAT, WHAT
DOCUMENTS OR CONTRACTS ACTUALLY
SAY THAT.
WE BELIEVE THAT THESE CAN
ACTUALLY SERVE AS USEFUL
TEMPLATES FOR THE COUNCIL AS
YOU CONSIDER HOW TO APPROVE
THESE TECHNOLOGIES.
I THINK IN THIS CASE WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT APPROVAL OF SOME
SET OF POLICIES.
THAT LEADS ME TO THE TWO
SPECIFIC CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE
WANTED TO RACE.
ONE IS JUST THE QUESTION OF HOW
THE CITY CAN APPROVE A SET OF
POLICIES THAT MAKE MEANINGFUL
THE WAYS TO ADDRESS THE CIVIL
LIBERTIES CONCERNS THAT HAVE
BEEN RAISED AND THE PRIVACY AND
CIVIL LIBERTIES ASSESSMENTS.
TO PUT IT VERY BLUNTLY, THE
CHALLENGES, THIS IS A 400 PAGE
DOCUMENT. WE ARE REALLY LOOKING
AT THREE SCENARIOS.
I THINK LAW HAS STATED THAT
COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THESE 300
PAGE OR 400 PAGE IMPACT REPORTS
GIVES THESE THE FORCE OF LAW.
WE ARE NOT SURE THAT IS TRUE, I
SHOULD PUT IT DIFFERENTLY.
WE ARE SURE THAT'S NOT A GOOD
IDEA.
WE ARE EITHER SAYING ALL OF
THIS IS LAW OR WE ARE SAYING
PART OF THIS IS LAW OR WE ARE
SAYING NONE OF THIS IS LAW.
IF ALL OF THIS IS LAW, IT IS
VERY VERY DIFFICULT FOR THE
PUBLIC TO UNDERSTAND WHERE THE
ENFORCEABLE POLICIES WITHIN
THIS ARE.
WE HAVE RAISED SPECIFIC
CONCERNS AROUND THAT IN
DISCUSSING THIS.
UNFORTUNATELY WE DO NOT HAVE
TIME AS A WORKING GROUP TO HAVE
A MEETING OR QUORUM WHERE WE
CAN WRITE A LETTER TO THE
COUNCIL BUT THE UNDERLYING
CONCERNS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN
THE WORKING GROUP AND I THINK
ONE OF THEM IS THAT THERE IS A
LOT IN THESE DOCUMENTS THAT IS
NOT CLEARLY POLICY OR PROCEDURE
. SOME OF IT POINTS TO OUTSIDE
DOCUMENTS THAT CAN CHANGE.,
SOME OF IT IS JUST A REFLECTION
OF CURRENT AGENCY PRACTICE AS
WELL.
SO THERE IS A LOT OF QUESTIONS.
IF ALL OF THIS IS LAW, I THINK
IT WILL BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT
FOR THE PUBLIC TO BE ABLE TO
FIGURE OUT.
>> LET ME UNDERSTAND THAT POINT.
IN THE SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE,
THAT WE DRAFTED AND PASSED, MY
INTERPRETATION WAS NOT TO
REDUCE A DOCUMENT TO SAY ALL OF
THIS IS LAW.
THAT WOULD BE A LAW.
MY GOAL AT LEAST WAS TO WORST
IMPORTANTLY DAYLIGHT THE BILLS
SO THAT WE CAN OPEN UP THE
DATA, OPEN UP THE TECHNOLOGY,
AND SURFACE EVERYTHING THAT WE
ARE DOING TO BEST UNDERSTAND IT.
ONCE WE BEST UNDERSTAND IT WE
CAN LOOK AT WHAT SAFEGUARDS
NEED TO BE PUT IN PLACE.
AFTER THAT PROCESS WE CAN TALK
ABOUT CHANGING THE LAW.
BUT I SAW IT SEQUENTIALLY.
I DID NOT SEE AND QUITE CANDIDLY
, I COULD TALK TO YOU OFF-LINE
OR PUBLICLYABOUT THE LENGTH OF
THESE 150 PAGE SERVICES BUT I
THINK IT'S A WASTE OF RESOURCES
WHEN THERE IS JUST SOME
FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS THAT NEED
TO BE ANSWERED.
WHAT IS IT USED FOR?
HOW ARE WE STORING IT? WHO HAS
ACCESS TO IT?
WHAT SAFEGUARDS DO WE HAVE TO
PROTECT US FROM ABUSE?
JUST SOME CORE PRINCIPLES.
I THINK ONE OF THE POINTS THAT
WAS MADE, THERE COULD BE AN
ABSENCE OF CLEAR POLICY AN
EXAMPLE BEING, AND I WILL MAKE
THIS ONE UP SO IT'S NOT THE
BEST EXAMPLE AND THIS IS ALWAYS
DANGEROUS WHEN YOU DO THIS, AN
EXAMPLE WOULD BE EVERY
DEPARTMENT MUST KEEP A
PUBLISHED LIST OF WHO HAS
ACCESS TO THE DATA IS AN
EXAMPLE.
OR THE SPECIFIC ARCHIVED TIME,
THE PERIOD OF RETAINING TIME.
IT COULD VARY FROM DEPARTMENT
TO DEPARTMENT BASED ON
TECHNOLOGICAL NEEDS.
BUT EVERYONE MUST KEEP ONE AND
WE LOOK AT THEM AND WE PUBLISH
THEM.
THINGS LIKE THAT ARE THERE
POLICIES THAT WE NEED TO
ARTICULATE.
BUT TO YOUR POINT, BY APPROVING
A ONE-PAGE ORDINANCE, MY GOAL IS
NOT TO SAY THAT IS THE LAW.
I THOUGHT IT SEQUENTIALLY
SLEEP.
FIRST WE ARE DAYLIGHTING IT.
WITH SDOT AND INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY AS TWO EXAMPLES, I
DON'T KNOW, I NEED TO HEAR A
LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE
RESOURCES YOU ARE PUTTING INTO
THIS SEVEN-MONTH PROCESS.
YOU HAVE MANY PRESSING NEEDS.
THIS IS ONE OF THEM BUT I DID
NOT DISSIPATE 150 PAYS
ANTICIPATE 150 PAGES.
>> IT IS A LENGTHY PROCESS.
THE MEAT OF THIS IS THE PRIVACY
IMPACT ASSESSMENT, THE FIRST
PART.
THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE ASKED OF
DATA MANAGEMENT.
THAT IS WHERE POLICY IS
OUTLINED.
THE BULK OF THIS AFTER THAT
PIECE OUR DOCUMENTATION OF
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, ETC.
THAT IS DOCUMENT IN OUR PROCESS
AND WHAT WE DID.
THIS IS WHAT IT TAKES TO BUILD
THESE THINGS.
BUT THE MEAT OF THE DATA
MANAGEMENT CAUGHT THAT SPEAKS
TO PRIVACY CONCERNS AND ISSUES
AROUND POLICY IS REALLY IN THE
FIRST PART. THAT IS WHERE THAT
IS OUTLINED.
WHENEVER POSSIBLE, WE INCLUDED
COPIES OF POLICY OR REFERENCE
PIECES OF POLICY THAT WERE
REFERENCED IN THE DOCUMENT.
>> I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU A
QUESTION.
THE LENGTH OF THE SERVERS IN
YOUR OPINION, IS THAT NECESSARY
TO GET TO THE ISSUE YOU ARE
TRYING TO RAISE OR DO YOU THINK
WE CAN EXPEDITE THAT TO SOME
EXTENT?
>> THINGS THAT QUESTION.
I THINK YOU WILL SEE THAT
PERHAPS OUR THINKING MAY BE
CONVERGING ON THIS MORE THAN
YOU ANTICIPATE.
WHAT I WILL SAY IS I THINK
THESE ARE INCREDIBLY USEFUL
DOCUMENTS AT I DON'T AT ALL
THINK THEY ARE A WASTE OF
RESOURCES DESPITE THEIR LENGTH.
