>>> THE PUBLIC SAFETY MEETING
WILL COME TO ORDER. IT IS 9:34
A.M.. WILL THE COMMITTEE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH
? COUNCILMEMBER SAKA ? CHAIR
KETTLE? THERE ARE FIVE MEMBERS
PRESENT.
>> WITHOUT OBJECTION, THE
AGENDA WILL BE ADOPTED. HEARING
JIK AND SEEING NO OBJECTIONS,
THE AGENDA IS ADOPTED. BEFORE
GOING INTO PUBLIC COMMENT,
YESTERDAY, AT OUR COUNCIL
BRIEFING WE HAD REMARKS
REGARDING WHAT HAPPENED AT
GARFIELD HIGH SCHOOL LAST WEEK.
I WANTED TO NOTE, FOR THE
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AS
WELL, WE LOST SOMEONE LAST
WEEK. AT THE TIME , I WAS WITH
THE MAYOR WHEN THAT
ANNOUNCEMENT WAS HAPPENING . IT
IS STRIKING . AS WE WERE THERE
FOR THE SIGNING CEREMONY , ALL
OF THE CAMERAS TURNED AND THERE
WAS A POLICE CAR AND A
BATTALION CHIEF, AND HE GOT
INTO HIS VEHICLE. THE SHUTTERS
ROLLED UP , AND HE PUNCHED OUT,
SIRENS GOING. I KNEW WHAT HAD
HAPPENED. AND IT IS STRIKING
THAT THIS IS WHERE WE ARE. IT
IS STRIKING TO ME, IN A WAY.
AND WATCHING THAT PERSON DON
HIS PROTECTIVE GEAR, HIS BODY
ARMOR, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT I
WORE. IT IS ONE THING TO HAVE
THAT HAPPEN IN BAGHDAD OR IRAQ
IN THE COURSE OF THE WAR AND
BEING AN ADULT IN THE MILITARY.
IT IS SOMETHING DIFFERENT WHEN
IT IS NEEDED FOR A HIGH SCHOOL
IN SEATTLE WASHINGTON. THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD
REFLECT ON. THIS IS SOMETHING
WE SHOULD REFLECT ON IN THIS
BODY, THIS CITY HALL, THIS
CHAMBER, AND SPECIFICALLY THIS
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE, WE
NEED TO REDOUBLE OUR EFFORTS
AND WE NEED TO LOOK FOR
SOLUTIONS AND PRESS ON ALL
FRONTS , THIS WAS AFTER I
JOINED COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH WITH BISHOP
WITHERSPOON AND OTHER MEMBERS
OF THE COMMUNITY, THEY TALKED
ABOUT BUILDING THOSE
RELATIONSHIPS , BETWEEN THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE
COMMUNITY. BUT, THIS IS THE
LESSON , WE HAVE TO BE BUILDING
COMMUNITY AND WORKING ON ALL
ANGLES. OUR COMMUNITY , WORKING
WITH A LOT OF THE HUMAN SERVICE
DEPARTMENTS THAT RELATE
PARTICULARLY TO THE USAGE . OR
TO THE POINT MADE BY
COUNCILMEMBER BETA 42,
REGARDING OUR PARKS, THOSE
FREQUENTED BY CHILDREN IN
PARTICULAR. THESE ARE THE
THINGS WE HAVE TO DO WITH THE
COUNCIL, WORKING WITH THE
VARIOUS COMMITTEES, INCLUDING
TRANSPORTATION AND THE TRAFFIC
PEDESTRIAN SAFETY PIECE. SO,
THIS IS A REMINDER TO US , THAT
WE NEED TO TAKE THESE ACTIONS,
YOU KNOW ? TO BE PRESENT , BE
MINDFUL, BE PREPARED, IN TERMS
OF HOW IT RELATES TO WHAT WE
ARE SEEING ON OUR STREETS AND
OUR SCHOOL GROUNDS TODAY. AND I
DO THINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
WE CAN DO AND WE WILL DO. I
JUST WANTED TO NOTE THAT. IT
WAS SPOKEN BRIEFLY ABOUT AT THE
COUNCIL MEETING YESTERDAY BUT
IT IS IMPORTANT TO RAISE THE
TOPIC HERE, IN THE PUBLIC
SAFETY SETTING, PARTICULARLY.
VICE CHAIR , ANYBODY ELSE, IF
YOU HAVE SOMETHING ON THIS
SPECIFIC TOPIC, I JUST WANTED
TO OPEN UP THE COMMITTEE
MEETING. BASED ON WHAT HAPPENED
LAST WEEK. AND AS A FOLLOW-UP
TO THE COUNCIL BRIEFING FROM
YESTERDAY. OKAY? COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, CHAIR.
THANK YOU FOR THOSE COMMENTS. I
AM INCREDIBLY SADDENED BY THE
GUN VIOLENCE AND THE DEATH THAT
WE SAW AT GARFIELD. AND REALLY,
THE GUN VIOLENCE ACROSS THE
CITY. I RECEIVED AN EMAIL FROM
A STUDENT AT INGRAM WHO
SUFFERED THE MURDER OF A
STUDENT . AND THE SUSPECT
RECENTLY PLED GUILTY TO MURDER
LAST YEAR. HE OUTLINED ALL OF
THE FAILURES WITHIN THE SCHOOL
DISTRICT AND THE CITY ITSELF.
AND WHAT THEY HAVE DONE,
RESPONDED TO THAT, THERE WAS NO
TRAINING FOR STUDENTS ABOUT HOW
TO DEAL WITH AN ACTIVE SHOOTER
SITUATION. THEY HAD NO
COUNSELORS ON STAFF. IT WAS
JUST AN INCREDIBLE FAILURE TO
PROVIDE THE SAFETY AND
WRAPAROUND SERVICES THAT WE
NEED. THIS OUR COUNCIL PASSED
$20 MILLION FOR COUNSELING,
NONE OF THAT MONEY HAS RELEASED
OR MADE ITS WAY TO SCHOOLS.
WHILE WE ARE UNFORTUNATELY, AS
A SOCIETY, AWASH IN GUNS.
SOMETIMES IT CAN FEEL
INCREDIBLY HOPELESS AND
DESPAIRING. I DO THINK THAT
THERE ARE ACTIVE STEPS THAT WE,
THE COUNCIL , THE MAYOR , WE
CAN WORK TOGETHER. AS CHAIR
KETTLE SAID, TO BUILD
COMMUNITY, TO ADDRESS A SENSE
OF SAFETY BY HAVING BETTER
SUPPORT IN OUR SCHOOLS. AND
CERTAINLY HAVING BETTER HEALTH
AND EMOTIONAL SUPPORT IN OUR
SCHOOLS . KIDS SHOULD NOT GO TO
SCHOOL EVERYDAY WONDERING
WHETHER THEY, OR A FRIEND OF
THEM , IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO
COME HOME. WE NEED TO DO
BETTER.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> WITH NO OTHER COMMENT, WE
WILL NOW OPEN THE PRIVATE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. COMMENT
SHOULD RELATE TO ITEMS ON THE
AGENDA OR WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF
THE COMMITTEE. HOW MANY PEOPLE
DO WE HAVE SIGNED UP FOR THAT?
>> FOUR IN-PERSON SPEAKERS,
THREE OR FOUR. AND IT LOOKS
LIKE 10 REMOTE SPEAKERS.
>> SO, EACH PERSON WILL HAVE
TWO MINUTES. WE WILL START WITH
IN-PERSON SPEAKERS FIRST AND
THEN TRANSITION TO REMOTE
SPEAKERS. CLERK WILL YOU PLEASE
READ THE PUBLIC COMMENT
INSTRUCTIONS?
>> THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD IS
UP TO 20 MINUTES. SPEAKERS WILL
BE CALLED IN THE ORDER IN WHICH
THEY REGISTERED. SPEAKERS WILL
HEAR A CHIME WHEN 10 SECONDS OR
LESS OF THEIR TIME IS LEFT.
MIKE'S WILL BE -- MICROPHONES
WILL BE MUTED IF SPEAKERS DO
NOT AND WITHIN THE ALLOTTED
TIME. THE FIRST IN-PERSON
SPEAKER IS MARK JACOBSON. NEXT
UP IS JEREMY. ONE SECOND.
>> [ INDISCERNIBLE - LOW VOLUME
]
>> I DON'T KNOW IF YOUR MIC IS
ON.
>> [ INDISCERNIBLE - LOW VOLUME
]
>> TRY AGAIN.
>> THIS IS THE SIXTH TIME IN
THE LAST YEAR THAT THERE HAS
BEEN A SHOOTING INCIDENT . THE
VICTIM LAST WEEK IS DEAD . THIS
COMES AFTER A 14-YEAR-OLD
VICTIM AT INGRAM HIGH SCHOOL.
ALL OF THESE COULD HAVE BEEN
AVERTED BY ALIGNING POLICE
OFFICERS, THIS IS DONE
SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE OF THE 14%
THAT MAKE UP THE POPULATION. IT
HAS RESULTED IN TWO BLACK
STUDENTS ' THAT'S. -- THAT'S
-- DEATHS . ALL OF THE THINGS
WE NEED TO DO, BUILDING
COMMUNITY, MENTAL HEALTH,
FIXING SOCIOECONOMIC EQUALITY.
ALL OF THOSE THINGS NEED TO BE
DONE. WHAT WE NEED TO DO RIGHT
NOW IS HAVE UNIFORMED POLICE
OFFICERS ON SITE. NO. I CANNOT
BELIEVE THAT WOULD NOT HAVE
DETERRED THAT SHOOTER, IN THAT
PARKING LOT , IF THERE WAS A
SEATTLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, OR A
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT CAR
PARKED IN THE DRIVEWAY WHERE
THEY USED TO BE, FOUR YEARS
AGO. NOW, NOT ONE SINGLE
INCIDENT , IT WAS A DIFFERENT
PRINCIPLE , THAT WAS BEFORE
THIS MORATORIUM. THE MEMBERS OF
THE SCHOOL BOARD, IN SEEKING
MORE EQUITABLE TREATMENT FOR
BLACK STUDENTS ARE LAUDABLE. WE
HAVE TO DO THESE THINGS. IT IS
NOT GOING TO LEAD TO LESS GANG
VIOLENCE. [ INDISCERNIBLE -
BACKGROUND NOISE ] YOU ARE
ELECTED , TO PROTECT THE
PUBLIC. AND, YOU KNOW, THE
PUBLIC IS ALL OF THE STUDENTS.
WHAT OTHER PUBLIC SPACE WOULD
YOU ALLOW SIX GUN INCIDENTS IN
ONE YEAR, YET YOU HAVE TO BE
INVITED IN BY THE MANAGEMENT OF
WESTLAKE CENTER OR THE OLYMPIC
SCULPTURE PARK . THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP , IS JEREMY,
FOLLOWED BY MELANIE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR KETTLE, I
APPRECIATE IT. I URGE YOU TO
MOVE BEYOND REFLECTING TO
ACTING. IT IS NOW TIME TO ACT.
I AM HERE TO SUPPORT THE POLICE
IN RESOLVING HOTSPOTS AROUND
THE CITY. WHAT IS HAPPENING
AROUND GARFIELD IS NOT
HAPPENING ANYWHERE ELSE, IT IS
NOT HAPPENING JUST AROUND THE
CORNER, IT IS NOT HAPPENING IN
OTHER PLACES. GARFIELD IS A
HOTSPOT. THE POLICE HAVE SAID
CLEARLY THEY WANT MORE SUPPORT
FOR TECHNOLOGY. I AM GLAD THAT
AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS
ARE ON THE AGENDA. I SUPPORT
AND I HOPE THAT WE CAN HAVE
FIXED LOCATION LICENSE PLATE
READERS. I KNOW THAT THERE ARE
CIVIL LIBERTIES CONCERNS BUT I
HOPE THAT THERE IS A PLAN THAT
CAN BE PUT TOGETHER TO PARTNER
WITH THE COMMUNITY SO THAT THE
POLICE AND HAVE AN IMMEDIATE
RESOURCE AND THEY CAN
UNDERSTAND WHAT CARS WERE
WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH
WERE UNUSUAL, AND THEN COMBINE
TO TRY TO CRACK DOWN ON THOSE
CARDS. POLICE HAVE BEEN VERY
CLEAR ON STAFFING AND
RESOURCING. LET'S GET THE
NUMBER OF OFFICERS THAT WE
NEED. IT WAS HARD BACKTRACKING
-- HEARTBREAKING TO HEAR ABOUT
PEOPLE BEING PULLED FROM THE
911 DISPATCH CENTER. THAT IS
UNBELIEVABLE THAT WE DO NOT
HAVE ENOUGH OFFICERS LEFT. BE
LAST THING THAT I WILL ADD, THE
SCHOOL BOARD IS PROVIDING NO
LEADERSHIP ON THIS MATTER, THEY
ARE FAILING US. AND WE ARE ALL
COUNTING ON YOU TO PUT
SOMETHING IN FRONT OF THEM, YOU
NEED TO WALK THEM DOWN THE
STEPS, YOU ARE THE PUBLIC
SAFETY EXPERT IN SEATTLE. THE
PARENTS WILL SHOW UP. BUT WE
ARE REALLY COUNTING ON IS FOR
YOUR LEADERSHIP [ INDISCERNIBLE
- BACKGROUND NOISE ] THIS IS
TRAGIC. LET US NOT WAIT FOR
ANOTHER INSTANCE OF GUN
VIOLENCE AND ANOTHER MURDER.
>> LAST IN-PERSON SPEAKER IS
MELODY SKINNER.
>> HELLO. I AM A LITTLE
EMOTIONAL, SORRY. IT HAS BEEN
AN EMOTIONAL DAY AND A HALF
AFTER GARFIELD. SEATTLE PUBLIC
SCHOOLS, IN THE CITY OF SEATTLE
HAVE DONE NOTHING TO PREVENT
THE SHOOTINGS AND ALSO THE
DEATH OF AMARR MURPHY-PAINE.
GARFIELD HAS BEEN ON SHELTER IN
PLACE MANY TIMES , THAT
COMBINED ON MARCH 13th WITH
ANOTHER SHOOTING OF A GARFIELD
STUDENT. IT IS TOO MUCH TO
BEAR. MORE THAN 1400 KIDS ARE
REQUIRED TO BE IN THE GARFIELD
BUILDING EVERY DAY. AND WE HAVE
A 911 EMERGENCY SITUATION THAT
REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ACTION. I
HAVE TO SAY, THE APATHY AND THE
INEFFECTIVENESS OF MAYOR
HARRELL AND SEATTLE PUBLIC
SCHOOLS HAS OVERRIDDEN ANY
ATTEMPTS. NOTHING IMPACTFUL HAS
COME FROM THESE. WHAT IS EVEN
MORE MADDENING IS THAT THERE IS
NO SENSE OF URGENCY. I HAVE
TRIED TO WORK WITH PT ESSAY ON
SAFETY ADVOCACY. GUN VIOLENCE
IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT IS A
COMPLEX PROBLEM. BUT WE NEED TO
ADDRESS THE EMERGENCY RIGHT IN
FRONT OF US, KEEPING OUR KIDS
ALIVE WHILE THEY ARE AT THIS
HIGH SCHOOL. THEY WERE NOT ABLE
TO BE ON THE GROUND ON
THURSDAY, WHEN AMARR
MURPHY-PAINE WAS MURDERED, THE
SHOOTING OF A STUDENT THREE
MONTHS AGO, THAT WAS ANOTHER
DAY THAT COMMUNITY PASSAGEWAYS
WAS NOT ON THE GROUND, THEY
WERE AT A FUNERAL. ANYWAY, I
JUST WANT TO SAY, I AM JUST
GOING TO SAY MY LAST PARAGRAPH
HERE, I HAVE MANY SUGGESTIONS
AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT
GARFIELD IS AN AMAZING PLACE
WHERE AMAZING ART , MUSIC, AND
ACADEMICS CONVENE, WITH ONLY
THREE DAYS LEFT WITH MY SENIOR,
SHE IS LEAVING WITH THE
SENSELESS DEATH OF A FRIEND AND
WILL BE LEAVING WITH THE
EFFECTS OF TRAUMA EXPOSURE FOR
THE REST OF HER LIFE. MORE
SPECIFICALLY, THINK ABOUT AMARR
MURPHY-PAINE 'S FAMILY.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THE FIRST REMOTE SPEAKER IS
BJ. PLEASE REMEMBER TO PRESS
STAR SIX, WHEN YOU REMEMBER TO
BE UNMUTED.
>> [ INDISCERNIBLE ] THIS DOES
NOT PREVENT VIOLENCE , OR
INCREASE PUBLIC SAFETY AT ALL .
THERE ARE DOCUMENTED CASES [
INDISCERNIBLE ]. IT IS
CONCERNING AND YOU WILL BE
AMAZED , THE FAMILIES HELD AT
GUNPOINT, THE DATA IS GIVEN TO
A PRIVATE COMPANY, THAT WOULD
ALLOW ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT
AGENCY , TO REQUEST DATA
DIRECTLY FROM A PRIVATE
COMPANY. LAST WEEK, COUNCIL
TIED UP FUNDING MEANT FOR
STUDENTS. MENTAL HEALTH
SUPPORTS [ INDISCERNIBLE -
BACKGROUND NOISE ] THIS WEEK ,
COUNCIL TALK ABOUT $300,000 ON
ACTIONS THAT DO NOT REDUCE
VIOLENCE. IF THE GOAL IS TO
STAY SAFE, WHY SPEND $300,000
ON THIS . REVERSE THE LIBRARY
HOURS [ INDISCERNIBLE -
BACKGROUND NOISE ] AND SO THAT
THERE IS ART , SPORTS, AND ALL
OF THE OTHER YOUTH PROGRAMMING
THAT COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH TALKED ABOUT
INVESTING IN . ALL OF THESE ARE
THINGS THAT CAN INTRODUCE
VIOLENCE. WHY GIVE $300,000 TO
A PRIVATE COMPANY TO MAKE IT
EASIER FOR POLICE DEPARTMENTS
IN IDAHO AND TEXAS TO GET
INFORMATION ON STUDENTS WHEN
THAT MONEY CAN GO TO
INITIATIVES THAT REDUCE
VIOLENCE IN SEATTLE.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE ELIZA.
>> GOOD MORNING, CHAIR KETTLE,
MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE , I AM THE POLICY
COUNCIL CHAIR FOR LEGAL VOICE,
FIGHTING FOR GENDER, JUSTICE,
AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS. I AM
TESTIFYING WITH CONCERN ABOUT
EXPANDING TECHNOLOGY. THE WORLD
TODAY IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN
FROM WHEN SPD WAS USING ASR.
ABORTION FUNDING IS UNDER
ATTACK WITH MULTIPLE BANS ON
CARE AND ACCESS. PATIENTS ARE
BEING TARGETED , AND THIS IS
PARTICULARLY SIGNIFICANT WHEN
WASHINGTON HAS ALREADY SEEN AN
INCREASE IN PEOPLE SEEKING
ABORTION CARE OUT OF STATE,
INCLUDING IN IDAHO, WHICH HAS A
NEAR-TOTAL ABORTION BAN . THERE
ARE EFFORTS THAT HAVE STYMIED A
MUTUALLY ENFORCED SHIELD LAW.
THAT CANNOT AFFECT OFF-SITE
AREAS LIKE ARIZONA. YOU CAN GO
AND COLLECT THAT DATA, AND
CIRCUMVENT SPD ENTIRELY. IF
DATA IS RETAINED FOR A LONG
PERIOD OF TIME, SUCH AS 90
DAYS, THIS GIVES INCREASING
DANGER TO PEOPLE SEEKING
HEALTHCARE . LEGAL VOICE
APPRECIATES THAT THE SEATTLE
CITY COUNCIL AND THE WASHINGTON
LEGISLATURE ARE COMMITTED TO
HELPING GIVE PEOPLE IN SEATTLE
ACCESS TO SAFE HEALTHCARE. WE
WANT TO REDUCE RETENTION TIME
TO NO MORE THAN 48 HOURS. THANK
YOU.
>> THE NEXT REMOTE SPEAKER IS
TAYLOR RILEY.
>> HELLO, COUNCILMEMBERS. MY
NAME IS TAYLOR RILEY. I AM A
DISTRICT 3 MEMBER. I AM OF
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH RESEARCHER
AND I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT
ABORTION SEEKERS WE AREN'T
SEEING IDAHO, TEXAS, AND
LOUISIANA INCREASING . AND SOON
THERE WILL NOT BE AN EXPANSION
OF THESE TASKS. THERE ARE
BOUNTY LAWS THAT ARE SEEKING
OUT PEOPLE WHO SUPPORT OR
PROVIDE ACCESS TO ABORTION
CARE. THIS IS NOT A FUTURE
FEAR. THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT
NOW. IN NEARLY 10 YEARS OF THIS
WORK, WE HAVE NOT SEEN THIS
LEVEL OF CRIMINALIZATION, AND
USING TOOLS JUST LIKE ALPR TO
TRACK AND ARREST PEOPLE. THAT
DATA IS BEING SHARED ACROSS LAW
ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES AND
ANTI-ABORTION STATES CAN USE
THIS DATA TO CRIMINALLY
PROSECUTE THOSE SEEKING
ABORTION HERE IN SEATTLE. THERE
ARE REALLY SIMPLE WAYS TO
ADDRESS THIS, FOR THE COUNCIL
TO STAY TRUE TO ITS CLAIM THAT
SEATTLE IS A SANCTUARY CITY.
THE RETENTION PERIOD SHOULD BE
REDUCED TO THE SAME LEVELS
FOUND ELSEWHERE. LIKE A
PREVIOUS CALLER SAID THIS IS A
LOT OF MONEY GOING TO
EXPANSION, LET'S SPEND THIS
MONEY ON WHAT MAKES OUR
COMMUNITIES AND CHILDREN SAFER,
LIKE PARKS AND LIBRARIES.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE CYNTHIA .
HOPEFULLY I GOT THAT RIGHT.
>> HI. I AM CYNTHIA. MY COMMENT
IS REGARDING AGENDA ITEM NUMBER
TWO , THE LICENSE PLATE READER
, OR ALPR. WE NEED TO KEEP
WASHINGTON WORKING , WITHOUT
TARGETING WOMEN SEEKING
REPRODUCTIVE HEALTHCARE OR
IMMIGRANT WORKERS. IT IS
JUSTIFICATION FOR WHY SPD
SHOULD NOT BE RETAINING IT. THE
PUBLIC RECORDS ACT IS A RED
HERRING. THE GREATEST RISK IS
BY SPD OFFICERS. OFFICERS
INVOLVED IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
IS SEVERE ENOUGH TO CALL IN A
PATHOLOGIST IN 2023. OFFICERS
ARE FOUR -TIMES MORE LIKELY TO
BE ENGAGING IN DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE THAN THE REST OF THE
POPULATION. DO NOT RETAIN THE
DATA OF LICENSE PLATES OF
INNOCENT PEOPLE. AMENDMENT ONE
MAKES IT ILLEGAL , BUT IT WAS
DUE TO A RESEARCHER THAT WE
HAVE ANY STATISTICS AT ALL ON
THE SPD'S CURRENT SYSTEM.
AMENDMENT ONE SHOULD HAVE AN
EXCEPTION ADDED FOR
RESEARCHERS. THE INFRASTRUCTURE
DEMANDS ARE DIRECTLY TIED TO
THE DATA RETENTION. THE SHORTER
THE DATA RETENTION, THE SMALLER
AMOUNT OF DATA TO BE STORED,
AND IN FACT, THE MOST
TECHNICALLY-FEASIBLE APPROACH
IS THE SHORTEST PERIOD OF
RETENTION. LIKE NEW HAMPSHIRE,
THREE MINUTES, THE DECISION TO
STORE OR NOT STORE LICENSE
PLATE INFORMATION IS MADE
ALMOST INSTANTANEOUSLY. ONLY
THE HOTLIST ARE STORED. THIS
WILL SAVE THE DEPARTMENT MONEY,
WHICH IS BETTER SPENT NOT
TRACKING INNOCENT PEOPLE AND IT
REDUCES THE BURDEN ON I.T. AND
IT REDUCES THE YEAR-OVER-YEAR
RECURRING COSTS. IF YOU APPROVE
THIS, YOU ARE MAKING SEATTLE NO
LONGER AN EFFECTIVE SANCTUARY
CITY. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE ALICE
LOCKHART.
>> GOOD MORNING, TOO. I AM
ALICE LOCKHART AND I LIVE IN
VOTING DISTRICT 5. I AM A
MOTHER OF YOUNG ADULTS. KIDS
WHO HAVE COLLEGE FRIENDS , WHO
HAVE GOTTEN JOBS IN OTHER
STATES. MY HUSBAND , HE TEACHES
HIGH SCHOOL BIOLOGY. MANY OF
THE STUDENTS, IN FACT MOST OF
THE STUDENTS, SEEM TO GO OUT OF
STATE TO COLLEGE. THEY HAVE
BEEN COMING HOME , COMING BACK
TO SCHOOL, HERE IS MY SISTER,
SHE WILL BE IN YOUR CLASS. THIS
YOUNG PEOPLE. MANY OF THESE
LOVELY, RESPONSIBLE YOUNG
PEOPLE WOULD, ABSOLUTELY, IF A
FRIEND NEEDED ABORTION CARE
BRING THEM OVER. JUST THE
THOUGHT, BECAUSE OF SEATTLE
DATA RETENTION POLICIES OF
LICENSE PLATE DATA, SUBJECT TO
BOUNTY HUNTER LAWS, BEING
ARRESTED, THIS IS ABHORRENT.
PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS. THANK
YOU VERY MUCH.
>> NEXT UP, WE HAVE MIKE.
>> YES, HELLO, GOOD MORNING,
MIKE HERE. GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBERS. YOU KNOW WHO I
AM. I AM REPRESENTING THE
FOUNDATION THAT I STARTED AFTER
MY FATHER -- I WANT TO GIVE MY
CONDOLENCES TO THE FAMILY OF
AMARR MURPHY-PAINE. THIS IS A
SAD SITUATION. I HAVE HAD MANY
FAMILY MEMBERS SINCE THE 1960s
ATTEND BARRVILLE HIGH SCHOOL.
IT IS SAD. WITH THIS GUN
VIOLENCE, WE NEED TO LOOK AT A
HOLISTIC APPROACH FOR OUR BLACK
YOUTH. I THINK THAT FOOTBALL IS
DETRIMENTAL TO OUR YOUTH. MY
BROTHER PLAYED FOOTBALL, AND HE
ENDED UP IN PRISON. MY DAD KEPT
ME FROM PLAYING LITTLE LEAGUE
FOOTBALL. NOT ALL BLACK KIDS
WHO PLAY LITTLE LEAGUE FOOTBALL
WILL END UP IN PRISON. A LOT OF
YOUNG BLACK YOUTH, MY SON IS
CURRENTLY INCARCERATED. AND A
LOT OF PEOPLE COMING IN PLAY
LITTLE LEAGUE FOOTBALL. WE NEED
TO LOOK AT THE HOLISTIC
APPROACH, AND THE YOUTH , WHEN
THEY TURN 14, 15, THEY ARE NOT
LOOKING FOR A DIME. WE HAVE HAD
A LOT OF TALKS WITHIN OUR
COMMUNITY . I DON'T KNOW
SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE AGENDA.
I AM MORE ON THE FENCE AGAINST
IT , WE ARE SPENDING MONEY FOR
SOMETHING THAT IS NOT NEEDED.
WE NEED TO BRING POLICE
OFFICERS BACK TO GARFIELD . ALL
SCHOOLS WITHIN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE, NOT JUST GARFIELD. BUT
FOR THE COMMUNITY, WE NEED THE
POLICE TO REMEMBER. I KNOW
THERE ARE GOOD COPS, AND BAD
COPS. LET'S BAN LITTLE LEAGUE
FOOTBALL WITHIN WASHINGTON
STATE. I AM GOING TO START THAT
CHARGE. I LOOK FORWARD TO
SPEAKING WITH YOU FURTHER.
>> THE NEXT REMOTE SPEAKER IS
KIM PROSCIUTTO.
>> GOOD MORNING,
COUNCILMEMBERS, MY NAME IS KIM
PROSCIUTTO, I AM THE MEMBER FOR
THE GROUP P 4, A LOCAL GROUP
LOOKING TO STRENGTHEN DEMOCRACY
AND ESPOUSE PROGRESSIVE VALUES.
WE HAVE INVESTED A SIGNIFICANT
AMOUNT OF TIME OVER THE LAST
FOUR YEARS LEARNING ABOUT
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY AND
OVERSIGHT, AND WITHIN THAT
WORK, WE HAVE HAD THE PLEASURE
OF WORKING WITH THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL 'S TEAM ON MANY
OCCASIONS. AS WE INVEST IN
PUBLIC SAFETY, WE APPRECIATE
THE ROLE OF THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL AND HIS LEADERSHIP, IN
STANDING UP THE OVERSIGHT
FUNCTIONS , TURNING IT OVER TO
SYSTEMIC IMPROVEMENT. HAVING
CREATED SYSTEMIC IMPROVEMENTS
RECOMMENDED , THEY ARE MOST
OFTEN ADOPTED AND THE IMPACT IS
MEASURED AND RECORDED. THE
INSPECTOR JUDGE IS READY IN THE
AUTO I.D. . THE STEADY HOME
THAT SHE BRINGS WILL BE KEY TO
SUCCESS. AND SATISFYING THE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COURT,
WE STRONGLY SUPPORT CHAIR
CATTLE 'S RECOMMENDATION THAT
THE TERM FOR THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL BE RENEWED. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP .
>> MY NAME IS -- I AM A
DISTRICT TO RESIDENT MYSELF. I
AM EXPRESSING CONCERN ABOUT THE
AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE
READERS. THE RESIDENTS OF
SEATTLE AND KING COUNTY, WE
DEEPLY UNDERSTAND THE RISKS
THAT THESE POSE ON THE
IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY OF SEATTLE.
IT WOULD STORE DATA WITH
THIRD-PARTY VENDORS. THIS IS
EXTREMELY CONCERNING . IT WOULD
ALLOW LAW ENFORCEMENT AND OTHER
STATES TO GATHER INFORMATION
USING THIRD PARTIES. IT WOULD
SHARE INFORMATION, ASSISTING
WITH THESE , AND WE KNOW FROM
OUR OWN , GET HISTORY, WE MUST
BE VIGILANT AND BEYOND CAREFUL.
PROTECTING IDENTITIES. THIS
ORDINANCE WOULD NOT DO THAT. WE
CONSIDER THIS ORDINANCE AND
MANDATE [ INDISCERNIBLE ] AT
THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT,
WE WANT A MAXIMUM RETENTION
PERIOD OF 48 HOURS FOR ANY DATA
COLLECTED IT IS EXCESSIVE AND
IT POSES SIGNIFICANT RISKS. I
AM IN AGREEMENT WITH EVERYONE
HERE. THESE PROPOSALS PUT OUR
MOST VULNERABLE DIVINITIES AT
GREAT RISK. THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS T
SHANNON. GO AHEAD AND PRESS
STAR SIX.
>> GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
>> GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. I AM
THE DIRECTOR OF THE ACLU OF
WASHINGTON . I WANT TO GIVE MY
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE
PROPOSED ALPR INSPECTIONS. AND
IT WILL NOT PREVENT VIOLENCE
FROM TAKING PLACE. IT WILL
STAND THE HARM A RANGE OF
GROUPS SEEKING REPRODUCTIVE
HEALTHCARE. IT IS A MAJOR
CHANGE FROM THE CURRENT
PRACTICE OF MAINTAINING DATA
ONLY ON THE PREMISE. LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND STATES, WITH
ABORTION BANS WOULD BE ABLE TO
GO DIRECTLY TO BYPASSING THESE
PROTECTIONS PROVIDED BY THE
WASHINGTON WORKING ACT. IT IS
MANDATORY TO SAY THAT ALPR BE
STORED ON SITE. THE LONGER THIS
ALPR DATA IS RETAINED, THE
RISKS ONLY GROW WITH MORE DATA
POINTS THAT CAN PROVIDE A MORE
FULL PICTURE . WE RECOMMEND NEW
HAMPSHIRE , THREE MINUTES, NO
MORE THAN 48 HOURS. WE WANT TO
END VIOLENCE. COLLECTING ALPR
DATA WILL PUT MARGINALIZED
COMMUNITIES AT AN EXTREME RISK.
THANK YOU.
>> OUR NEXT REMOTE SPEAKER IS
MARIAH MARIAH ELLIS -- MORALES.
>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS
MARIAH MORALES, I AM THE
FOUNDER OF WASHINGTON PEOPLE'S
PRIVACY , RELATING TO DIGITAL
RIGHTS. I AM CALLING REGARDING
THE PROPOSAL OF THE MASS
EXPANSION OF ALPR . THIS WOULD
ENABLE VEHICLES TO RETAIN THE
INFORMATION, NOT ALL OF THEM
CONTROL GUARD. ON THE ONE HAND
, PEOPLE IN THE PUBLIC MUST BE
ACCESSIBLE. BUT CORRECTLY
MAINTAINING THAT DATA, WHICH
MUST BE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE,
COULD RESULT IN MASSIVE AMOUNTS
OF HARM. THE NEAR-INSTANT
EXPANSION OF ANY RECORDS , OUR
STRONG RECOMMENDATION IS TO
BLOCK THIS MASS EXPANSION.
POTENTIAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ABUSE
OF THE DATA IS NOT PREVENTED BY
PREVENTING THIS. PERMISSIVE
SHARING AMPLIFIES THE CONCERNS.
ONE OF THE LARGEST CONCERNS
ABOUT THE USE OF THIRD PARTY
SOFTWARE COMPANIES IS
SURVEILLANCE , DUE TO EXTREMELY
BROAD POLICIES , FOR THE SHARE,
TRANSFER, AND USE OF RESEARCH
PURPOSES DO DEVELOP NEW
PRODUCTS, INCLUDING AI AND
PREDICTIVE PROGRAMS AND
AUTOMATED DECISIONS. ALPR IS
JUST ONE PART OF THE DATA
COLLECTED AND USED. IF ANY DATA
IS COLLECTED BY PUBLIC SAFETY ,
IT IS NOT PROTECTED, THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO BE
TALKING ABOUT. THERE IS SO MUCH
MORE TO ADD. BUT I WOULD LIKE
TO POINT OUT, IN THE CURRENT
STATE OF OUR NATION, IT IS NO
COINCIDENCE THAT OUR COMMENTS
ARE COMING FROM WOMEN, TRANS,
NON-BINARY, AND OTHER PEOPLE
WHO COULD BE HARMED. I WANT TO
EXPRESS MY DEEPEST COMPASSION
FOR EVERYONE AFFECTED BY THE
SHOOTINGS OUTSIDE OF GARFIELD.
I WANT TO SEE A PRIORITIZATION
OF COMMUNITY CARE. THESE CALLS
TO FUND SUPPORT PROGRAMS CANNOT
BE IGNORED.
>> WE WILL NOW PROCEED TO OUR
FIRST ITEM OF BUSINESS. AND WE
WILL MOVE AGAIN ON OUR FIRST
ITEM OF BUSINESS. IT WILL BE
CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM ONE INTO
THE RECORD?
>> AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE, THE
REAPPOINTMENT OF INSPECTOR
GENERAL LISA JUDGE.
>> THANK YOU. AS INSPECTOR
GENERAL JUDGE COMES TO THE
TABLE, THIS IS A VERY IMPORTANT
APPOINTMENT. THE INSPECTOR
GENERAL, ALONG WITH THE
ACCOUNTABILITY PARTNERS WITH
US, THEY HAVE TO HELP OUR ROLE
IN ACCOUNTABILITY. AND, TODAY,
THIS IS ALSO IMPORTANT, IN THE
SENSE THAT THE OIG HAS A UNIQUE
ROLE, PARTLY BECAUSE IT IS PART
OF THE TRANSITION AS PER THE
CONSENT DEGREE PROCESS. WE LOOK
FORWARD TO VOTING ON YOUR
APPOINTMENT AT THE NEXT
COMMITTEE MEETING. WE WOULD
LIKE TO NOW HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
TO HEAR FROM YOU , YOUR
PRESENTATION, AND HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE TO ASK QUESTIONS AND
ALSO TO TAKE A VOTE AND HAVE
THE OPPORTUNITY FOR ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS TO BE PRESENTED, THAT
MAY COME TO THE COMMITTEE. OVER
TO YOU.
>> MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE,
GOOD MORNING, CHAIR . I WANT TO
OFFER APPRECIATION FOR THE
REMARKS THAT YOU OPENED THE
MEETING WITH AND FOR THE
SPEAKERS PRESENT REMOTELY WHO
SPOKE ABOUT THE VIOLENCE AT
GARFIELD HIGH SCHOOL AND IN
HIGH SCHOOLS AT SEATTLE. IT IS
A TRAGEDY AND I OFFER MY
CONDOLENCES TO FRIENDS AND
FAMILY, AND ALL OF THE STUDENTS
WHO HAVE BEEN HARMED BY GUN
VIOLENCE, I WANTED TO GIVE A
LITTLE BIT OF AN INTRODUCTION
AND THANK YOU FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU
TO DISCUSS MY REAPPOINTMENT. I
HAVE SUBMITTED A PRETTY
DETAILED REPORT ABOUT THE
MILESTONES, ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND
EVERYTHING THAT HAS BEEN
ACCOMPLISHED OVER THE PAST
COUPLE OF YEARS. RECENTLY,
THERE WAS A REPORT CONDUCTED BY
DR. ROSENTHAL. SORRY, I AM
HAVING TROUBLE WITH MY MOUTH
TODAY. DR. RICHARD ROSENTHAL,
ASSESSING THE STATUS OF THE
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM TO
ASSESSED YOUR CONSIDERATION FOR
MY REAPPOINTMENT. I BELIEVE I
HAVE BILLED A HIGH-PERFORMING
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL AND
I HAVE MAINTAINED A HIGH LEVEL
OF LEGITIMACY WITH OUR
STAKEHOLDERS. I WANT TO TAKE A
QUICK MINUTE TO TALK ABOUT WHY
I AM CHOOSING TO SEEK
REAPPOINTMENT. THIS IS NOT EASY
WORK AT IT HAS NOT BEEN AN EASY
ROAD OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS,
BUT IF THIS KIND OF WORK IS
DONE WITH PURPOSE AND WITH
COLLABORATION, IT IS HIGHLY
REWARDING TO ME PERSONALLY AND
I BELIEVE IT CAN BE VERY
IMPACTFUL FOR OUR COMMUNITY,
AND OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT,
POLICE OFFICERS ARE OFTEN THE
FACE OF GOVERNMENT, AND FOR
SOME IT MAY BE THE PRIMARY
INTERFACE WE HAVE. THERE IS NO
MORE IMPORTANT WORK THAN TO
MAKE SURE THAT THOSE
INTERACTIONS WITH OUR COMMUNITY
MEMBERS, WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY
PROVIDED IS PROFESSIONAL,
PROFESSIONAL, LEGITIMATE, AND
AS MINDFUL OF CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS. AS AN EXAMPLE --
WELCOME. OH. OKAY, THAT IS
NICE. I WAS WITH YOU, TALKING
ABOUT USE OF FORCE. OKAY.
HELLO, EVERYBODY.
>> FOR THOSE WHO MAY BE
WATCHING ON SEATTLE CHANNEL, WE
HAVE A KINDERGARTEN CLASS
COMING IN THAT I SUSPECT
COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA WILL BE
JOINING IN, FOR THESE YOUNG
KINDERGARTEN CLASSMATES ,
WELCOME TO THE CHAPERONES AND
PARENTS ALIKE. THANK YOU FOR
JOINING US. I AM SURE THAT YOU
ARE OKAY WITH A SLIGHT
INTERRUPTION.
>> IT IS PERFECT. I LOVE IT. [
LAUGHTER ] SO , YOU KNOW, I WAS
BEFORE YOU RECENTLY DISCUSSING
SPD'S USE OF FORCE. IT HAS
REDUCED DRAMATICALLY. PART OF
THE REASON , THEY HAVE LOOKED
AT TRAINING, TO LOOK AT THE WAY
THAT SPD APPROACHES PEOPLE IN
CRISIS. I THINK IT IS LAUDABLE.
AND I THINK IT IS AN EXAMPLE OF
HOW OUR CREATIVE WORK HAS
BENEFITED OUR COMMUNITY. I WANT
TO UNDERSCORE MY DESIRE TO
CONTINUE THE IMPORTANT WORK
CONTINUED BY OIG , THAT WOULD
BENEFIT CONTINUITY. NOT TO
MENTION THE WORK THAT IS
IMPORTANT AS SEATTLE TRANSFERS
OUT OF THE CONSENT PROCESS.
BUILDING OIG REQUIRED REACHING
A POINT OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT
THE MANDATES ARE AND WHAT KIND
OF EXPERTS WERE NECESSARY TO DO
THAT WORK IN A MEANINGFUL WAY.
IN THIS LAST YEAR, OIG HAS
ACHIEVED WHAT FEELS LIKE AN
UNDERSTANDING OF THE FULL SLATE
OF WORK THAT IS NECESSARY TO
PROVIDE OVERSIGHT OF OSP AND
OEA. WE ARE READY TO ACCEPT THE
CONSENT DECREE COMPLIANCE
FUNCTIONS. THOSE ARE THE
REMARKS I WANTED TO MAKE TO
START US OFF AND I AM AVAILABLE
FOR MORE QUESTIONS.
>> AS USUAL, I TURN HERE TO SEE
IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, INSPECTOR GENERAL
JUDGE. I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS, YOUR LEADERSHIP ,
OVER THIS LAST PERIOD AND I
COULD NOT AGREE MORE ABOUT THE
IMPERATIVE TO SORT OF HAVE
CONTINUITY WITHIN SUCH AN
IMPORTANT ROLE NOW MORE THAN
EVER BUT WE WILL GO THROUGH OUR
DELIBERATIVE PROCESS. BUT I DO
APPRECIATE AND ACKNOWLEDGE, AT
LEAST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THE
STRONG LEADERSHIP SO FAR. SHOUT
OUT TO ALL OF THE
KINDERGARTNERS WHO JUST JOINED
US. HELLO, EVERYONE, HI, GUYS.
I HAVE THREE KIDS. I HAVE A
FOURTH-GRADER, PITT GREATER,
AND SOON TO BE KINDERGARTNER.
MAYBE THEY WILL BE IN CHAMBERS,
LOOKING CUTE IN THE BACKGROUND
AS WELL BUT I DIGRESS. I WANT
TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT FOR JUST
A MOMENT AND ASK YOU THREE
QUESTIONS THAT REALLY SHAPE AND
INFORM THE WAY THAT I APPROACH
THINGS AND REALLY, I THINK IT
REFLECTS A GROWTH MINDSET THAT
WE SHOULD BE ASKING OF
OURSELVES CONSTANTLY,
ESPECIALLY DURING PERIODIC
POINTS WHERE WE CAN KIND OF
LOGICALLY PAUSE, REFLECT AND
FIGURE OUT HOW WE ARE GOING TO
GET BETTER. THREE QUESTIONS
THAT I WILL ASK YOU TODAY I
WANT TO HEAR YOUR INITIAL
THOUGHTS AND THEN DURING THE
NEXT COMMITTEE MEETING I WOULD
LOVE TO HEAR IF YOU HAVE ANY
MORE REFINED THINKING, BUT THIS
IS KIND OF HIGH LEVEL IN BOTH
SCENARIOS. THE FIRST QUESTION
IS, DURING YOUR TENURE, WHAT DO
YOU THINK WORKS PARTICULARLY
WELL ? THAT IS QUESTION NUMBER
ONE. THE SECOND QUESTION IS
WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE
DIFFERENTLY? ANOTHER WAY OF
STATING THAT IS, WHAT SPECIFIC
OPPORTUNITIES FOR GROWTH, FOR
THIS AGENCY, OR FOR YOU , WOULD
YOU LIKE TO HELP BUILD UPON,
GOING FORWARD, THIRD, FINALLY,
IF REAPPOINTED , WHAT WOULD
YOU, WHAT SPECIFIC STEPS WOULD
YOU TAKE, WHAT THINGS WOULD YOU
LIKE TO ACCOMPLISH, LET'S JUST
SAY AND THE NEXT YEAR OR TWO,
WHAT WORKED WELL, OPPORTUNITIES
FOR GROWTH , AND, IF CONFIRMED,
KIND OF AS A HIGH LEVEL PLAN,
WHAT WILL YOU DO IN THE NEXT
YEAR OR TWO?