ALL I AM SAYING ABOUT THEM IS
WHATEVER YOU PUT INTO LAW, TO
MAKE THE FORCE OF LAW, IT WILL
BE THIS ENTIRE DOCUMENT.
I THINK THIS IS HUGELY USEFUL
BECAUSE IT DOCUMENTS EXISTING
AGENCY PRACTICES, TALKS ABOUT
THE ABILITIES OF THE
TECHNOLOGY.
THERE IS A PLACE FOR COMMUNITY
MEMBERS TO GO TO UNDERSTAND HOW
IT IS BEING USED.
WHAT THAT DOESN'T DO IS GET US
TO THE POINT WHERE THOSE CIVIL
LIBERTIES CONCERTS ARE FULLY
ADDRESSED BECAUSE POLICY IS
SORT OF IN DIFFERENT PARTS OF
THIS DOCUMENT AND AS I
MENTIONED, SOME OF IT MAY BE
OUTSIDE OF THIS DOCUMENT.
SOME OF IT MAY NOT BE UP-TO-
DATE.
WE FOUND A NUMBER OF THOSE
INSTANCES.
SO I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR CUT
ACLU AND WHAT AMERICA SETS A
SOLUTION CALLED THE WORKING
GROUP WILL BE UP TO DISCUSS
THAT AS WELL AND SEE IF THEY
AGREE WITH IT.
THE IDEA REALLY IS THAT WE FEEL
THAT WE HAVE ACTUALLY DONE A
LOT OF THE WORK TO PULL OUT
THOSE SPECIFIC POLICIES THAT
ADDRESS THE THINGS THAT WE
THINK ARE MOST PRESSING TO
ADDRESS.
TO YOUR POINT, COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA, FOR EXAMPLE ON PAGE 4
OF THE PRIVACY AND CIVIL
LIBERTIES IMPACT ASSESSMENT
THAT WE PROVIDED, THE FULL ONE,
WE GO THROUGH WHAT IS IN THE
EXISTING SAR AND THE POLICY
THAT IS REFERENCED THERE TO
THEIR CREDIT I THINK SDOT HAS
DONE A LOT OF WORK TO TRY TO
PUT SOME POLICIES IN PLACE.
BUT WE TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHERE
IT FELL SHORT IN OUR VIEW.
>> PAGE 4 OF YOUR MEMO?
>> OF THE PRIVACY WORKING GROUP.
SO THERE WE STILL HAVE ONE
PROBLEM BEING IT DOES NOT SET
FORTH CLEAR USE COLLECTION AND
RETENTION RULES.
SO WITHIN THAT DOCUMENT WE
ACTUALLY THEN RESPOND AND SAY
THAT THERE SHOULD BE A POLICY
THAT MAKES CLEAR THAT NO DATA
MAY BE RECORDED OR RETAINED
EXCEPT FOR SPECIFICALLY
DESIGNED PURPOSES AND WHAT
THOSE PURPOSES HAD OUGHT TO BE.
SIMPLE LANGUAGE, ALL THE POLICY
IN ONE PLACE. WE THINK THAT
WHATEVER YOU DO WITH THE SIR,
YOU COULD PERHAPS MOVE FORWARD
TO FINDING SOME POLICY WAY TO
INCLUDE THOSE AS CLEAR BEING IN
ONE PLACE AND ENFORCEABLE.
I WAS GOING TO RESPOND TO THAT.
>> WE CONSULTED WITH GARY SMITH
WHO IS INVOLVED IN WRITING THIS
ORDINANCE WHICH YOU WORKED WITH
HIM ON THIS.
THIS IS LARGELY YOUR WORK AND
HIS AND WHOEVER WAS THERE, I
THINK COUNCILMEMBER O'BRIEN WAS
THERE.
HIS INTERPRETATION WAS ANY
REPRESENTATION THE DEPARTMENT
MAKES ABOUT THE HANDLING OF
DATA SO FOR EXAMPLE DATA
RETENTION WHATEVER PRESENTATION
THEY MAKE BECOMES LAW.
SO IF THE QUESTIONS YOU ASKED
THAT ARE PROPOSED AND ANSWERED
IN THE SIR, IF THE DEPARTMENT
STATES OUR POSSE RATES ARE
RETAINED IN ALL POLICIES EXCEPT
FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY CAUGHT THAT
BECOMES CODIFIED WHEN THIS IS
APPROVED.
SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR
YOU.
>> THAT IS HELPFUL.
I DON'T KNOW WHO I AM GREEN
WITH WHEN I SAY THIS BUT THAT
KIND OF CLEAR POLICY I THINK
MAKES SENSE.
IT SHOULD BE DAY LIGHTED AND WE
SHOULD KNOW THAT.
THAT'S LIKE THREE SENTENCES,
NOT A 150 PAGE DOCUMENT.
>> IS NOT THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT,
IT'S THE PIECES WHERE THE
DEPARTMENT REPRESENTS THE USE
OF DATA AND SHARING AND
WHATEVER THE QUESTION HAS TO
BE.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA WANT
TO MAKE A POINT .
>> THANK YOU COUNCIL PRESIDENT.
I LOOKED AT THIS DOCUMENT THAT
HAS BEEN HELD UP.
THIS IS 150 PAGES JUST ON THE
CLOSER.
CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEVISION.
THIS DOCUMENT IS NOT GOING TO
BE DIGESTED BY THE GENERAL
PUBLIC NOR FRANKLY DO I EXPECT
THIS DOCUMENT TO BE INTERPRETED
BY ANY NUMBER OF FOLKS WHO ARE
WORKING WITHIN EACH DEPARTMENT.
FOR ME, I THINK THIS IS
UNDERSCORING I BELIEVE WHAT YOU
ARE ALL SAYING WHICH IS IF THIS
IS NOT INTENDED TO BE LAW, WHAT
WE NEED IS A 3-5 PAGE SUMMARY
DOCUMENT WHICH I THINK THE
WORKING GROUP HAS BEGUN TO
SUMMARIZE SOME OF THE CLEAR
RECOMMENDATIONS WHICH ACTUALLY
TOOK A CLEAR AND ENFORCEABLE
GUIDELINES.
WHAT THIS IS TELL ME IS THAT
YOU HAVE DONE A VERY
COMPETITIVE ANALYSIS.
YOU HAVE ANSWERED ALL THE
QUESTIONS YOU HAVE BEEN ASKED
TO.
YOU TALK ABOUT EXISTING
PRACTICES.
BUT WHAT WE NEED TO COMPLEMENT
IT WITH IS A SUMMARY DOCUMENT
THAT TALKS ABOUT THE CLEAR AND
ENFORCEABLE POLICY PRACTICES.
HOW IS THIS GOING TO BE USED IN
FUTURE?
WHAT PROTOCOLS, WHAT PROCEDURES
WILL BE BE PUTTING IN PLACE TO
PROTECT CIVIL LIBERTIES?
HOW WILL WE ENSURE THAT FUTURE
UTILIZATION OF WHATEVER
úTECHNOLOGY CONFORMS TO THE
POLICY GUIDELINES THAT COMES
FROM THIS, HENCE OF ANALYSIS?
I WOULD AGREE, THIS IS IN LINE
WITH WHAT THE ORDINANCE WAS
ASKING.
HOWEVER I THINK THE MISSING
ELEMENT IS, WHAT IS THAT
SUMMARY DOCUMENT THAT WE CAN
SAY, HERE IS THE GUIDING
PRINCIPLE.
HERE IS THE LAW THAT WE EXPECT
YOU TO COMPLY WITH THAT
ACTUALLY MEETS OUR EXPECTATION
AS POLICYMAKERS FOR HOW THIS
NEW TECHNOLOGY WILL BE UTILIZED
TO PROTECT CIVIL LIBERTIES AND
ADVANCED THE POLICY GOALS THAT
YOU ALL HAD WITH THE USE OF THE
TECHNOLOGY IN THE FIRST PLACE.
>> I FULLY AGREE.
UNCONDITIONALLY AGREE.
AGAIN WHEN I TALK ABOUT
SEQUENTIAL WORK, JASON'S
PRESENTATION IS EXACTLY, I
DON'T KNOW HOW THAT LICENSE
PLATE READER REALLY WORKS, I
WANTED TO DAYLIGHT THE PROCESS
FIRST AND WHILE HE SAID AS AN
EXAMPLE, I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT
PART YOU SAID IS NOT RETAINED
OR HOWEVER MANY DAYS IT'S
RETAINED. EACH DEPARTMENT WE
SHOULD KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE
RETAINING SCHEDULE IS FOR THE
TECHNOLOGY.
SO I FULLY AGREE THAT I WANT TO
GET TO THAT POINT WHERE WE HAVE
THESE CLEAR ARTICULABLE
POLICIES ON THE KEY AREAS.
WHAT IS RETAINED, WHO HAS
ACCESS, AND THE TRAINING.
WHEN I TALKED ABOUT THAT
MASKING TECHNOLOGY, I SAID WHO
IS PUSHING THE BUTTON ON
MASKING?
ISN'T THAT ONE KEYSTROKE AWAY
FROM PUTTING IT ON TV?
SO THAT'S WHY WHO AND WHAT THE
TRAINING IS CAUGHT THOSE ARE
ALL GREAT POINTS TO HAVE AN
SHOULD BE A DAY LIGHTED PROCESS.
BUT I THINK THAT THE CITY OF
SEATTLE CANNOT JUST HAVE ONE
POLICY. DEPARTMENTS AND
COMMISSIONS AND OFFICES AS WELL.
DO YOU ALL WANT TO RESPOND AT
ALL TO THE CONCERNS?
>> WE HAVE BEEN AS COMPLETE AND
COMPLIANT AS WE CAN BE TO THIS
ORDINANCE.
IF YOU'RE LOOKING FOR AN
ADDITIONAL PIECE OF INFORMATION
WHETHER THAT IS AN EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY OR SOMETHING I THINK WE
NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT
LOOKS LIKE.
WE FEEL ALL THE QUESTIONS WERE
ANSWERED ADEQUATELY AND
REPRESENTATIONS FROM THE
DEPARTMENT ABOUT HOW THEY USE
THIS TECHNOLOGY WERE
APPROPRIATE.
WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH
SOME OF THE ASPECTS OF THE
REPORT YOU CAME UP WITH.
THAT IS NOT OUR NORMAL
OPERATION.
HOWEVER WE ARE VERY DEDICATED
TO MAKING SURE THAT CIVIL
LIBERTIES, ALL OF THE ISSUES
THAT THIS ORDINANCE IS DESIGNED
TO MEET, HAPPEN.
SO WE WOULD NEED TO TALK ABOUT
WHAT QUESTIONS YOU WANT TO
HIGHLIGHT.
IS THAT AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF
POLICIES?
I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS
LIKE FOR YOU.
AND WE WILL PROBABLY NEED TO
ASK SOME DETAIL.
>> I WILL ADD THAT I THINK THAT
US IN I.T.
AND THE WORKING GROUP CAN WORK
TOGETHER TO COME UP WITH THAT
WHAT THAT FORMAT WOULD LOOK
LIKE.
THAT CONSISTENT FOR YOU WISH TO
SEE EVERY TIME THERE IS A
SERVER ATTACHED TO THAT SUMMARY.
ONE THAT WOULD BE EASILY
DIGESTIBLE, COULD BECOME LAW,
ALL THOSE THINGS WE JUST TALKED
ABOUT.
IF THERE WAS ANOTHER MEETING OF
THIS COMMITTEE COMING UP IN THE
NEAR FUTURE WE COULD WORK IN
THE MEANTIME AND COME BACK WITH
THAT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.
>> SO TO YOUR SECOND POINT, THE
QUESTION OF, THAT ALL OF THIS
IS LAW, I WANT TO GET TO THAT
POINT.
I DON'T WANT THAT TO BE LAW.
IT IS A BAD LAW IF IT IS 150
PAGES.
I HAVE TO TELL YOU, I KNOW JUST
TO CUT TO THE CHASE ON ANOTHER
ISSUE, AS CHAIR OF AN ISSUE I
DON'T HAVE AN UPDATE OF PASSING
29 SEPARATE ORDINANCES FOR EACH
TECHNOLOGY AS WELL.
I HAVE A GREAT APPETITE FOR
REALLY NARROWING DOWN THOSE
POLICIES THAT COUNCILMEMBER
MOSQUEDA TALKS ABOUT SO WELL
ON EXACT MEANT AND LIABILITY.
IF THAT'S THE PRICE WE HAVE TO
PAY FOR USING THIS TECHNOLOGY,
AND YOU WANT TO DRILL THOSE
DOWN UNDERSTANDING THAT IT
COULD BE DEPARTMENT SPECIFIC.
AND LAST, I REALLY, I JUST HAVE
TO ASK THIS QUESTION.
WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE FIRST
COUPLE OF SIR'S, I THOUGHT WE
WERE GOING TO DO SOME OF THE
EASY ONES FIRST TO GET THE
WHEELS MOVING A LITTLE BIT.
OR THESE TWO SUPPOSED TO BE,
ARE THESE PERCEIVED TO BE THE
EASIER ONES ARE MORE DIFFICULT
ONCE?
>> WE HAD A COUPLE OF EASIER
ONCE.
WE HAD A COUPLE OF FIRE
DEPARTMENT CAMERAS.
ONE IS USED FOR HAZMAT RESPONSE
AND ANOTHER IS USED FOR WHEN A
FIRE TRUCK GETS INTO AN
ACCIDENT.
THESE FOLKS VERY HELPFULLY
POINTED OUT, THESE ARE A LITTLE
OLD.
THEY HAD BEEN PREPARED A YEAR
AGO AND HAD ASPIRATIONAL POLICY
LISTED IN THEM THAT WE NEED TO
UPDATE.
DID THE POLICY HAPPEN CAUGHT
DID THEY HAPPEN THE WAY THEY
SAID THEY WOULD WORK SO WE HAD
TO PULL THOSE.
THOSE WERE THE EASY ONES.
THESE WITH AN EXCELLENT UP.
WE HAVE A SIX TOTAL.
TO WORK POLICE AND THEY WERE
POLICE LPR WHICH IS A VERY
DIFFERENT USE.
WE DID OUR BEST AT TRYING TO
BRING YOU EASIER ONCE.
>> SO THESE ARE MIDDLE RANGE.
>> I WOULD CHARACTERIZE THEM AS
MIDDLE RANGE.
AS YOU SAID EARLIER, THERE HAS
IN FACT BEEN ABUSES OF LICENSE
PLATE READER TECHNOLOGIES.
I BROUGHT ALONG THIS, THERE ARE
A LOT OF AUGMENTATION INCLUDING
USE BY THE COMPANY CALLED
VIGILANT THAT COOPERATED WITH
I.C.E.
FOR IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT
PURPOSES.
THIS IS A STORY OF THIS MAN WHO
HAPPENS TO BE OAKLANDS PRIVACY
COMMISSIONER. HE AND HIS BROTHER
GOT PULLED OVER BECAUSE THEY
WERE IN A RENTAL CAR THAT WAS
REPORTED STOLEN.
THE NEXT YOU KNOW HE AND HIS
BROTHER ARE IN HANDCUFFS AT
GUNPOINT.
THIS IS THE AUGMENTATION OF
WHAT CAN HAPPEN IF DATA IS NOT
ADEQUATELY PROTECTED.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE TO WRAP UP
THIS POINT AND TAKE IT AS FAR
AS WE CAN TODAY AND I
APPRECIATE THE OFFER TO WORK
TOGETHER TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT
WHAT THE POLICY LOOKS LIKE.
FOR US I WILL SAY TWO THINGS.