>> INITIALLY, OFF THE TOP OF MY
HEAD, WHAT WORKED WELL WAS
BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS BASED ON
TRUST AND RESPECT AND HAVING A
COLLABORATIVE APPROACH TO THE
WORK. I DO NOT THINK WE WOULD
HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL AT ALL,
BUT NOT NEARLY AS SUCCESSFUL AS
WE WOULD'VE BEEN IF WE HAD NOT
BILLED STRONGER RELATIONSHIPS
WITH THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT, WITH THE OFFICE OF
POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY, WITH
CBC, TRYING TO WORK WITH THIS ,
TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR WORK IS
INFUSED BY THAT PARTNERSHIP.
YOU KNOW? HAVING A STRUCTURE, A
THREE-PART STRUCTURE WAS A
REALLY WELL-THOUGHT-OUT PLAN
THAT ENABLED US TO HAVE
BUILT-IN THOUGHT PARTNERS, TO
HAVE BUILT-IN AREAS OF TENSION
AND CONFLICT , TO BE ABLE TO
WORK THROUGH, CRITICAL ISSUES ,
WITH DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES
IMPACTING PUBLIC SAFETY. I
THINK, BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS
EARLY ON AND MAINTAINING THOSE.
MAINTAINING A FOCUS ON
NEUTRALITY AND OBJECTIVITY, AND
RELIANCE ON DATA. I BELIEVE
THAT HELPED THOSE
RELATIONSHIPS. THE OTHER THING
THAT OCCURS TO ME, THE WORK
THAT WE DID, THAT DIRECTLY
INVOLVED COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND
EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS I THINK
MADE OUR WORK A LOT MORE
RESPONSIVE, MORE LEGITIMATE,
MORE ROBUST. SPECIFICALLY, THE
SENTINEL EVENT REVIEW WAS A
TWO-YEAR -LONG PROCESS, WITH
COMMITTEE MEMBERS AND PEERS
DETERMINING THE PROCESS AND
COMMUNITY MEMBERS WORKING
ALONGSIDE SPD TO PROBLEM SOLVE,
ISSUES THAT HAPPENED FROM A
SYSTEMIC ISSUE, DURING THE
SUMMER OF 2020. WE CAME AWAY
WITH A TRUE SENSE OF WHAT WAS
IMPORTANT TO COMMUNITY, WHAT
THINGS REALLY WENT WRONG IN THE
EYES OF COMMUNITY. IT MADE IT
MORE RESPONSIVE TO THOSE
CONCERNS, THE END PRODUCT, THE
RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MADE.
SO , YOU KNOW, THAT INFORMS MY
APPROACH MOVING FORWARD, IF I
AM CONFIRMED, I STRONGLY
BELIEVE IN HAVING EXTERNAL
STAKEHOLDERS AND COMMUNITY
MEMBERS AND WE HAVE RUN A
NUMBER OF WORK GROUPS AROUND
USE OF DECEPTION, TRAFFIC
SAFETY , AND IT IS ALWAYS SO
HELPFUL TO GET DIFFERENT
PERSPECTIVES AND WEAVE THOSE
INTO OUR WORK, WITH SPD, THOSE
ARE THE TWO TAKEAWAYS , FROM MY
FIRST TERM. IN MY OFFICE, OUR
MANTRA IS , FEEDBACK IS A GIFT.
I TAKE YOUR POINT VERY WELL, IT
IS IMPORTANT TO BE OPEN AND
RESPECTIVE -- RECEPTIVE TO
FEEDBACK, IMPROVE, ALWAYS BE
OPEN TO OTHER PERSPECTIVES AND
APPROACHES. EVERYBODY IS NOW
LEAVING. BYE, EVERYONE. HAVE A
GOOD DAY! SORRY, THEIR CUTENESS
IS DISTRACTING.
>> LET'S MAKE THIS OFFICIAL. I
THANK YOU FOR JOINING US, THE
KINDERGARTNERS , I AM SUPPOSED
TO BE QUIET, YOU ARE RIGHT
THERE BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE
THAT. MY DAUGHTER IS FINISHING
UP THIRD GRADE. IT SEEMS LIKE
YESTERDAY, SHE WAS JUST IN THE
SAME PLACE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR JOINING US AND HAVE A GOOD
DAY. AND WHATEVER IS UP NEXT ON
THE PROGRAM. MR. CHAIR, IF I
MAY, I WANT TO SEE AT LEAST ONE
OF YOU, IN ONE OF THESE SEATS ,
MONDAY, KEEP LISTENING, LISTEN
TO YOUR TEACHERS, YOUR PARENTS,
YOUR MENTORS , YOUR ELDERS. YOU
ARE GOING TO BE HERE TOO.
SORRY.
>> REMIND ME.
>> YOU DIRECTLY ADDRESSED SORT
OF WHAT WORKED WELL AND YOU
STARTED TO ADDRESS THE SECOND
QUESTION, OPPORTUNITIES FOR
GROWTH, KIND OF WHAT IS DONE
DIFFERENTLY, THINGS THAT YOU
CAN DO, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU CAN
BUILD UPON, AND, THE THIRD AND
FINAL THING, KIND OF THE
HIGH-LEVEL CONCRETE ACTIONS
THAT YOU WILL BE TAKING, THIS
COULD BE UP TO TWO YEARS, TO
ACHIEVE SOME OF THOSE THINGS.
>> YEAH, OKAY, LESSONS THAT I
HAVE LEARNED, I THINK THEY
REVOLVE AROUND A COUPLE OF
GENERAL ISSUES. ONE IS HIRING
STAFFING AND THE OTHER IS JUST
ABOUT BUILDING THE INTERNAL
PROCESS , SO THAT YOU HAVE YOUR
INTERNAL ASSESSMENT, AND WHAT
FEELS NECESSARY FOR ME , IN OUR
FUNCTION OF OVERSIGHT, MAKING
SURE THAT THE REVIEW THAT WE DO
OF OP INVESTIGATIONS AND
CLASSIFICATION DECISIONS IS
ROBUST. I THINK, AREAS WHERE WE
HAVE STRUGGLED IN THE EARLY
YEARS WAS AROUND THAT. AND THAT
WAS KIND OF A MISCALCULATION ON
MY PART, FROM THE OUTSET, WHEN
OIG STARTED, WE HAD EIGHT
POSITIONS ALIGNABLE. AND
OVERSIGHT HAD BEEN DONE BY ONE
PERSON FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS,
PRIOR TO OIG COMING INTO
EXISTENCE, SO, I HAD NO IDEA
WHAT KIND OF INTENSIVE
RESOURCES WERE NECESSARY TO
REALLY HAVE ROBUST OVERSIGHT
AND OPIATE INVESTIGATION AND
CLASSIFICATION MARKET HAS BEEN
A LEARNING EXPERIENCE, WE HAVE
A SUPERVISOR +3 WORKS. -- PLUS
THREE WORKERS. THAT ALLOWS US
TO DO GOOD QUALITY CONTROL AND
HAVE A PROCESS FOR INTERNAL
QUALITY INSURANCE TO SAY --
REALLY DO THE WORK WE SAY WE
ARE DOING. WE HAVE WORK TO DO
BUT WE ARE WORKING ON MAKING IT
MORE TRANSPARENT IN OUR
WEBSITE, JUST LEARNING ABOUT
HOW TO MAKE OUR WORK
UNDERSTANDABLE, TRANSPARENT,
HOW TO MAKE SURE WE ARE DOING
WHAT WE TELL COMMUNITY AND
LEADERSHIP WE ARE DOING , THOSE
ARE SOME OF MY BIG TAKEAWAYS.
AND --
>> AND THEN KIND OF, HIGH
LEVEL.
>> OBVIOUSLY, THE NUMBER ONE
ISSUE IS MAKING SURE THERE IS A
SEAMLESS TRANSITION BETWEEN
BEING UNDER FEDERAL OVERSIGHT
AND HAVING A CONTINUALLY ROBUST
SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, OF QUALITY
CONTROL, WITH RESOURCES IN
SEATTLE. SO, WE HAVE ALREADY
UNDERTAKEN THAT WERE, WE FILED
OUR FIRST REPORT WITH THE
COURT. WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
DOING A MULTIPART EXAMINATION
OF THE SPD RESPONSE TO CRISIS
INCLUDING A QUALITATIVE REVIEW
TO DEMONSTRATE FOR THE COURT
THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO GO
IN AND READ REPORTS, WATCH BODY
WORN , MAKE SURE THAT THE
INTERNAL PROCESSES THAT SPD HAS
FOR REPORTING ARE ACCURATE, AND
LOOKING TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL
OF THAT IS OPERATING AS
INTENDED AND AS REPORTED BY
SPD. IN ADDITION TO THE NUMBERS
AND THE QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR
COMMENTS AND PUBLIC SELF
REFLECTION THERE. AND, THAT IS
VERY HELPFUL. I WILL JUST SAY
THIS, I COULD NOT AGREE MORE
THAT FEEDBACK IS AN ABSOLUTE
GIFT, THE GOOD, THE BAD, AND
THE UGLY. THAT DOES NOT MEAN
THAT YOU HAVE TO 100% ADOPT OR
INCORPORATE, BUT IT IS
IMPORTANT TO HEAR. AND WE ARE
ALL EXPELLED ACCOUNTABLE FOR
OUR ACTIONS AND INACTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. VICE CHAIR. I
CAN ADD ONE OTHER THING, WE
HAVE VARIOUS EXTERNAL
MECHANISMS FOR MAKING SURE THAT
WE ARE PERFORMING AS INTENDED.
WE HAD SOME ISSUES , A NUMBER
OF YEARS AGO, WITH OUR OP F
FUNCTION . I BROUGHT IN
EXTERNAL ENTITIES TO CONDUCT A
THOROUGH REVIEW OF OUR OPA
FUNCTIONING AND GIVE US
FEEDBACK AND CREATE A REPORT
ABOUT HOW IT WAS GOING, AND HOW
WE COULD FIX THINGS THAT HAD
GONE AWRY WITH THAT. AND SO, I
INVITE EXTERNAL SCRUTINY. WE
JUST HAD AN ANALYSIS DONE BY
DR. RICHARD ROSENTHAL. WE
OPERATE AN AUDIT SHOP, SUBJECT
TO PEER REVIEW, WE ARE A MEMBER
OF AN ORGANIZATION THAT
INCLUDES THE UNITED STATES AND
CANADA, WE WENT THROUGHOUT
FIRST PEER REVIEW AFTER YEAR
THREE, AND PASSED OUR FIRST
PEER REVIEW, THAT IS ACTUALLY
NOT COMMON. WE SUBMIT WORK FOR
EXTERNAL REVIEW WITH THE
ASSOCIATION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT
AUDITORS. SO, WE HAVE A NUMBER
OF EXTERNAL MECHANISMS THAT
CONTINUE TO CHECK US.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, VICE CHAIR .
COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
COMING HERE TODAY, THIS IS THE
FIRST REAPPOINTMENT OF A MEMBER
OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM. I
HAVE A QUESTION, FIRST. CAN YOU
PLEASE, CHAIR, REMIND ME. THERE
WERE QUESTIONS DISTRIBUTED IN
THE MIDDLE OF THE ANSWERS, I
DON'T KNOW IF I SHOULD ASK
QUESTIONS THAT ARE ALREADY ON
THE SHEET OR HOLD THEM UNTIL
NEXT TIME.
>> I DO HAVE QUESTIONS, MYSELF.
I HAVE QUESTIONS THAT
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE COULD
PROBABLY ASK. OR, WE CAN SEND
THEM TO THE INSPECTOR GENERAL
JUDGE. I WOULD SAY , GO AHEAD,
THIS IS MORE FOR THE PUBLIC.
AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, WHO
ARE NOT ON THE COMMITTEE, THEY
COULD GIVE THIS OPPORTUNITY
BETWEEN NOW AND OUR NEXT
MEETING, YOU COULD GO EITHER
WAY. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK
QUESTIONS, GO AHEAD.
>> WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT A
SEAMLESS TRANSITION , ONCE THE
MONITOR IS NO LONGER USED, WHAT
DOES THAT LOOK LIKE FOR YOUR
OFFICE, IN TERMS OF STAFFING
AND HOW DOES THAT CHANGE YOUR
BODY OF WORK? WE HAVE SPENT A
LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT YOUR
RESPONSIBILITIES, MONITORING
THE ONGOING USAGE OF TECHNOLOGY
THAT HAD BEEN CLEARED BY
SURVEILLANCE IMPACT REPORTS. I
DO KNOW THAT YOU ARE REALLY
BUSY. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE
FACT THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN ON A
LARGER POLICY-MAKING ROLE. YOU
WILL HAVE THIS OTHER BODYWORK,
WHAT IS THAT LOOK LIKE, GOING
FORWARD?
>> YOU CAN REALLY TAKE A LOOK
AT THE OPERATIONS NOW, GOING
FORWARD, WE WERE GIVING --
GIVEN STAFFING TO BE
RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE,
PROVIDING ONGOING FEEDBACK, AND
THAT WOULD BE AROUND FORCE
INVESTIGATION, FORCE REVIEW.
THEY HAVE BEEN ON BOARD,
STATISTICAL ANALYSTS . AND
ANOTHER POLICY ANALYST , PART
OF THAT, LARGELY INVOLVED IN
PRODUCING THE REPORT THAT WAS
FILED WITH THE COURT, THEY ARE
WORKING ON THE CRISIS REPORT
RIGHT NOW, THEY ARE ALSO
ENGAGING IN A NUMBER OF
ACTIVITIES, TO DEFINE THE SLATE
OF COMPLIANCE WORK, MOVING
FORWARD. AND THAT IS NOT GOING
-- THE AUDIT FUNCTION AT OIG
DOES PERFORM. THOSE ARE RISK
BASED. YOU HAVE A RISK REGISTER
WITH TOPICS AND THINGS THAT
COME UP WITH STAKEHOLDERS AND
OPERATIONS, STATEMENTS AND
THINGS THAT COULD BECOME
PROBLEMATIC. WE RUN THEM
THROUGH A MATRIX, TO DEFINE
WHICH ARE THE MOST LIKELY TO
OCCUR, AND WHICH MIGHT HAVE THE
MOST NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE
COMMUNITY, SO, THAT IS HOW WE
PRIORITIZE THE PERFORMANCE
AUDITS , AND THE ASSESSMENTS,
THE ASSESSMENTS THAT WE WILL
DO, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM
RIGHT NOW, THAT IS THE
MONITORING TEAM, MORE OF JUST
QUALITY CONTROL, QUALITY CHECKS
OF THE VARIOUS SYSTEMS AT STD.