ONE IS, APPROVED THE TECHNOLOGY
, APPROVED THE USE OF THE
TECHNOLOGY AND WE WILL LEAD
WITH THOSE GUIDELINES.
DON'T MAKE IT A SEPARATE
PROCESS WHERE YOU APPROVE FIRST
BECAUSE MY FEAR IS THE COUNSEL
MAY NEVER COME BACK TO APPROVE
THE GUIDELINES.
HAVE GONE 90% OF THE WAY.
THE CITY HAS DONE ALL OF THIS
FANTASTIC WORK.
THE WORKING GROUP HAS DONE ITS
WORK AND MY HOPE IS THAT THAT
FINAL STEP OF CONDENSING DOWN,
AND I TAKE VERY WELL YOUR
POINT, TO CONDENSE DOWN THE
ESSENTIAL POLICIES THAT NEED TO
BECOME LAW.
MAKE IT VERY CLEAR WHAT THOSE
ARE.
THOSE HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW AND
WITHIN THAT THE AGENCIES ARE
THAT CAUGHT THEY HAVE CLEARED
GUIDELINES AS FAR AS HOW TO
OPERATE TECHNOLOGY AND THEY CAN
MAKE THEIR FURTHER RULES
WITHOUT WORRYING, WE ARE
CHANGING SOMETHING THAT'S A
SINGLE SENTENCE, THAT WE SAID
THIS IS A PRACTICE, THIS ALSO
BINDS DOWN TO BECOMES THE FORCE
OF LAW.
THEN THEY CAN'T CHANGE IT.
I DON'T THINK WE WANT THAT.
I THINK WE WANT THOSE WORLDS
DOWN ESSENTIAL POLICIES AND
WORKING GROUP HAS MADE SOME
SUGGESTIONS TO TRY TO GET US TO
THAT POINT.
>> DID YOU WANT TO SAY
SOMETHING?
>> I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE
WAY THE SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE
IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN YOU WOULD
HAVE TO MAKE SOME AMENDMENTS
BECAUSE IT DOES TALK ABOUT
APPROVAL OF THE ENTIRE SIR.
THE SAR HAS SEATTLE HAS POINTED
OUT, HAS LOT OF REQUIREMENTS
WHICH IS WHY IT'S SO LONG.
NOT SAY THAT CAN BE CONDENSED
DOWN.
A TICKET CAN.
IT WOULD JUST REQUIRE AN
AMENDMENT TO THE ORDINANCE TO
SAY THAT THE SAR SUMMARY WOULD
BE APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL
RATHER THAN THE ENTIRE THING.
└> I AM GETTING A LITTLE
CONFUSED, IS NOT THE FIRST TIME
FOR ME IN A WEEK.
GO AHEAD COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA
.
>> I WAS JUST GOING TO OFFER
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, IT WOULD BE
HELPFUL I THINK AFTER THE
WORKGROUP AND DIRECTOR HAVE A
CHANCE TO ABOUT WHAT THAT
SUMMARY DOCUMENT LOOKS LIKE A
TO POTENTIALLY HAVE SUGGESTIONS
FROM GREG OR CENTRAL STAFF
ABOUT WHAT POTENTIALLY WOULD
NEED TO CHANGE.
I THINK LIKE ANY PIECE OF
LEGISLATION WE ALWAYS HAVE TO
GO BACK AND MAKE MINOR CHANGES
AS WE GO FORWARD.
THE DOCUMENT ITSELF IS STILL
CRITICAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.
THE CONSOLIDATION OF IT INTO A
3-BY PAGE DOCUMENT THAT REALLY
POINTS OUT WHAT ARE THE KEY
QUESTIONS OR THE KEY
RECOMMENDATIONS AND HOW IT WILL
BE USED IN THE TEACHER.
I THINK WE CAN WORK ON SOME
LANGUAGE.
I THINK WE HAVE A STARTING
PLACE WITH THE WORKGROUPS
TEMPLATE QUESTIONS THAT THEY
HAVE ASKED AND I THINK IT GIVES
US THE BEGINNING OF IT.
SO I WOULD ENCOURAGE US TO SEE
WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE
ROM THE CONVERSATION AND THEN
INVITE OR SUGGEST EDITS TO THE
ORDINANCE IF NEEDED.
>> AGREED.
LET ME TELL YOU WHAT I AM
HEARING AND AT LEAST MY
STRATEGY.
I HAVE NO APPETITE TO RUSH THE
APPROVAL OF AN SIR.
THAT TECHNOLOGY IS ALREADY OUT
THERE.
IT'S NOT LIKE WE HAVE TO
APPROVE THE USE OF THE
TECHNOLOGY.
WE'RE LOOKING IN THE REARVIEW
MIRROR FOR WHAT WE ARE DOING.
I HAVE A GREAT APPETITE FOR
DAYLIGHTING WHAT THE HECK WE
ARE DOING.
THE SCHEDULE WE HAVE SOME
FLEXIBILITY BUT I WANT TO GET
THIS BODY OF WORK DONE.
I REALLY DON'T WANT 150 PAGE
SIR FOR OTHER TECHNOLOGIES.
I THINK WE CAN NEAR IT DOWN,
THE CORE ISSUES.
THOSE PRINCIPLES THAT
COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA IS
TALKING ABOUT, I WANT TO PUT A
LOT OF ENERGY INTO THOSE.
BUT I ALSO THINK THAT WHEN WE
GO THROUGH EACH SIR AND EACH
TECHNOLOGY IT WILL BE SOMEWHAT
UNIQUE.
WHO HAS ACCESS, BECAUSE
THERE'LL BE CROSS DEPARTMENTAL
ACCESS IN THESE TECHNOLOGIES AS
WELL.
THIS WILL BE A LITTLE TRICKY.
AND LAYER ON TOP OF THAT THAT
WE HAVE PASSED OUR OPEN DATA
INITIATIVE WHERE WE WANT TO
DAYLIGHT EVERYTHING.
ON THESE TWO FUNDAMENTALLY, AND
I DON'T KNOW IF YOU TALK ABOUT
THIS IN THE WORKING GROUP, WE
REALLY HAVEN'T TALKED ABOUT THE
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY WHEN A
PERSON IS IN A VEHICLE OR THE
USE OF AN ORCA CARD.
MY EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY HAS
BEEN DIMINISHED UNFORTUNATELY
BECAUSE I JUST ASSUME THAT WITH
MY PHONE BEING GPS ENABLED, WITH
COSTCO RING CAMERAS EVERYWHERE,
WITH 241 CAMERAS, IF THE PERSON
GOES FROM POINT A CALL OR FROM
THEIR HOME TO A MOSQUE FIVE
DAYS PER WEEK, I FIGURE THAT
ISSUE IS NOT PRIVATE.
I STRUGGLE WITH THIS BECAUSE 20
YEARS AGO I WOULD HAVE SAID
THAT'S A VERY PRIVATE WHERE A
PERSON GOES.
BUT TODAY THE TECHNOLOGY HAS
ERODED THAT.
>> WHEN YOU ARE MOVING ABOUT IN
PUBLIC, YOU DON'T HAVE AN
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY IN PUBLIC
. HOWEVER THERE IS SORT OF AN
OPEN QUESTION ABOUT TRACKING
YOUR LOCATION OVER TIME, OVER
AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME JUST
BECAUSE OF THE PROLIFERATION OF
DATA.
THERE IS A YOU A SUPREME COURT
CASE, I THINK IT WAS THE UNITED
STATES VERSUS JONES WHERE THE
JUSTICES TALK ABOUT THIS
QUESTION.
IN THE PAST, IF A CITY WANTED
TO SERVE ALE SOMEONE, IT TOOK A
LOT OF PEOPLE AND A LOT OF TIME
AND A LOT OF TOOLS TO DO SO.
LIKE CAMERAS AND THINGS.
WHEREAS NOW WE CAN USE DATA A
LOT MORE EASILY.