AND HONESTLY, FOR THE LAST
10-PLUS YEARS , THE SEATTLE
POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN
UNDER FEDERAL CONSENT DECREE.
ALMOST ALL OF IT HAS BEEN
FOCUSED ON USE OF FORCE, THE
SUPERVISION OF PATROL, CRISIS
RESPONSE OUT ON THE STREETS.
THERE HAS BEEN VERY LITTLE
ATTENTION PAID TO OTHER ASPECTS
OF SPD. WE WILL BE LOOKING TO
FOLD INTO OUR ONGOING
COMPLIANCE WORK, WORKS AROUND
THAT, HOW DO WE LOOK AT THE
OTHER SYSTEMS TO MAKE SURE THEY
ARE FUNCTIONING EFFECTIVELY AND
APPROPRIATELY. YOU ASKED ABOUT
THE COLLISION REVIEW BOARD,
THAT IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE AREAS
THAT HAVE GONE UNINTENDED BUT
WILL NECESSARILY BE PART OF THE
OVERALL SYSTEMIC WORK THAT OIG
DOES , TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF
SPD SYSTEMS AND OPERATIONS ARE
FUNCTIONING EFFECTIVELY,
APPROPRIATELY, AND IN A WAY
THAT OUR COMMUNITY SEES FIT. I
HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR
QUESTION.
>> IT SOUNDS LIKE WHAT YOU ARE
SAYING IS, YOU WILL BE
CONTINUING A LOT OF THE SAME
FUNCTIONS THAT YOU HAVE ALREADY
BEEN PROVIDING, BUT YOU WILL
INCLUDE INVESTIGATIONS, WHERE
YOU HAVE BEEN FOCUSING ON
CONTROL, BUT THE BASIC WORK OF
YOUR OFFICE WILL NOT BE
CHANGING THAT MUCH. AM I
GETTING IT RIGHT?
>> IT WILL EXPAND , IN TERMS OF
THE SCOPE OF THINGS THAT WE
LOOK AT, WITHIN THE SPHERE OF
OPERATIONS, IT WILL NOT BE
SIMPLY FOCUSED ON THE USE OF
FORCE BY PATROL. I THINK THAT
THE MAYOR'S OFFICE HAS ALREADY
BEEN DOING WORK AROUND ADULT
SEXUAL ASSAULT, GOING IN AND
LOOKING AT THAT UNIT, TO FIGURE
OUT HOW THEY ARE DOING THEIR
WORK, WHETHER IT IS BEING
PERFORMED EFFECTIVELY, WHETHER
RESOURCES ARE BEING USED
EFFECTIVELY, WE WILL EXPAND
INTO THOSE KINDS OF OTHER
OPERATIONS WITHIN SPD, AFTER
THE CONSENT DECREE.
>> ALSO, WHAT I WANT TO SAY,
THE MISSION OF THE CPC IS TO
MAKE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS ON
ALL ASPECTS OF POLICING, BASED
ON COMMUNITY INPUT, WHEN YOU
SAY THAT YOU ARE WORKING
TOGETHER WITH THE OTHER
BRANCHES OF THE ACCOUNTABILITY
SYSTEM, I HOPE THAT INCLUDES
CPC, BECAUSE THEY ALSO HAVE A
VERY LARGE POLICY -RECOMMENDING
ROLE. ONE MORE QUESTION, AND I
APOLOGIZE FOR BRINGING THIS UP.
LAST JULY, OPA RECEIVED
COMPLAINTS REGARDING A
POLITICAL FLAG IN A MARKED
PRECINCT. AND THEN, OPA
REFERRED THE INVESTIGATION TO
OIG BECAUSE OF A CONFLICT AND I
AM NOW WONDERING WHAT IS THE
STATUS OF THAT INVESTIGATION,
BECAUSE THERE IS A TIMELINE.
>> THERE IS A TIMELINE, WHEN
THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS. IT
HAPPENED A NUMBER OF YEARS AGO,
SO WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
INTERVIEWING. IT IS UNDER
INVESTIGATION, WE ARE
INTERVIEWING PEOPLE WHO MAY
HAVE HAD ACCESS TO THAT AREA,
WHO COULD PROVIDE INFORMATION,
TRYING TO IDENTIFY IF THERE ARE
INDIVIDUALS WHO MAY HAVE SOME
ACCOUNTABILITY. AND WE , WE
HAVE BEEN CONDUCTING
INVESTIGATIONS, I'M SORRY,
INTERVIEWS FOR SEVERAL MONTHS I
THINK , WE ARE WORKING THROUGH
IT, INITIALLY WE HAD DECIDED
THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HIRE
AN EXTERNAL INVESTIGATOR JUST
TO GET SOME DISTANCE BETWEEN
THE CITY AND , ANY POTENTIAL
OFFICER INVOLVEMENT AND IT
SEEMED LIKE IT COULD BE A
FAIRLY LARGE INVESTIGATION,
THERE ARE CPA RESTRICTIONS --
>> CPA ?
>> CBA, COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
RESTRICTIONS, PROHIBITING ANY
PERSONNEL, I WOULD IMAGINE
CITY, I YOU FOLKS, FROM MEMBERS
WHO ARE COVERED BY COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENTS, AND IT
IS UNDER INVECTIVE -- ACTIVE
INVESTIGATION.
>> IT DOES NOT HAVE TO COMPLY
WITH THE SAME TIMELINE THE
>> IT CERTAINLY DOES, ONCE
INDIVIDUALS WHO IDENTIFIED
POLICY, WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE
TO HAND ENOUGH INFORMATION DOWN
TO GET TO THAT POINT, IT WILL
ABSOLUTELY BE GOVERNED BY THE
180 DAY CBA REQUIREMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> I WANTED TO ASK , THE
MONITOR NOTED , IN THE
ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT, 2023.
VARIOUS, YOU KNOW, IMPROVEMENTS
THAT COULD BE MADE TO THE
ACCOUNTABILITY TRIAD, WHAT
SPECIFIC RATE CAN YOU SPEAK TO
, IN TERMS OF OIG, AND MAYBE
YOUR ROLE , IN WORKING WITH IT
AS WELL?
>> YEAH, I THINK THAT WAS WITH
A LOT OF WELL-FUNDED
OBLIGATIONS. IT HAD SOME
RECOMMENDATIONS TO TAKE
FORWARD, SOME OF THOSE
SPECIFICALLY POINTED AT OIG .
WE HAVE ALREADY PUSHED OUT OUR
ANNUAL REPORT, THAT WAS ONE OF
THE MAIN CRITICISMS, THAT WE
WERE JUST TAKING TOO LONG. SO I
DO TAKE DR. ROSENTHAL'S
FEEDBACK. SO, YOU KNOW , I
AGREE, OPEN COMMUNICATION,
HONEST, RESPECTFUL
RELATIONSHIPS WITH OUR PARTNERS
IS INTEGRAL TO THE
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM. I HAVE
AN OPEN LINE OF MEDICATION WITH
OPA LEADERSHIP AND I AM CONSULT
THAT MEGA CONSULTING. I HAVE A
VERY OPEN DIALOGUE WITH COCHAIR
MERKEL. AND I DO AGREE, IT IS
VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE
MUTUALLY HONEST CONVERSATIONS,
THAT WE CAN BE CANDID WITH ONE
ANOTHER, BUT THAT WE CAN ALSO
WORK THROUGH CONFLICT IN A WAY,
YOU KNOW, THAT IS TRUSTWORTHY
AND RESPECTFUL. SO, I DO WANT
TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE WAYS
IN WHICH WE HAVE OFFERED
SUPPORT TO THE CPC IN PROBABLY
THE LAST NINE OR 10 MONTHS, WE
HAVE BEEN VERY ACTIVELY
INVOLVED AS HELPERS IN THEIR
HIRING PROCESSES. LASTLY, MY
ASSISTANT, MS. RICHARDSON,
SPENT , YOU KNOW, A GOOD PART
OF HER DAY ASSISTING DIRECTOR
ELLIS WITH HIGHLIGHTING THE
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT. MY
DIRECTOR HAS SPOKE ABOUT
ASSISTING THEM IN INTERVIEWS ,
WITH A POLICY DIRECTOR SEARCH .
MY POLICY SUPERVISOR RECENTLY
ASSISTED WITH ANOTHER SURGE. MY
DEPUTY IS GOING TO BE ASSISTING
IN THE SEARCH FOR THE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR. SO I THINK WE ARE
GOOD DIRECTORS WHEN THEY NEED
HELP IN TERMS OF TRYING TO STOP
FOLKS. I STOP THOSE WITH A
SUPERVISOR REALLY THAT HE MET .
ONE OF MY OFFICE FOLKS ARE
MEMBERS OF THAT AND THAT HAS
BEEN ONGOING FOR QUITE SOME
TIME, AND I HAVE A SUPERVISOR
STAFF NEARBY, I RECENTLY DID A
PRESENTATION ON THE OIG 2024
WORK PLAN, THAT WAS A VERY
HELPFUL CONVERSATION, BECAUSE
IT BECAME APPARENT TO US, WHEN
WE SOLICIT FEEDBACK FROM OTHER
PARTNERS, TO DEVELOP THE WORK
PLAN, CDC REALLY DOES NOT HAVE
ANY IDEAS OF WHAT THE
PRIORITIES ARE, WE ARE MISSING
THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE
PRE-CONVERSATION, WE CAN SAY
SOME OF THESE ARE THINGS COMING
UP FOR US AND THAT WE WANT TO
FOCUS ON, AND THEN CDC CAN MAKE
BETTER DECISIONS AND HAVE MORE
INFORMED CONVERSATIONS ABOUT
WHAT INPUT THEY WANT TO PUT
FORWARD FOR THE COMING WORK
PLAN, WE HAVE A PRETTY MEETING
PLANNED BEFORE SOLICITING
FEEDBACK. LET'S SEE, WHAT
ELSE? WHAT ELSE DID WE DO? MY
DD HAS -- BECAUSE SHE WAS
PREVIOUSLY THE DIRECTOR OF THE
CDC, SHE HAS A LOT OF KNOWLEDGE
AND EXPERTISE ABOUT THAT
ORGANIZATION . SHE HAS BEEN
HAVING REGULAR MEETINGS WITH
DIRECTOR ELLIS TO PROVIDE
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE. I THINK
THEY ARE ON THE CALENDAR ,
WEEKLY. BUT THINGS COME UP, AND
WE HAVE BEEN PROVIDING SUPPORT,
WE HAVE A MANDATED MEETING, AND
SO THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE
WORK WE ARE DOING, AND HOW WE
CAN COLLABORATE WITH EACH
OTHER. THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I
WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT RIGHT NOW,
WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE STRIDES,
MUTUAL OBLIGATIONS AND WE ALL
HAVE TO WORK TOWARD HAVING
THOSE CLEAR AND OPEN
RELATIONSHIPS WITH EACH OTHER.
>> MOVING FORWARD, AS I ALLUDED
TO , OIG HAS A SPECIAL ROLE AS
IT RELATES TO THAT TRANSITION
PROCESS. THAT IS AN AREA OF
INTEREST FOR ME, TO ENSURE THAT
IS FACILITATED AS SMOOTHLY AS
POSSIBLE, TO THE BEST OF OUR
ABILITY. SO, THANK YOU ON THAT.
AGAIN, WE WILL, IF THERE ARE
ANY QUESTIONS, OR INPUT THAT WE
RECEIVE, WE WILL GET THAT TO
YOU, YOU KNOW, AND ANY
RESPONSE, TO MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE. ALSO TO THE PUBLIC
RECORD. WE DID RECEIVE A
LETTER, AS REQUIRED FROM THE
ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE, FROM
DIRECTOR GINO BETTS , WHO HAS
BEEN ON THE JOB FOR NEARLY TWO
YEARS, SO, THAT IS JUST THE
RIGHT LEVEL OF OBSERVATION. HE
NOTED, INSPECTOR GENERAL JUDGE
HAS BEEN AN COMMITTED AND
INNOVATIVE PARTNER. ADJOURNING
HIGH QUALITY OPA
DECISION-MAKING. SO, THIS
LETTER FROM DIRECTOR GINO BETTS
WILL BE ALSO INCLUDED INTO THE
RECORD. SO, THANK YOU VERY
MUCH. AT THE NEXT COMMITTEE
MEETING, WE WILL BE TAKING THE
NEXT STEP. ALL RIGHT, THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> PRESIDENT, COMMITTED
MEMBERS, I APPRECIATE IT.
>> WE WILL NOW MOVE ON. WILL
THE CLERK PLEASE READ ITEM
NUMBER TWO INTO THE RECORD?
>> CONSTABLE 120778 , AN
ORDINANCE RELATING TO
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY
IMPLEMENTATION, AUTHORIZING
APPROVAL OF USES AND ACCEPTING
THE 2023 UPDATED SURVEILLANCE
IMPACT REPORT AND THE 2023
EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW FOR THE
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT 'S
USE OF AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE
READER TECHNOLOGY. BRIEFING,
DISCUSSION , AND POSSIBLE VOTE
.
>> WELCOME FROM CENTRAL STAFF,
MR. TAMASO JOHNSON. WE HAVE MR.
BRIAN MAXEY AND MS. KERRY
KEEFE, FROM SPD.
>> CAN I READ THE NEXT PIECE?
>> I HAVE A QUESTION.
>> COUNCILMEMBER CATHY MOORE ?
>> THANK YOU, I JUST HAVE A
QUESTION. I WILL BE MAKING A
MOTION . I GUESS, I WANT TO
CLARIFY WHETHER HE WILL BE
SEEKING A VOTE TODAY. IF YOU
ARE SEEKING A VOTE TODAY, I
WILL BE MAKING A MOTION TO
TABLE. I AM SEEKING GUIDANCE.
GUIDANCE OF YOUR PREFERENCE ,
FOR THE PROCEDURE FOR DOING
THAT, WHETHER YOU WANT ME TO
WAIT UNTIL WE HAVE HAD THE
BRIEFING.
>> WE CAN CHECK IN WITH THE
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE. MY
INTENTION WAS TO RECOMMEND
PASSAGE OF COUNCIL BILL 120778,
THAT WAS MY FULL INTENTION,
AFTER THE PRESENTATION OF MR.
JOHNSON, FROM CENTRAL STAFF,
AND MR. BRIAN MAXEY AND MS.
KERRY KEEFE.
>> OUR ADVICE FROM THE DEPUTY
CLERKS, A MOTION TO POSTPONE IS
A SUBSIDIARY ACTION AND MUST
CONCUR AFTER MOVING. AND MOVING
TO PASSAGE.
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT
CLARIFICATION.
>> GOOD MORNING, FOR THE
RECORD, MY NAME IS TAMASO
JOHNSON, COUNCIL CENTRAL STAFF.
I'M HERE TO PROVIDE BREATHING,
BACKGROUND, AND AN OVERVIEW OF
COUNCIL BILL 120778. WE ARE
HEARING 120778, REGARDING
AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE READERS
FOR THE SECOND TIME, HEARD IN
COMMITTEE FOR THE FIRST TIME
MAY 14th, 2024. THIS COUNCIL
BILL WOULD APPROVE THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT'S FLEETWIDE
EXPANSION OF AUTOMATED LICENSE
PLATE READERS , OR ALPR, ALSO
REFERRED TO IN SOME PLACES AS
AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE
RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY. THIS
WOULD APPROVE THE EXPANSION OF
THIS TECHNOLOGY FROM THE
LIMITED DEPLOYMENT APPROVED
RETROACTIVELY BY THE COUNCIL TO
THE NEW FLEETWIDE DEPLOYMENT,
IN BRIEF, UNDER THE FLEET -WIDE
DEPLOYMENT, THE AUTOMATED
READERS WOULD BE EQUIPPED TO
EVERY SPD PATROL VEHICLE AND
SOME OTHER VEHICLES, THIS WOULD
BE IMPLEMENTED THROUGH THE
USAGE OF VEHICLE RECOGNITION
SOFTWARE. THIS WOULD ENABLE
THEM TO RECOGNIZE LICENSE
PLATES, PASSING IN THE VIEW OF
THE DASH CAM'S. RECORDING THE
PLATE NUMBER AS WELL AS THE
TIME, THE DATE, ABOUT THE
INFORMATION WHERE THAT LICENSE
PLATE WAS READ. THERE HAVE BEEN
SEVERAL , WITH REGARDS TO
AUTOMATED LICENSE PLATE
READERS. AND YOU HAVE HEARD
MOST OF THOSE REFERENCED IN
PUBLIC COMMENT, DURING THE
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD TODAY.
AND IN BRIEF, THE TWO PRIMARY
POLICY ISSUES RELATE TO THE
RETENTION PERIOD OF THE DATA,
GENERATED BY AUTOMATIC LICENSE
PLATE READERS, THE CURRENT
PROPOSAL SETS THAT PERIOD AT 90
DAYS , FOR DATA THAT IS NOT
BEING USED IN AN ACTIVE
INVESTIGATION. THE TWO OTHER
POLICIES, THE SECOND POLICY
ISSUE RELATES TO ACCESS, TO
THAT DATA, GENERATED BY LICENSE
PLATE READERS, THROUGH TWO
PRIMARY VECTORS OR AVENUES.
NUMBER ONE, THE PUBLIC RECORDS
ACT, THE WASHINGTON STATE DATA
GENERATED BY LICENSE PLATE
READERS, CONSIDERED TO BE
PUBLIC RECORD. IT MAY BE
REQUESTED BY MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC. THE SECOND POLICY
ISSUE, AS YOU HEARD REFERENCED
IN PUBLIC COMMENT, RELATES TO
ATTEMPT BY OUTSIDE ENTITIES TO
COMPEL DATA DISCLOSURE , BY THE
THIRD PARTY VENDORS. AND THERE
IS ONE AMENDMENT, CURRENTLY ON
THE AGENDA. AMENDMENT ONE , IT
WOULD ESSENTIALLY MEMORIALIZE ,
IN THIS ORDINANCE, CURRENT SPD
PRACTICE, RELATING TO
RESPONDING TO PUBLIC RECORDS BY
REQUIRING THAT SPD NOT PUBLICLY
DISCLOSE THE LPR DATA THAT
LINKS A SPECIFIC PLATE TO A
SPECIFIC TIME, DATE, AND
LOCATION. IT WOULD REQUIRE SPD
TO REQUIRE THAT PROCESS ,
UNLESS REQUIRED BY A CHANGE IN
APPLICABLE LAW. IN THE EVENT
THAT THERE WAS A COURT ORDER OR
A CHANGE IN APPLICABLE LAW, IT
WOULD REQUIRE SPD TO PROMPTLY
NOTIFY CITY COUNCIL AT THAT
POINT. THANK YOU, AND I AM
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
>> ANY QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS FOR
MR. JOHNSON ? OKAY,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ?
>> CAN WE GET INTO THE
PROCEDURAL? THERE ARE , THERE
ARE FOLKS FROM SPD AND THE
MAYOR'S OFFICE, ARE YOU GOING
TO BE ABLE TO BE PROVIDING --
IS YOUR ROLE AT THE TABLE TO
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DURING THIS PRESENTATION? OR
MUST WE HOLD OUR QUESTIONS
UNTIL AFTER THIS MEETING?
>> STAFF.
>> I HAVE NO QUESTIONS FOR
CENTRAL STAFF.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE?
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK
YOU. THANK YOU, TAMASO JOHNSON,
FOR YOUR MEMORANDUM. ON PAGE
TWO, YOU TALKED ABOUT HOW SPD
IS CURRENTLY USING THIS
TECHNOLOGY IN ONE OF THEIR
DEPLOYMENTS, NINE CARS, AS YOU
MENTIONED, RETROACTIVELY BY THE
COUNCIL IN 2021, THEN YOU
REFERENCED THE CONTRADICT BILL
. AND THEN YOU ALSO TALKED
ABOUT, ON PAGE THREE, YOU
TALKED ABOUT THE PROCESS TO
PREVIOUSLY -AUTHORIZED
TECHNOLOGY , IT DOES NOT
REQUIRE A NEW ANALYSIS WITH
CIVIL LIBERTIES BY THE
COMMUNITY SURVEILLANCE WORKING
GROUP, RECALLING THOSE
STATEMENTS IN THERE.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> OKAY, I WANTED TO TALK A
LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE
BACKGROUND. SO, I HAVE A COPY
OF THE ORDINANCE. THE 2021
CONTRADICT BILL THAT DID
AUTHORIZE THE LIMITED
DEPLOYMENT OF THE ALPR. AND, I
DO KNOW, IN SECTION 3, AND
THEN, FOR THOSE UNFAMILIAR,
I'M SORRY, I DO NOT HAVE THE
COPY. BUT IT DOES SAY THAT
COVETED REQUESTS THE POLICE
DEPARTMENT TO REPORT NO LATER
THAN THE END OF THE THIRD
QUARTER OF 2021, THE
FEASIBILITY OF RETAINING
NON-CASE RECORDS FOR NO MORE
THAN 48 HOURS. THAT WAS PASSED
BY COUNCIL, AND AUTHORIZING THE
LIMITED RETROACTIVE DEPLOYMENT
OF ALPR. DO YOU RECALL THAT AND
ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THAT ?
>> YEAH. I AM FAMILIAR WITH
THAT. WITH THAT AMENDMENT BY
COVETED. IT PREDATES MY TIME
HERE, BUT I AM VERY WELL
FAMILIAR WITH THE HISTORY. YES.
>> OKAY, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING
THAT THE REQUEST WAS MADE, AT
THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ,
THESE COMMUNITY SURVEILLANCE
WORKING GROUPS. AND THAT THEY
HAD PRODUCED A NUMBER OF
SPECIFIC COMMENTS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS. AND, AGAIN,
TALKING ABOUT, AT THAT POINT,
THERE WAS A 90-DAY RETENTION
PERIOD. AND RECOMMENDING 48
HOURS , DURING WHICH TIME, IT
MUST USE THE DATA FOR A
SPECIFIC PERSON, AND RETAIN NO
INFORMATION. AND SO, IS IT YOUR
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE
CONTRADICT BILL RECOMMENDATION
WAS BASED ON THE WORKGROUP
RECOMMENDATION?
>> I BELIEVE THAT ISSUE, THAT
RETENTION PERIOD , THAT WAS
BROUGHT ABOUT , POTENTIALLY BY
OTHER COMMENTERS, DURING THE
ORIGINAL RETROACTIVE
AUTHORIZATION. AND I BELIEVE,
THAT PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
STARTED INITIALLY IN 2018. AND
THE ORDINANCE WAS APPROVED
FINALLY IN 2021, THE 48 HOUR
RECOMMENDATION DOES ORIGINATE
FROM THE WORKING GROUP THAT WAS
POTENTIALLY RAISED BY OTHER
PUBLIC COMMENTERS DURING THAT
PROCESS.
>> HOW HAS SPD COMPLIED WITH
THE ORDINANCE PASSED IN 2021,
IN TERMS OF PROVIDING A REPORT
ON THE FEASIBILITY OF RETAINING
RECORDS FOR NO MORE , FOR
NON-CASE SPECIFICS, FOR NO MORE
THAN 48 HOURS? IT
>> I BELIEVE THE FEASIBILITY OF
THE 48-HOUR RETENTION. IT WAS
ADDRESSED BY SPD AND WAS
COMMUNICATED BACK TO THE
CONTRADICT THAT IT WOULD NOT BE
WORKABLE, OPERATIONALLY, BUT I
WOULD DEFER TO SPD ON THAT AS
WELL.
>> YES, COUNCILMEMBER, WE DID
RESPOND . I AM WORKING ON
GETTING A COPY OF THE RESPONSE
FOR THE RECORD.
>> IT WOULD HAVE BEEN HELPFUL
TO HAVE THAT RESPONSE NOW AS
PART OF THIS CONVERSATION,
BECAUSE, TO ME , ALL OF THE
INFORMATION I AM RECEIVING, 48
HOURS IS FEASIBLE FOR ANYTHING
THAT IS OUTSIDE OF WHAT HAS
CURRENTLY BEEN AUTHORIZED. FOR
ME, THAT IS THE BROADER ISSUE .
THAT WOULD BE FOR NONSPECIFIC
INFORMATION.
>> THE LATEST LETTER TO COVETED
THAT I SENT OUT, WITHIN THE
LAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, WE DID
ADDRESS THE TIMELINES
SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE
FEASIBILITY OF THE 48 HOURS. WE
HAVE UPDATED ALL OF
>> OKAY. I DO NOT RECALL THAT
EVER BEING ADDRESSED IN THE
MEMO, ABOUT NON-CASE SPECIFIC.
SO, ANYTHING NOT RELATED TO A
HIT ON THE HOTLIST OR ACTIVE
INVESTIGATION OR WARNING OR AN
AMBER ALERT. I DID NOT RECALL
YOU ADDRESSING WHY YOU NEED TO
RETAIN ANY INFORMATION, OUTSIDE
OF THOSE CATEGORIES, BEYOND 48
HOURS.
>> UNDERSTOOD, COUNCILMEMBER.
IT DID NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS
THAT, THE UNIVERSAL NEED TO
MAINTAIN THE DATA, FOR
INVESTIGATIVE PURPOSES. WE DO
NOT ALWAYS KNOW WHAT PLATE WE
ARE GOING TO BE LOOKING FOR, IN
THE EVENT OF AN INVESTIGATION
THAT COMMENCES AFTER THE DATA
HAS BEEN COLLECTED.
>> THAT IS A NONACTIVE
INVESTIGATION? THAT IS DATA
THAT DOES NOT COME THROUGH, ON
A MATCH WITH THE HOTLIST FOR
THE STOLEN VEHICLE, SILVER
ALERT, MISSING PERSON, ACTIVE
INVESTIGATION, SEARCH WARRANT,
ALL OF THE THINGS THAT ARE
LISTED IN THE CURRENT SIR?
>> CORRECT.
>> I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS
FOR MR. JOHNSON.
>> ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS?
VICE CHAIR? WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE ON TO MR. BRIAN MAXEY AND
MS. KERRY KEEFE, FOR YOUR
REMARKS.
>> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THE
ABILITY TO ANSWER ANY
OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS THAT THE
COMMITTEE MAY CURRENTLY HAVE,
THIS HAS BEEN AN ONGOING
DIALOGUE FOR QUITE SOME TIME,
AND SOME OF THE VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT PRIVACY ISSUES HAVE
BEEN RAISED I APPRECIATED THE
OPPORTUNITY TO DELVE INTO THOSE
ISSUES, MOST OF THEM WERE
FLAGGED BY SPD, VERY COGNIZANT
OF PRIVACY INTERESTS AROUND OUR
REFUGEES AND IMMIGRANT
COMMUNITIES. AND PEOPLE
EXERCISING THEIR REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS WITHIN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE. I PERSONALLY
PRESENTED, AT THE MUNICIPAL
ATTORNEY 'S OFFICE ON THIS
VERY TOPIC , FLAGGING CONCERNS.
AND I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE
ADDRESSED ALL OF THE POTENTIAL
AVENUES THAT SOMEONE, WHO MIGHT
BE SEEKING THIS INFORMATION FOR
NEFARIOUS PURPOSES WOULD DO. WE
HAVE EXPLORED THE RISKS . WE
ARE NOW SEEKING AN AMENDMENT TO
STATE LAW THROUGHOUT THE OFFICE
OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND
GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS. I HAVE
EXAMINED THE SUBPOENA AND
WARNING ISSUES, ALONG WITH A
THIRD PARTY ISSUE. MOST
IMPORTANT, WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING
VERY HARD AT HOW THIS WOULD BE
ACCESSED INTERNALLY. ONE OF THE
PUBLIC COMMENTERS WAS
ADDRESSING THE POTENTIAL FOR
ABUSE, EVEN WITHIN OUR OWN
EMPLOYEES. AND WE ARE TAKING
VERY COMPREHENSIVE STEPS TO
LOCKDOWN THE INFORMATION. I AM
SURE VERY FEW OF OUR PERSONNEL
HAVE ACCESS OR CAN GET TO IT,
REQUIRING SIGNIFICANT
DOCUMENTATION, INCLUDING THE
REASONABLE SUSPICION OF
PROBABLE CAUSE , WITH THE
DOCUMENTATION AND VALUE THAT
CAME OUT OF IT, SO THAT WE ARE
ABLE TO TRACK THAT, ALL OF
THESE USES ARE GOING TO BE
AUDITED BY THE OFFICE OF THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL. AT LEAST,
THE JUDGE HAS GIVEN US, TO
DATE, I THINK TWO REVIEWS,
LOOKING AT USAGE AND ENSURING
THAT WE COMPLY WITH THE SIR'S
AND THE RESPECT OF OUR
COMMUNITY CONCERNS . AND I
THINK I AM GOING TO HAVE TO
LEAVE IT THERE AS FAR AS
INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS, I KNOW
THAT YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AND
THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE, I WANT
TO IMPRESS THAT YOU BE INTEND
TO USE THIS RESPONSIBLY AND WE
REALLY BELIEVE THIS WILL
INCREASE OUR CAPACITY NOT JUST
TO SOLVE CRIMES, BUT TO GET TO
THE PERPETRATORS EFFICIENTLY,
AND WITH PRECISION, SO THAT WE
HAVE MUCH FEWER IMPACTS , AS WE
FUMBLE AROUND, TRYING TO
IDENTIFY THE RIGHT PERSON, THIS
WILL GIVE US THE ABILITY TO GET
STRAIGHT TO THE HEART OF THE
MATTER.