THERE IS MUCH LESS OF AN
INVESTMENT COMING FROM THE
GOVERNMENT TO DO THAT.
COULDN'T GET SO MUCH MORE
INFORMATION. SO THAT IS
ACTUALLY KIND OF A POLICY
QUESTION TWO LOOK INTO MAYBE AT
THE LOCAL AND STATE LEVELS
ABOUT HOW DOES WASHINGTON WANT
TO VIEW THIS KIND OF
INFORMATION.
AT LEAST ON THE FEDERAL LEVEL,
THE TRACKING OVER TIME IS OPEN.
>> IF I MAY ADD TO THAT AS
WELL, WE ARE FORTUNATE TO LIVE
IN WASHINGTON STATE OUR
ARTICLES UNLIKE THE FOURTH
AMENDMENT, DOES NOT RATCHET
DOWN BASD ON PEOPLE'S
EXPECTATIONS OF PRIVACY.
SO THE FOURTH AMENDMENT, THERE
IS THIS DEBATE ON THE SUPREME
COURT ESPECIALLY IN LIGHT OF
THIS CASE, ABOUT WHAT THE
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY IS IN
PUBLIC.
I DON'T THINK WE WOULD AGREE,
AND I AM SPEAKING WITH MY ACLU
HAT ON, BUT IN PUBLIC, WE
BELIEVE YOU DO RETAIN AN
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.
I THINK THE SUPREME COURT IS
FIGURING OUT THE PARAMETERS OF
THAT AND THEY CERTAINLY HAVE
MADE CLEAR THAT IN TERMS OF
LOCATION PRIVACY IN PARTICULAR
THAT EXPECTATION PERSISTS.
MY FEELING IS BASED ON THE
TRAJECTORY OF THE CASES AND THE
FACT THAT THEY HAVE FOLLOWED ON
PREVIOUS WASHINGTON STATE
CASES, THAT THEY WILL
EVENTUALLY GET TO THE POINT OF
SAYING, LOOK, BECAUSE
TECHNOLOGY ENABLES SURVEILLANCE
IS SO MUCH MORE PERVASIVE, YOU
DON'T HAVE TO FOLLOW ME AROUND
WITH AN OFFICER AND THE VEHICLE
OR EVEN STICK ANYMORE AND
ACTUAL GPS TRACKER ON MY CAR,
YOU CAN USE LICENSE PLATE
READERS TO THE POINT MADE HERE,
TO TRACK THOUSANDS OF VEHICLES.
THAT MAY CHANGE THE GAME.
SO I AM MORE THAN HAPPY.
I THINK THIS IS AN OFFER AS
WELL FROM THE WORKING GROUP TO
SIT DOWN AND SPEAK ABOUT THAT.
BUT COMING BACK TO THE ISSUE AT
HAND IN FRONT OF COUNSEL, ONE
POINT I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE
IS CAUGHT IN THIS INSTANCE AT
LEAST I THINK WHAT THE WORKING
GROUP IS PROPOSING IS VERY MUCH
IN LINE WITH AGENCY PRACTICE.
I HAVE NOT HEARD THAT THE
AGENCY IS WANTING TO USE OR
DISSEMINATE THIS INFORMATION OR
DATA IN WAYS THAT WE WOULD BE
UNCOMFORTABLE WITH.
WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
THAT MAKES IT INTO POLICY AND
THE SUGGESTION WE MOVE FORWARD
WITH IS A CONDENSED COCHLEAR
VERSION THAT THE PUBLIC AND US
CAN GO TO TO FIGURE OUT WHAT
PART OF THIS IS LAW.
IT'S A GOOD WAY TO DO THAT.
I WILL SAY THAT THERE ARE OTHER
SIR'S WE HAVE REVIEWED WHERE WE
DON'T AGREE WITH THE AGENCY
PRACTICE.
WE ACTUALLY THINK THAT THE
AGENCY PRACTICE IN USING A
GIVEN TOOL IS TOO BROAD AND
THAT IS A SUBSTANTIVE DEBATE
FOR THE COUNCIL TO HAVE.
>> WHAT WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF
THAT?
>> POSSIBLY THE OTHER LICENSE
PLATE READERS, OR THE POLICE
VERSIONS --
>> SPECIFICALLY ON THESE TWO
SARS?
>> ON THESE TWO SARS BODILY WE
AGREE WITH AGENCY PRACTICES.
WHEN WE GET TO THE SPD, YOU
WILL SEE WE WOULD LIKE A MUCH
SHORTER DATA RETENTION PERIOD
OF 48 HOURS THAT IS CURRENTLY
IN PRACTICE.
>> BEAR DEBATE.
I READ EVERYTHING I CAN ON
EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY BY THE
WAY.
I DON'T WANT TO SLOW PAY ON
THAT BECAUSE THAT AREA
PARTICULARLY IN PRIVATE
PRACTICE WITH THE SOCIAL MEDIA
NETWORK JUST FASCINATES ME.
I'M NOT AS ALOOF AS I MIGHT
SEEM.
>> THIS IS ENTIRELY POSSIBLE
THAT A CONDENSED VERSION COULD
STILL BE CALLED A SIR AND YOU
WOULD NOT HAVE TO CHANGE THE
ORDINANCE.
THAT SOMETHING I WOULD WANT TO
WORK ON.
>> LET ME ALSO POINT THIS OUT.
ACLU AND WHAT AMERICA HAVE IN
THE LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO THE
COUNCIL THIS WEEKEND, WE MAKE
THE POINT THAT THERE ARE WAYS
POTENTIALLY TO DO THIS WITHOUT
THE AMENDMENT.
CHAIR HARRELL, I WONDER IF WE
CAN GET TO THAT SECOND
TIMELINE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOSQUEDA WILL
MAKE A POINT AND THEN WE WILL
GO TO YOUR SECOND POINT.
>> OKAY, SECOND POINT.
>> THE SECOND POINT IS REALLY
ABOUT THE CADENCE OF DELIVERY
OF THESE DEFERENT SIR IS TO
BOTH THE WORKING GROUP AND TO
THE COUNCIL.
I WANT AT THE ONSET TO
RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS A
TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK DONE
BY THE CITY TO KEEP UP WITH
THIS MASS OF PERMISSION.
IT IS AGAIN EXTREMELY USEFUL
BECAUSE IT IS A DOCUMENTATION
OF THE DISCUSSION AROUND THIS
AND CURRENT PRACTICES.
THE WORKING GROUP ALSO HAS OUR
CHALLENGES BECAUSE WE WERE
BEHIND THE BALL, BEHIND THE
EIGHT BALL.
WE ACTUALLY WERE APPOINTED A
FEW MONTHS LATE.
SO SINCE THE TIME THAT WE HAVE
BEEN ON THE JOB, I THINK WE
HAVE DONE A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT
OF WORK.
BUT THE CHALLENGE OF THE WAY
THE TIMELINE IS CURRENTLY
STRUCTURED IS THAT TWO THINGS.
ONE IS THAT SOME OF THE MOST
CONCERNING TECHNOLOGIES FROM
THE CIVIL LIBERTIES PERSPECTIVE
COME TO US AT THE VERY END.
THAT IS A CONCERN FOR US.
IF PART OF THE ORIGINAL INTENT
OF THE ORDINANCE WAS TO GET
RULES AROUND THE MOST
CONCERNING TECHNOLOGIES SOONER,
THEN THAT SHOULD REALLY BE
REVERSED AND SOME OF THOSE
TECHNOLOGIES SHOULD BE BUMPED
UP.
THE OTHER PIECE IS JUST THE
GROUPINGS.
I SEE FROM THE POWERPOINT THAT
THE GROUPING HAS CHANGED BUT AS
I AM CURRENTLY UNDERSTANDING,
THERE ARE CURRENT TECHNOLOGIES
PROPOSED TO BE DELIVERED TO THE
WORKING GROUP.