>> THANK YOU, MR. BRIAN MAXEY.
NORMALLY GO TO MY VICE CHAIR ,
BUT IN THIS CASE WITH TWO HANDS
RAISED, I WILL GO WITH
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, FOLLOWED
BY COUNCILMEMBER RIVERA, WHO I
SHOULD NOTE HAS JOINED US AND
IS WELCOME TO ASK ANY
QUESTIONS. SO, COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE?
>> I AM HAPPY TO GO AFTER
RIVERA, SINCE I HAVE ALREADY
SPOKEN. SORRY, I AM TRYING TO
ACCESS ALL OF THIS. SO, I JUST
AM YOU KNOW, FOR THE RECORD, I
DO WANT TO STATE, VERY CLEARLY,
THAT I DO SUPPORT THE AUTOMATIC
LICENSE PLATE READER USAGE , AS
A TOOL. AND CLEARLY , I BELIEVE
THEY ARE IMPORTANT, AND I
SUPPORT THE FULL EXPANSION OF
THIS, CITYWIDE. I HAD TALKED
ABOUT THE PRIVACY EXPERTS, THE
ADVOCATES WHO HAVE REALLY BEEN
PUSHING FOR RETAINING ON-SITE
RETENTION AND STORAGE.
DISCUSSIONS WITH YOU, IT BECAME
VERY CLEAR THAT OPERATIONALLY,
THAT IS NOT FEASIBLE. SO I HAVE
MOVED AWAY FROM THAT AS A
POSITION I AM SUPPORTIVE OF
USING A THIRD-PARTY VENDOR. BUT
AGAIN, THE ISSUE REMAINS THE 48
HOURS AND THE ACCESS, BY AN
OUT-OF-STATE ACTOR THROUGH THE
THIRD-PARTY VENDOR. AND IT
SEEMS TO ME, THAT THE MAIN
ISSUE HERE , HOW DO WE PROTECT
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAVE COME INTO
THE STATE OF WASHINGTON TO
ACCESS REPRODUCTIVE CARE OR
GENDER AFFIRMING CARE, PEOPLE
WITH IMMIGRANT STATUS. HOW DO
WE PROTECT THEM , FROM BEING
CRIMINALIZED AND PROSECUTED IN
NONPROTECTED STATES? THIS
COUNCIL AND THE STATE PASSED A
SHIELD LAW FOR THAT VERY
PURPOSE, BUT THE SHIELD LAW
ONLY APPLIES TO GOVERNMENT
ENTITIES OR BUSINESSES THAT ARE
INCORPORATED AND/OR
HEADQUARTERED IN WASHINGTON,
AXON IS HEADQUARTERED IN
ARIZONA. THAT IS INCORPORATED
IN DELAWARE. AND I UNDERSTAND
SPD HAS SAID WE WILL BE VERY
CLEAR IN OUR CONTRACT TERMS
THAT THEY ARE NOT TO RELEASE
THAT DATA. AND THAT THEY ARE TO
CONTACT US, IF THEY RECEIVE ,
YOU KNOW, ANY COURT ORDER TO DO
SO. BUT THE PROBLEM IS, AS YOU
WELL KNOW, IT IS NOT UNCOMMON
TO RECEIVE A SEALED WARNING
THAT PROHIBITS DISCLOSURE OF
THE EXISTENCE OF THE WARRANT TO
THE PARTY THAT HOLDS THE
INFORMATION. SO , MY QUESTION
TO YOU, I AM GETTING TO THE
QUESTION. WHEN I -- WHEN I READ
THE S.I.R.s, IT SAYS THAT
OPERATIONAL SERVICES WILL ONLY
BE DEPLOYED FOR OPERATIONAL
SERVICES. FOR WANTED, DANGEROUS
PERSONS, THOSE VIOLATING
PROTECTION ORDERS, THOSE
OPERATING STOLEN VEHICLES,
CANVASSING THE AREA AROUND THE
CRIME SCENE, AND LOCATING
VEHICLES UNDER THIS LAW. IT
SEEMS VERY CLEAR -- THOSE ALL
REQUIRE A HIT OF SOME SORT FOR
IMMEDIATE INFORMATION. THIS
SEEMS VERY CLEAR THAT THOSE
PURPOSES CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED ,
WITHIN THE 48-HOUR TURNAROUND.
AND , ONCE YOU GET THAT
INFORMATION, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO
CONTINUE TO RETAIN THAT
INFORMATION. SO I REALLY DON'T
UNDERSTAND, GIVEN THE RISKS TO
THE REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS OF
PEOPLE COMING TO WASHINGTON ,
WHAT IS THE ACTUAL DOWNSIDE TO
SPD, OF NOT BEING ABLE TO
RETAIN NONRELEVANT DATA BEYOND
48 HOURS?
>> COUNCILMEMBERS, GOOD
MORNING, KERRY KEEFE , HERE ON
BEHALF OF THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT. AND I THINK,
LOGICALLY, LOGICALLY SPEAKING,
OFTENTIMES, YOU DO NOT KNOW
WHETHER OR NOT THE INFORMATION
IS RELEVANT TO AN
INVESTIGATION, WITHSO, TO PRECL
TO DATA, AFTER 48 HOURS, WHEN
AN INVESTIGATION IS JUST
BEGINNING. ESPECIALLY, IN A
COMPLICATED INVESTIGATION SUCH
AS HOMICIDES, OR GUN VIOLENCE
INVESTIGATIONS, THAT DATA MAY
NOT BE KNOWN TO BE RELEVANT ,
UNTIL THAT INVESTIGATION IS
UNDERWAY AND AN OFFICER IS ABLE
TO TALK TO WITNESSES, GATHER UP
THEIR INFORMATION, SO WITHIN 48
HOURS , YOU WOULD BE CUTTING
OFF ACCESS TO VERY PERTINENT
INFORMATION THAT COULD DEVELOP
IN THE COURSE OF AN
INVESTIGATION. SO, THAT, I
THINK, IS MY MOST COMPELLING
REASON, BOTH WITH THE
EXPERIENCES OF SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE, YOU HAVE SEEN THE
INVESTIGATIONS OFTENTIMES ARE
VERY LONG AND ONGOING. BEING
ABLE TO DEVELOP THE
INFORMATION, BASED ON THE
INFORMATION THAT IS GATHERED
THROUGHOUT THAT INVESTIGATION
IS CRITICAL IN DEVELOPING IT.
>> RIGHT, BUT IT IS VERY CLEAR
IN THE S.I.R.s, TO ASSIST WITH
ACTIVE INVESTIGATIONS. IF YOU
HAVE AN OPEN INVESTIGATION, YOU
ARE ALLOWED TO KEEP THAT
INFORMATION, THE LICENSE PLATE
INFORMATION, AND STILL THE
INVESTIGATION HAS BECOME
COMPLETED. AND EVEN BEYOND
THAT. IT IS ONLY WHEN YOU
DON'T HAVE AN OPEN
INVESTIGATION, YOU ARE ASKING
TO HAVE THAT INFORMATION
RETAINED FOR 30 DAYS BECAUSE OF
THE POSSIBILITY THAT HE MIGHT
OPEN AN INVESTIGATION IN 30
DAYS AND IT MIGHT BECOME
RELEVANT IN 30 DAYS, IT IS THAT
NARROW WINDOW THAT WE ARE
TALKING ABOUT, IT IS NOT WHEN
YOU HAVE AN ACTIVE
INVESTIGATION, NOW YOU HAVE A
LICENSE PLATE, WHERE YOU CAN
ADD TO THAT INVESTIGATION, THAT
IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> THAT MAY HAVE BEEN POORLY
DRAFTED IN THE ISR, IT IS PRIOR
TO THE COLLECTION OF DATA, IN
ORDER TO RETAIN IT, THE DATA
THAT WAS GOING TO BE RETAINED
FOR 90 DAYS COULD ASSIST IN AN
ACTIVE INVESTIGATION. AND I
KNOW THAT THERE HAS BEEN A LOT
OF TALK ABOUT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
AND HOW THAT MIGHT PLAY OUT,
USING THIS TECHNOLOGY,
REMEMBER, THIS TECHNOLOGY JUST
TELLS YOU WHERE A CAR HAS BEEN,
IT DOES NOT TELL YOU WHO WAS
DRIVING IT, IT DOES NOT TELL
YOU WHAT HAPPENED WHEN THAT
PERSON EXITED THE VEHICLE. IT
IS CERTAINLY A LOCATION OF THE
VEHICLE. IT SEEMS FAR MORE
LIKELY, IN THE DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE CONTEXT, THAT IF
SOMEONE SUBJECTED TO A DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE PROTECTIVE ORDER HAD
THEIR VEHICLE WITHIN OR IN A
CERTAIN LOCATION, WITHIN THE
THOUSAND-YARD OR 1000'
BOUNDARY OF THE PROTECTIVE
ORDER, THAT WOULD BE COMPELLING
EVIDENCE AGAINST THE ABUSER WHO
HAS VIOLATED THAT ORDER. AND IT
MAY ONLY BE CIRCUMSTANTIAL
EVIDENCE IN A CRIMINAL CASE. IN
A CIVIL PROCEEDING, IN FAMILY
COURT, WHERE A LOT OF THOSE
PROTECTIVE ORDERS ARE
LITIGATED, IT IS UNDER
PREPONDERANCE AND THAT WOULD BE
HIGHLY PERSUASIVE TO THE
HEARING EXAMINER IN THOSE
CASES. OR THE SUPERIOR COURT
JUDGE, IF IT WAS ELEVATED TO
THEM. SO, THAT IS JUST AN
EXAMPLE OF HOW THAT PERIOD OF
TIME COULD BE USEFUL. BECAUSE
YOU MAY NOT KNOW , THERE WAS A
PERSON WHO VIOLATED THAT,
WITHIN 48 HOURS, 30 DAYS, IT
GIVES YOU THAT BUFFER.
SIMILARLY, WE KNOW THAT MOST
STOLEN VEHICLES THESE DAYS ARE
NOT STOLEN FOR JOYRIDING . THEY
ARE STOLEN SPECIFICALLY TO USE
IN OTHER CRIMES, IF WE HAVE A
HIT ON A VEHICLE NOT ON OUR
LIST THAT WE NOW KNOW WAS
INVOLVED IN A CRIME, HAVING
THAT 90-DAY BUFFER LETS US LOOK
BACK IN TIME TO LET US KNOW
WHAT OTHER CRIMES THAT WAS
ASSOCIATED WITH, AND WE MAY OR
WE MAY NOT KNOW WHETHER IT WAS
REPORTED STOLEN. IT MAY NOT BE
ON THE LIST. PEOPLE DO NOT
ALWAYS TELL US THAT
IMMEDIATELY. HE GIVES US THE
BUFFER TO GO BACK AND TRACK,
WHERE DID THAT VEHICLE GO? WE
WOULD HAVE TO HAVE, AS A
STARTING POINT, WE DO NOT KNOW
WHO WAS DRIVING. IF YOU ARE
EVER DOING AN INVESTIGATION, A
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, AND YOU
WANT TO GET AT A PERSON, THIS
IS A FAR MORE EFFECTIVE WAY
THEN ALPR. MANY OF THE WARRANTS
GO TO THE TRACKING AND LOCATION
INFORMATION, SO, I CAN SEE THE
REALTIME BENEFITS OF ALPR, BOTH
BOUNCING OFF THE HOT LIST,
TRACKING PEOPLE IN REAL TIME,
IF THERE IS A CRIMINAL EVENT,
CAFE ERASER , FROM YEARS AGO,
PUT IT TOGETHER THAT
INVESTIGATIVE PROFILE, WITHIN
THAT PERIOD TO FIND OUT WHERE
THAT VEHICLE WENT , OR WHAT
THEY WERE INVOLVED IN, THAT IS
SORT OF THE THINKING BEHIND HOW
WE WOULD USE THIS. ON THE
BACKEND, WHEN WE HAVE A
REALTIME CRIME CENTER, THEY
WILL HELP NAVIGATE THIS,
HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET THE
INFORMATION ON THAT PLATE AND
FIGURE OUT WHERE IT WAS, AND
GET IT BACK OUT PRETTY QUICKLY
FOR INVESTIGATIVE PURPOSES, WE
CHOSE THE 90 DAY AS THE
SIGNIFICANT NEED.
>> IF YOU DO NOT GET A HIT, ARE
YOU GOING TO BE LOOKING AT
EVERY SINGLE LICENSE PLATE TO
THEN TRACK WHERE IT WAS. YOU
ARE GOING TO HAVE THOUSANDS OF
LICENSE PLATES , IT DOES NOT
SEEM LIKE A REASONABLE WAY TO
APPROACH AN INVESTIGATION, IF
YOU GET A HIT, YOU KNOW THE
ACTIVE INVESTIGATION THAT YOU
HAVE, THEN YOU GET A LICENSE
PLATE RELEVANT, YOU GET TO KEEP
THAT, FOREVER, THE LENGTH OF
THE PERIOD OF THE
INVESTIGATION. YOU GET AHEAD,
YOU KEEP THAT INFORMATION ON A
STOLEN PLATE, THAT COULD OPEN
THE DOOR TO POTENTIAL CRIMES, I
AGREE WITH YOU, I AM REALLY
CONCERNED, YOU ARE TALKING
ABOUT SHARING THIS DATA IN A
CIVIL CONTEXT. THIS IS LIMITED
TO THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE
CONTEXT. IT RAISES A FLAG.
MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU
WERE SAYING. IT IS CLEAR, THE
INFORMATION THAT YOU ARE
SEEKING TO RETAIN, FOR 30, OR
90 DAYS, IS -- IT IS NOT
IMMEDIATELY RELEVANT. AND I DO
NOT UNDERSTAND HOW YOU ARE
GOING TO HAVE THE RESOURCES TO
DETERMINE WHETHER THOUSANDS OF
LICENSE PLATES THAT YOU ARE
COLLECTING ON A DAILY BASIS ARE
GOING TO BE, AT SOME POINT
RELEVANT TO THE INVESTIGATION
THAT HAS NOT EVEN BEEN OPENED.
>> CERTAINLY, WE WOULD HAVE NO
WAY OF KNOWING IN ADVANCE,
WHETHER THAT LICENSE PLATE WAS
RELEVANT. THAT IS WHY WE ARE
SEEKING THE 90-DAY BUFFER. AND
YOU HAVE AN EVENT THAT HAPPENS,
WITH A VEHICLE, WHETHER IT IS
STOLEN OR NOT, AND, WE KNOW
THAT IT WAS USED IN A CRIMINAL
CONTEXT, THEN, WE CAN TRACK
WHERE THAT VEHICLE CAME FROM
AND WHERE IT WENT. IT GIVES US
MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHO IT
IS, AS WE CLOSE IN ON THAT
INVESTIGATION.