THREE DAYS BEFORE THE DEADLINE
SO TO 25. THAT IS A CHALLENGE
FOR US AS WELL.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE
HAVE THE ABILITY AS THE WORKING
GROUP TO GIVE EACH OF THESE
TECHNOLOGIES THE FULL REVIEW IT
DESERVES.
EVEN READING ONE OF THESE SIR'S
TAKES A LOT OF WORK AND A LOT
OF IT FALLS TO MY OFFICE AND WE
HAVE TIRELESSLY POURED THROUGH
THE DETAILS OF THESE.
BUT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE
HAVE THE ABILITY TO
MEANINGFULLY REVIEW
TECHNOLOGIES WHICH IS REALLY
THE REASON FOR OUR REQUEST AND
THIS WAS ALSO REFLECTED IN THE
LETTER WHICH IS, TO SPACE THEM
OUT, TO PRIORITIZE THE
TECHNOLOGIES THAT MATTER THE
MOST FROM A CIVIL LIBERTIES
PERSPECTIVE, AND IF IT'S
POSSIBLE TO DO THEM AT THE
CADENCE WHERE IT GETS US A
SMALLER NUMBER BUT MORE SUBTLY
RATHER THAN WAITING TOWARDS THE
END OF THE PROCESS, THAT WILL
GIVE US A MORE MEANINGFUL
OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW.
WHEN WE GET 12 AT ONCE, WE FEEL
IT WILL BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT
FOR US TO MEET, IMPOSSIBLE TO
FOR US TO MEET THE SIX WEEK TWO
EIGHT WEEK TURNAROUND THAT IS
REQUIRED.
ALL THIS TO SAY, THERE IS ROOM
FOR DISCUSSION.
I HOPE WE WILL HAVE THAT
DISCUSSION.
THE OTHER THING I WILL SAY AS
WELL IS, NOW WITH MY ACLU HAT
ON, BECAUSE THE WORKING GROUP
HAS NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY OF
MEETING ON THOSE TO HAVE A
CONSENSUS, BUT IN TERMS OF THE
PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE PUBLIC
MEETINGS, ONE IDEA WOULD SIMPLY
BE IF YOU HAD A SPECIFIC TIME
AND PLACE PER MONTH WHERE THE
PUBLIC IS AWARE, THIS IS THE
TIME AND PLACE WHERE THE
SURVEILLANCE ORDINANCE
TECHNOLOGY OF THE MONTH,
WHATEVER IT IS, WILL BE
DISCUSSED, THAT MAY GET MORE
PEOPLE THERE BECAUSE MORE
PEOPLE WILL HAVE IT ON THE
CALENDARS.
IT IS MORE PREDICTABLE THAN
HAVING MEETINGS THAT JUMP
AROUND FROM TIME AND PLACE.
ALSO I THINK MORE MANAGEABLE
WHEN YOU ARE DOING ONE AT A
TIME.
WE DON'T WANT TO SUBSTITUTE OUR
EXPERTISE OR THE EXPERTISE OF
THE FOLKS IN THE CITY THAT ARE
DOING THAT.
THAT IS A SUGGESTION FROM US AND
A WAY THAT MIGHT MAKE THESE
MEETINGS MORE ACCESSIBLE TO
PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL.
I WILL STOP THERE.
>> I HEAR YOU.
I DON'T THINK THERE IS EVEN A
REMOTE MODE OF AND HOW WE ARE
GROUPING OR WHICH TECHNOLOGIES
WE HAVE CHOSEN.
I THINK THE COUNCILS ARE SENT
MIXED MESSAGES ON THIS BECAUSE
WE WANT TO GET THE PROCESS
GOING AND PRINCIPLES IN PLACE
AND ONCE PROCESSED WE WANT TO
TACKLE MORE OF THE CONTROVERSY
ONCE.
SO THE COUNCIL COULD TAKE SOME
OWNERSHIP HERE.
BUT I WANT TO GIVE THE
DEPARTMENT TO RESPOND TO THE
TWO CONCERNS.
BOTH THE GROUPINGS AND THE PACE
OR THE TIMING OF THE
TECHNOLOGIES, THE DEFAULT ONES,
FRONTLOADED PERHAPS.
GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO RESPOND.
>> I WILL LET GINGER RESPOND TO
THE HARDER QUESTIONS.
THE FIRST THING YOU TALKED
ABOUT WHICH IS HAVING A MORE
PUBLISHED CALENDARS OF THE
PUBLIC KNOWS WHEN WE WILL TALK
ABOUT THAT, IT WOULD BE GOOD
FOR THE WORKING GROUP AND WE
CAN DO A BETTER JOB IN LINING
UP THE VARIOUS OUTREACH FOR THE
REST OF THE YEAR.
THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN WORK ON
! I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO DO
THAT.
THIS HAS BEEN DIFFICULT ONLY
BECAUSE WE HAVE ONLY HAD STARTS
AND STOPS IN CREATING THESE
DOCUMENTS.
IF WE CAN GET TO AN AGREED TO
GROUPINGS I WOULD LOVE IT SO WE
CAN PUBLISH MEETINGS IN
ADVANCE.
HAVE ALSO BEEN ASKED TO DO SOME
OF THIS WORK SO IT'S NOT ALL
OUR DECISION.
WE WORK WITH THE PROMISE TO
DETERMINE WHAT IS APPROPRIATE
AND NOW WE ARE MOVING ONTO
POLICE TECHNOLOGIES PRETTY
SOON.
IT WILL BE UP TO PLACE TO HELP
FIGURE OUT, ARE THERE OTHER
MEETINGS THAT ARE MORE
APPROPRIATE.
BUT WE CAN FIGURE OUT THE
DETAILS OF ALL THAT.
IN TERMS OF GETTING A MONTHLY
SIR OR CHANGING THE GROUPINGS,
IT TAKES 6-7 MONTHS TO COMPLETE
THESE.
THERE IS NO WAY TO GET AROUND
THAT BETWEEN A MONTH OF PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT, EIGHT WEEKS FOR YOU
GUYS TO REVIEW, CREATING THE
SIR ITSELF, I COULD NOT BRING
YOU SOMETHING IN JUNE IF I
WANTED TO WHICH I DO.
BUT I COULD BRING YOU SOMETHING
IN JUNE OR JULY OR EVEN AUGUST.
WE'RE LOOKING RIGHT NOW AT
COMPLETING GROUP 3. WE ARE
WORKING ON THAT RIGHT THERE.
SOME OF THE TECHNOLOGIES THAT
EXIST IN GROUP 4, THEY ARE
GROUPED TOGETHER BECAUSE THEY
ARE REALLY BASIC.
THOSE ARE THE INVESTIGATIVE
POLICE TECHNOLOGIES THAT WILL
TAKE TIME TO GET ALL THE
INFORMATION REQUIRED.
I HAVE BEEN THERE.
SO WE JUST DON'T HAVE, WE HAVE
BEEN TALKING TO YOU ABOUT
CADENCES AND WE CAN ONLY
DELIVER THESE THINGS IF WE KNOW
WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO DELIVER
THEM.
WE CAN'T CHERRY PICK.
WE HAD GROUPS 1 AND 2 READY FOR
YOU RIGHT NOW.
WE WANTED TO SHIP THEM LAST
WEEK.
BUT WE WANTED TO HAVE THE
CONVERSATION BEFORE WE LAY THEM
ON YOU.
WE JUST DON'T HAVE A LOT OF
FLEXIBILITY THAT WAY.
WE WILL DO WHAT WE CAN BUT IT
IS A LONG ROAD TO GET THESE
COMPLETED.
NOTHING IS COMING IN JUNE.
EVEN IF I HAD 20 PEOPLE HELPING
ME.
>> I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE
PEOPLE OF THE CITY AND
ACCOMMODATING THE WORKING GROUP
AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE
SENDING THOSE THINGS THAT WE
CAN RESPOND TO.
WE REALLY APPRECIATE THAT.
I THINK ONE THING THAT WILL BE
HELPFUL IN TERMS OF POTENTIAL
REPRIORITIZING IS UNDERSTANDING
HOW MUCH OF THE CHALLENGE IS
FROM CREATING THE SIR'S
THEMSELVES VERSUS HOW MUCH OF
IT IS AROUND THE PUBLIC OUTREACH
.
>> I UNDERSTAND.
SO CREATING THE SIR IT CREATES
SEVERAL WEEKS.
THERE IS THAT CREATION PART.
UNTIL THAT IS DONE, WE CAN'T
HOLD PUBLIC COMMENT BECAUSE WE
DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO PUBLISH
TO SAY THIS IS THE DRAFT OF ALL
THE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS
TECHNOLOGY.
SO THAT IS SEQUENTIAL.
WE CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT WHEN
WE CAN DO PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.
WE COULD HAND SOME STUFF OFF TO
YOU IN DRAFT FORM BUT IT
DOESN'T HAVE THE PUBLIC COMMENT
WHICH IS AN IMPORTANT PART.
SO SOME OF THIS IS SEQUENTIAL
AND IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MAY
PEOPLE WE PUT ON IT.
IT WILL TAKE TIME TO DO IT.
>> ANOTHER PRACTICAL ASPECT TO
CHANGING TIMELINES, BECAUSE
GINGER AND HER TEAM ARE SOLELY
DEPENDENT ON THE DEPARTMENT TO
BRING TO US THEIR KNOWLEDGE AND
SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTISE, AND
BECAUSE THE CALENDAR HAS BEEN
PUBLISHED, WE HAVE TO CHECK
WITH THE DEPARTMENT TO
UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR
CAPABILITIES ARE TO MAKE THOSE
AVAILABLE TO US SO WE CAN DO
THE WORK WE NEED TO DO ON OUR
AND.
SO IT'S A BIT OF A QUESTION FOR
THE CLIENTS OF I.T.
THAT WE HAVE TO WORK WITH AS
WELL.
>> I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND.
I THINK THE QUESTION ON HOW
CLOSE THESE SIR'S ARE WOULD
REALLY HELP PARTICULARLY IF
THERE IS A REORDERING POSSIBLE
THAT REALLY BRINGS DOWN THE
NUMBERS SO WE ARE NOT TALKING
ABOUT COMPLETING A GROUP OF 12
SIR'S TO A PARTICULAR DATE BUT
YOU ARE REALLY TALKING ABOUT
FOCUSING ON ONE AT A TIME.
I UNDERSTAND IT IS SUBJECTIVE.
BUT THE SIR'S AS WELL, MY
ASSUMPTION IS IN THE NEARLY 2
YEARS SINCE THE ORDINANCE HAS
PASSED THAT THESE AGENCIES HAVE
KNOWN AND SIR WOULD BE NEEDED
FOR EACH OF THESE TECHNOLOGIES
SINCE THEY WERE ON THE LIST.
SO MY HOPE IS THAT WE ARE NOT
LITERALLY SAYING, FINISH THIS
SIR THEN START WORKING ON THE
NEXT BUT THEY ALL HAVE BEEN IN
PROCESS.
THEY ARE IN PROCESS.
IF WE GO TO ONE PER MONTH, THE
HOPE IS THAT LESSONS THE
PRESSURE TO GET THESE LARGE
GROUPS DONE.
>> UNFORTUNATELY IT IS, WE ARE
FINISHED WITH GROUP 2 SO LET'S
GO TO GROUP 3. WE HAVE A
LIMITED NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT
ARE AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT TO REWRITE AND WRITE
THE SIR'S.
GROUP 3 IS STARTED.
THESE ARE ALL PLACED
TECHNOLOGIES AT THIS POINT.
GROUP 4 IS NOT.
HAVE DONE SOME WORK ON THEM BUT
THEY ARE FURTHER ALONG IN THE
GROUP 3 PART.
MORE PEOPLE REALLY DOES NOT
HELP BECAUSE WE HAVE TO FIND THE
INFORMATION.
>> I WAS HOPING THAT YOU HAD
WORKED OUT AND NEGOTIATED A
SCHEDULE WHEN I LEFT.
>> WELL DONE.
>> SO, I HEAR YOU LOUD AND
CLEAR NOW AND I DON'T THINK
YOUR DEMANDS ARE UNREASONABLE.
I ALSO HEAR THE DEPARTMENTS
UNDER GINGER'S LEADERSHIP
COORDINATING THIS, THE
CHALLENGES YOU HAVE.
THIS IS A LOT OF WORK.
IMPORTANT WORK AND A LOT OF
WORK.
MAYBE THERE IS A MIDDLE GROUND.
WHAT I WILL ASK YOU OFF-LINE IS
TO TELL ME, I THINK WE COULD
CHERRY PICK A LITTLE BIT ON
OCCASION.
SO MAYBE TELL ME SOME OF THE
REALLY CHALLENGING ONES THAT
YOU THINK, TO DIVERT YOUR
ATTENTION TO AS WELL.
>> ONE POINT, I INCLUDED A
LETTER THAT INCLUDES A TIMELINE
THAT HAS IN YELLOW HIGHLIGHTS,
AND I CAN SHOW YOU THIS, IT
LOOKS LIKE THIS BUT THIS IS
BLACK AND WHITE.
THE HIGHLIGHTED TECHNOLOGIES ON
THAT LIST ARE THE ONES THAT WE
THINK SHOULD BE ELEVATED AND WE
HAVE ACTUALLY SUGGESTED AN
ORDER FOR THEM.
WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR THAT THE
WORKING GROUP HAS NOT HAD A
CHANCE TO FORMALLY VOTE ON THAT
BUT CERTAINLY FORMALLY.
>> I WILL RESPECTIVELY HAND IT
BACK TO YOU.
THERE MIGHT BE SOME DIVERSITY
OF OPINION IN THE WORKING GROUP
AND I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED, YOU
ARE WITH THIS AND JOE IS FROM
THERE AS WELL IN THE WORKING
GROUP.
>> HE IS ON BOTH.
>> THEY HAVE KIND OF A PRIVACY
SUBGROUP AND YOU SHARE THAT I
BELIEVE.
>> THANKS FOR FILLING IN.
>> WHAT I WILL SAY IS, I AM NOT
SUGGESTING, I DON'T HAVE A LOT
OF INTEREST IN REARRANGING THE
WHOLE SCHEDULE.
THERE COULD BE SOME NEGOTIATION
WORK.
AGAIN, WE ARE NOT TRYING TO GET
OUT OF THE HARD WORK OF SOME OF
THE DIFFICULT ONES AS WELL.
SO MAYBE YOU CAN GIVE ME A FEW
THAT I CAN NEGOTIATE WITH AND
SEE IF WE CAN RESCHEDULE.
WE WILL JUST TALK MORE PUBLICLY
BUT OFF-LINE ON SOME OF THE
SCHEDULING ISSUES AS WE ENTER
INTO THE BUDGET YEAR I HOPE TO
HEAR FROM YOU ALL ABOUT HOW
THIS MAY IMPACT YOU.
THAT IS WHERE I HAVE TO ADVOCATE
. WE HAVE TWO STRONG ADVOCATES
ON THIS TO BE THE ACTUALLY 4-5
WHO ARE INVESTED IN THIS ISSUE.
IF THERE IS BUDGET
IMPLICATIONS, WE NEED TO KNOW
SO WE CAN MAKE SURE WE MAKE
THAT ADJUSTMENT.
>> THERE IS ONE THING I WILL
PUT ON THE TABLE.
THERE IS A DEADLINE UP MARCH OF
2022 COMPLETE ALL THIS WORK.
I THINK WE ARE ALL RECOGNIZING
THAT IS SOMETHING WE WANT TO
ADDRESS AT SOME POINT, CAN WE
GET THIS ALL DONE BY THEN?
THAT'S FOR US TO DELIVER TO YOU
ALL.
A LOT OF THE CONCERN WE HAVE
ABOUT CHANGING SCHEDULES COMES
DOWN TO, WE JUST DON'T SEE HOW
WE ARE GOING TO GET THIS DONE
IN THAT TIMEFRAME.
SO JUST PUTTING IT OUT THERE.
>> CAN I JUST ADD INFORMATION
TO THAT AS WELL?
THE ORDINANCE ALSO CONTEMPLATES
A POSSIBLE SIX-MONTH EXTENSION
WHICH WE CAN'T ADDRESS.
THAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY
ADDRESS THE PRIORITIZATION BUT
IT DOES HOPEFULLY ALLOW SOME
WIGGLE ROOM FOR TIME TO MAKE
SURE THE AGENCY GIVES YOU WHAT
THEY NEED TO DO AND WE CAN DO
WHAT WE NEED TO DO.
IT'S VERY CLEAR IF YOU GET 12
TECHNOLOGIES ON 20 FEBRUARY AT
LEAST FROM OUR STANDPOINT,
THEORETICALLY WE ARE REQUIRED
TO LOOK AT ALL OF THOSE IN A
TWO-MONTH PERIOD THAT IS NOT
FEASIBLE FOR US.
I THINK WE HAVE SOME
CONVERSATIONS TO HAVE TO FIND
OUT HOW THAT WILL WORK.
>> IF IT MAKES YOU FEEL BETTER,
2 OF THOSE ARE REDUCED.
THE TWO FIRE CAMERAS ARE 2 OF
THOSE WHICH IS MORE JUST
FINALIZING OF POLICY.
SO THERE WILL NOT BE TO 300 PAGE
DOCUMENTS COMING UP.
>> EVEN THAT KIND OF INFORMATION
TO SHARE WITH THE WORKING
GROUP, JUST WHAT OUR THOUGHTS
ARE, OUR PLANS ARE, JUST THAT
THEY ARE CONTINUALLY REASSURED
THAT WE ARE NOT TRYING TO SET
THEM UP TO FAIL.
WE WANT THEM TO DO THEIR JOBS
AND THEY ARE DOING IT VERY
WELL.
I THINK YOU FULLY UNDERSTAND
THE RESOURCE ISSUE AS WELL.
AGAIN, I WANT TO THINK SDOT FOR
BEING OUR FIRST GUINEA PIGS ON
GETTING THROUGH THIS.
NOW ON THESE TWO, AS FAR AS
NEXT STEPS, I HAVE TO THINK OFF-
LINE AND TALK TO MY COLLEAGUES
ABOUT THE APPROVAL PROCESS.
I DID SAY PUBLICLY WE WERE NOT
GOING TO VOTE ON THIS.
SO I WILL WORK WITH CENTRAL
STAFF.
I HAVE HEARD EVERYONE'S
CONCERNS.
I THINK WE ARE REALLY NOT FAR
APART AT ALL.
SO LET ME WORK THROUGH AND COME
UP WITH SOME IDEAS OF HOW WE
CAN GET THERE AGAIN THESE ARE
TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE ALREADY
IN PLACE.
I WANT TO DO IT RIGHT.
>> THANK YOU MR. PRESIDENT AND
MR. CHAIR.
I THINK WHAT YOU HAVE OUTLINED
IS BAR AS THE PROCESS REALLY
HELPED US GET AWAY FROM THIS
TRUST US MENTALITY.
TRUST US, THIS IS SO-AND-SO.
TRUST US THAT THE CHANGES WE
NEED ARE IN THIS 150 PAGE
DOCUMENT.
IT'S MORE THAN WHAT'S IN THE
150 PAGE DOCUMENT.
SO I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE I
THINK THAT SENDS A CLEAR
MESSAGE BOTH INTERNALLY TO OUR
DEPARTMENTS AND AS US
POLICYMAKERS AND THE PUBLIC
THAT WE ARE DOING MORE THAN
JUST SAYING JUST TRUST US.
WITH A SUMMARY DOCUMENT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT CREATING JOINTLY
AND AGAIN I WANT TO UNDERSCORE
APPRECIATION FOR THAT SUMMARY
DOCUMENT WITH THE
RECOMMENDATIONS AND POLICIES
AND PROTOCOLS. I THINK THAT
GIVES US ALSO SOMETHING TO LOOK
AT WHEN WE ARE APPROVING.
I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT
WE ARE NOT GOING TO POTENTIALLY
BE ABLE TO GO THROUGH ASK
NUMBERS OF VOTES ON EACH ONE BUT
EACH POLICY DOCUMENT, IF EACH
SIR HAD A SUMMARY DOCUMENT IN
HAND THAT WAS THAT SHORT
SUMMARY MEMO, WE AS
POLICYMAKERS CAN QUICKLY LOOK
THROUGH THAT AND SO CAN THE
PUBLIC AND ADVOCATES TO FULLY
UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS WE ARE
VOTING ON.
IT WOULD BE VERY CHALLENGING TO
VOTE AYE OR NAY . I THINK IT
WOULD HELP. I THINK WOULD
REALLY HELP TO UNDERSCORE THE
URGENCY IN WHICH WE ARE
UNDERTAKING BIT URGENCY OF THE
ORDINANCE AS YOU ALL COME UP
WITH YOUR PRIORITIES AND
GROUPINGS TO LOOK AT THOSE
ISSUES THAT ARE THE MOST
CONCERNING, THAT DO RAISE THE
MOST QUESTIONS AROUND CIVIL
LIBERTIES, THAT GIVE US THE MOST
HEARTBURN WHEN WE ABOUT
TECHNOLOGIES, THIS CAN HELP US
UNDERSTAND HOW WE ARE ADVANCING
THESE CONVERSATIONS WITH
URGENCY.
SO I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT
FUTURE CONVERSATION AND WITH
THOSE SUMMARY DOCUMENTS IN HAND
AND A REVISED HIM AND I THINK
WE ARE WELL ON TRACK TO MEET
THE INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE.
>> TARGET.
I FULLY AGREE.
THAT'S GREAT.
IN CLOSING I WANT TO SAY THAT,
AND I HAVE A CONFLICT OF TIME
SO I NEED TO BE SOMEWHERE ELSE.
BUT WE DID NOT GET TO THE ISSUE
OF WHETHER WE HAVE ACTUAL
CONTRACTS IN WITH THIRD PARTIES
BUT I AM AWARE OF THE ISSUE.
I'M GLAD YOU CITED.
I ALSO WANT TO VIEW SOME
POSITIVE FEEDBACK FROM THE
WORKGROUPS.
THAT THEY HAVE REALLY DONE
THEIR JOB WELL.
THERE ARE A FEW SARS THAT WE
GOT BACK ON AND THE DEPARTMENT
SAID MAYBE I CAN PUT A FEW MORE
HOURS BEHIND THIS PRODUCT.
I THINK THAT PART IS WORKING.
I DO SORT OF WANT TO END THIS
QUITE CANDIDLY GET TO THE POINT
TO WHERE WE DISAGREE.
SOMETIMES IT'S IT'S HARD TO SEE
WHERE THE DISAGREEMENT POINTS
ARE OR WHETHER IT SHOULD BE 48
HOURS OR 90 DAYS, LET'S PUT THE
ISSUE ON THE TABLE AND MAKE
SOME TOUGH DECISIONS AND WE
WILL FIGURE THAT OUT.
I CERTAINLY LIKE DOING THE WORK
THAT GETS US TO A POINT OF
AGREEMENT.
THAT'S THE CHALLENGE HERE. SO
WE WILL WORK ON A SCHEDULE.
I WILL TALK TO BOTH OF YOU
OFTEN.
THINK YOU BOTH FOR BEING HERE
AND SR, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALL
OF YOUR WORK.
WE'RE GOOD?
EVERYBODY HAD A GREAT REST OF
THE DAY.
THIS MEETING STANDS ADJOURNED.
>> [MEETING ADJOURNED]