>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JEFF
THE SPIRIT THANK YOU, MOORE.
RIVERA?
>> THANK YOU , JERRY. THEY
COULD GIVE FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY. I KNOW THAT I DO
NOT SIT ON THIS COMMITTEE. BUT
EVERYONE KNOWS, THAT I AM
REALLY CONSIDERING PUBLIC
SAFETY , IT IS OF PARAMOUNT
SAFETY. MR. BRIAN MAXEY, I,
TOO, AM VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THIS
TOOL . I HAVE PRIVACY CONCERNS
AS WELL. SO I WANT TO GET TO
ENSURING THAT WE ARE
MITIGATING, AS MUCH AS
POSSIBLE, FOR THE PRIVACY, FOR
THE PRIVACY CONCERNS, FOR
PRIVACY ISSUES. AS WE ARE BEING
ABLE TO UTILIZE A TOOL THAT I
DO KNOW IS NECESSARY, AS YOU
DEAL WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY
ISSUES IN THE CITY, TO THE
POINT THAT HE MADE EARLIER,
ABOUT , FOLKS USING THIS,
INTERNALLY, I AM WONDERING,
WHAT ARE THE PARAMETERS, AND
THE SAFEGUARDS, THAT YOU HAVE
PUT INTO, THAT YOU ALLUDED TO,
I DO NOT REALLY UNDERSTAND. I
HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF, I DO NOT
UNDERSTAND WHAT THESE
PARAMETERS ARE, THAT YOU PUT IN
PLACE, TO LIMIT THIS
INFORMATION TO WHOEVER, AT THE
DEPARTMENT, ACTUALLY NEEDS TO
USE IT, SO THAT IT IS NOT
BROADLY AVAILABLE TO EVERY
SINGLE OTHER OFFICER. BUT TO
MITIGATE FOR THAT PRIVACY
CONCERN, OF HOW IT MIGHT BE
USED, INTERNALLY, COULD YOU
SPEAK TO THAT, PLEASE?
>> SO, THE PLAN IS TO HAVE A
DISCRETE VIEW. PROBABLY THE
CIVILIAN ANALYSTS THAT WE HAVE
AT THE REALTIME CRIME CENTER.
AND ALTERNATELY, THE CAPTAIN
THAT OVERSEES THAT BODY OF
WORK. IT WOULD BE LIMITED TO
THAT BODY , TO ACCESS THE
SYSTEM COMPLETELY. AND THIS IS
ONE OF THE BENEFITS OF USING
THE AXON CLOUD-BASED STORAGE,
EVERY TIME THE SYSTEM IS
TOUCHED, IS AUTO -LOGGED, WHAT
THEY DID, WHO DID IT, WHAT THEY
LOOKED AT, THAT IS IMPORTANT,
THE WAY WE ARE LOOKING AT THIS,
WE ARE IN THE PROCESS OF
TREATING IT AS AN INTERNAL
POINT. IF YOU WANT TO ACCESS
THIS DATA, YOU NEED TO PUT
TOGETHER YOUR BASIS WITH
PROBABLE CAUSE. IF WE DECIDE TO
DO THIS, REASONABLE SUSPICION.
I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO
TEST THE SYSTEM MORE, BUT RIGHT
NOW, WE WOULD NEED PROBABLE
CAUSE AND LOOK BACKWARDS AT THE
DATA, ONLY UNDER THE
CIRCUMSTANCES. NOT ONLY WOULD
WE HAVE A LOG OF WHAT WAS DONE,
OR WE WOULD HAVE A DOCUMENT
BEHIND IT, AND ALL OF THAT
WOULD BE SUBJECTED TO AUDIT, TO
ENSURE THAT OUR REASONS FOR
LOOKING AT THE HISTORICAL DATA
WERE VALID AND THAT WE ARE NOT
ABUSING THE SYSTEM.
>> JUST SO I UNDERSTAND, AND
ANY OFFICER HAS ACCESS TO IT,
THEY JUST NEED TO HAVE THESE
PIECES IN PLACE, THE PROBABLE
CAUSE, FOR A WIDER SEEKING OF
INFORMATION, AND THEN THERE
WOULD BE ACCESS TO THAT
INFORMATION?
>> NO, CERTAINLY, WE WOULD , IF
IT WAS ON THE HOT LIST, OUR
REGULAR OFFICERS WOULD GET THE
TRIGGER FOR THAT. OUR BELIEVE
IS, WE KNOW THAT THERE IS 9000
STOLEN VEHICLES IN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE, WE DO NOT HAVE THE
CAPACITY TO REACT TO EACH AND
EVERY ONE OF THOSE, WE WOULD
NEED SOME GUIDANCE ABOUT, THAT
WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE BEEN USED
IN A CRIME. OR WHATEVER THAT WE
MIGHT KNOW ABOUT IT. AND WE ARE
GOING TO DEVELOP SYSTEMS, SO
THAT THEY CAN FOLLOW UP, IF
THERE ARE HITS. WE MIGHT SEND
OTHER RESOURCES TO RECOVER
THAT, WHEN AVAILABLE. BUT THE
AVERAGE OFFICER WOULD NOT HAVE
THE ABILITY TO SEARCH THAT
BUFFER THAT I KEEP TALKING
ABOUT. THAT WOULD BE RESTRICTED
TO SELECT PERSONNEL, AUDITED,
AND THE DOCUMENTATION
REQUIREMENTS I WAS DISCUSSING
THAT SHOWS THE NEEDS AND THE
WISE. -- WHY. THE REPORT WOULD
COME BEFORE THIS BODY.
>> WHO WOULD THAT VERY SELECT
PERSONNEL BE, I GUESS THAT IS
WHAT I AM ASKING? WHO ARE YOU
DESIGNATING AS THAT SELECT
PERSONNEL TWEET
>> FOR ALL OF THIS TECHNOLOGY,
WE NEED A REALTIME CRIME
CENTER. CIVILIAN ANALYSTS,
MANAGED MOST LIKELY BY ACCOUNT
CAPTAIN ON THE SEVENTH FLOOR .
IT WOULD ONLY BE THOSE
INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD ACCESS TO
IT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RIVERA. I SKIPPED OVER THE VICE
CHAIR, DID YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS ?
>> NO.
>> ANYBODY ELSE?
>> MAY I ASK A FOLLOW-UP
QUESTION?
>> GO AHEAD.
>> SORRY. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
I'M SORRY, I JUST KEEP GOING
AROUND AND AROUND. I APPRECIATE
YOUR PATIENCE. BUT I AM
REVIEWING THE MEMO THAT WAS
SENT OUT . LOOKING AT THE
PERIOD WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE
90-DAY RETENTION. YOU ARE
SAYING THE 90-DAY RETENTION
GIVES SPD TIME, IT GIVES TIME
FOR SPD TO APPROPRIATELY
INVESTIGATE ACTIVE CASES. IN
THIS TIMEFRAME, INVESTIGATORS
CAN TALK TO WITNESSES, REVIEW
VIDEO, AND GATHER ALL OF THE
ELEMENTS TO ENSURE THAT THEY
HAVE THE RIGHT SUSPECT BEFORE
CLEARING INFORMATION ON LICENSE
PLATES. FOR EXAMPLE, AN
INVESTIGATOR ON A HOMICIDE CASE
MIGHT GET A LEAD ON THE
IDENTITY OF A SUSPECT. AFTER
RECEIVING THAT TESTIMONY, THE
DETECTIVE COULD LOOK UP THAT
LICENSE PLATE AND POTENTIALLY,
POTENTIALLY FIND THE SUSPECT
'S LOCATION AND APPREHEND THEM
BEFORE THEY CAN HARM SOMEONE
ELSE. FAIR POINT. BUT HOWEVER,
AS YOU JUST CORRECTLY STATED,
THE BEST WAY TO LOCATE SOMEBODY
IS THEIR PHONE. YOU KNOW? THIS
, THIS IS OUR TRACKER. AND I
HAVE SIGNED DOZENS OF WARNINGS
THAT THEY LOCATED WITH
SUSPECTS. IT SEEMS TO ME, THE
ACCESS , YOU ALREADY HAVE
ACCESS TO THE BEST TOOLS FOR
LOCATING AND IDENTIFYING A
SUSPECT, WHICH IS SOMEBODY 'S
PHONE AND THE USE OF A LICENSE
PLATE IN THAT SITUATION IS
MINIMAL EFFECTIVENESS, BASED ON
THE RISK THAT IT POSES, SO YOU
ARE ASKING FOR A VERY LONG --
IT ALSO REQUIRES SOMEBODY TO, A
LOT OF TIMES. IT SEEMS LIKE A
LOT OF OFFICER TIME INVOLVED ,
TO GET TO THE POINT WHERE THEY
POTENTIALLY NEED A LICENSE
PLATE AND THEY COULD, EASILY,
WHAT THEY HAVE THE IDENTITY,
THEY COULD GET A SEARCH WARRANT
FOR A PHONE AND SHE'LL LOCATE
THEM.
>> I AGREE, THE PHONE IS THE
VERY BEST EVIDENCE , IF YOU
KNOW THE PERSON INVOLVED, IF
YOU DO NOT KNOW THE PERSON
INVOLVED, IF YOU DON'T HAVE
ACCESS TO THEIR PHONE NUMBER,
IF YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT CARRIER
THEY ARE ON, THERE ARE
COMPLICATIONS TO THAT, BUT IF
YOU DO NOT KNOW THE IDENTITY OF
THE PERSON, THAN THE LICENSE
PLATE BECOMES RELEVANT.
>> WHEN YOU SAY POTENTIALLY TO
FIND THE SUSPECT 'S LOCATION,
I MEAN, JUST BECAUSE THE CAR
HAS DRIVEN PAST ONE SPOT, AND
THAT IS WHERE IT IS PICKED UP,
DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN YOU
ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO LOCATE
THAT PERSON, WHAT YOU HAVE THE
LICENSE PLATE, DOES IT?
>> NO. IF YOU HAVE 90 DAYS AND
MULTIPLE HITS ON THAT LICENSE
PLATE, AS IT MOVES AROUND THE
CITY, AND PERHAPS GOES AROUND.
IT GIVES YOU INFORMATION ABOUT
WHERE THAT PERSON, WHOEVER WAS
DRIVING IT, MIGHT ACTUALLY BE.
IT NARROWS THE SEARCH.
>> IF YOU HAVE MULTIPLE HITS,
IF YOU HAVE THE HITS, YOU GET
TO KEEP THE DATA. RIGHT? AGAIN,
THE HITS, YOU GET TO KEEP THE
DATA COVER FOR AS LONG AS YOU
NEED IT , ONCE YOU HAVE A HIT.
>> WHEN I SAY HIT, I MEAN THE
READ ON THE LICENSE PLATE, I AM
NOT TALKING ABOUT A HOT LIST.
IT MAY NOT BE ON THE HOT LIST,
AND YOU MAY LEARN, DAY 60, THE
CRIME IS COMMITTED, USING THAT
VEHICLE. LOOKING BACK AT THE
HISTORICAL VEHICLE IS NOT WHAT
IS GOING TO INFORM YOU. YOU
NEED TO FIND THE PATTERNS FOR
THE INVESTIGATION.
>> OKAY. THANK YOU.
>> WE DO NOT HAVE ENOUGH CARS
THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE AN
INCOMPLETE NOT OR A COMPLETE
MAP, EVERYWHERE THAT CAR WENT,
THAT IS WHERE THE AMOUNT OF
INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE, OVER
THE COURSE OF 90 DAYS, WOULD
GIVE US A BETTER CHANCE OF
HAVING SOME USABLE DATA ON THE
PATTERNS OF THAT VEHICLE FOR
INVESTIGATIVE PURPOSES.
>> BUT WE DON'T NEED --
NEVERMIND. THANK YOU.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT?
>> I HAVE TO ADMIT , I AM
HAVING A HARD TIME VINYL
FOLLOWING THE INTRICACIES OF
THIS CONVERSATION. I AM NOT A
LAWYER, I APOLOGIZE. IT IS
DIFFICULT FOR ME TO SEPARATE .
PUBLIC COMMENT. THE ISSUES THAT
WE HEARD ABOUT IN PUBLIC
COMMENT AND WHAT WE HEARD ABOUT
IN GARFIELD, FROM THIS
DISCUSSION. I HAVE ALREADY
SAID, WHAT MOTIVATES MY
SUPPORT, MAINLY FOR THIS
TECHNOLOGY , IT IS NOT THE
ABILITY TO RECOVER STOLEN CARS.
IT IS TO INTERRUPT THE
DOWNSTREAM, SECONDARY CRIMES
THAT THESE STOLEN CARS ARE USED
TO COMMIT. GIVE US A REAL LIFE
EXAMPLE. IF WE DON'T KNOW , IF
YOUR ARGUMENT IS, WE DON'T KNOW
WHAT WILL BE IN THAT , OR WHAT
WILL BE USEFUL, IN AN
INVESTIGATION INTO THE
PROCEEDS, SO, IF THE DEPARTMENT
IS RESEARCHING WHAT HAPPENED OR
IS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT
CARS WERE AROUND GARFIELD LAST
WEEK, I MEAN, IF IT WAS NOT ON
THE HOT LIST TO BEGIN WITH . I
MEAN , IS THAT WHY THIS
TECHNOLOGY IS OF SUCH
QUESTIONABLE HELP? HOW DOES IT
WORK OUT? YOU PROBABLY LOST ME.
I DON'T KNOW. YOU PROBABLY --
I WILL , OKAY, I WILL RESTATE
MY QUESTION.
>> FORGIVE ME.
>> IT'S OKAY. IS THIS
TECHNOLOGY HELPFUL IN THE CASE
OF A RECENT CRIME , THAT MIGHT
NOT HAVE ALREADY BEEN -- WHERE
THE CAR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN
TRIGGERED A STOLEN? THAT
LOCATION COULD BE HELPFUL ? I
GUESS THAT IS MY QUESTION.
>> YES. I THINK THAT THE ANSWER
IS YES. COULD THAT INFORMATION
BE HELPFUL?
>> THIS IS NECESSARY TO KEEP
THIS INFORMATION AS EVIDENCE? I
AM TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, WHAT
AM I NOT GETTING HERE ?
>> THE CONFUSION I'M HEARING
FROM A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS IS,
WILL WE KNOW THAT THIS VEHICLE
WAS INVOLVED IN A CRIME, SUCH
THAT WE FLAG IT WITHIN THOSE
FIRST 48 HOURS ? THE ANSWER IS
NO. WE DO NOT KNOW THAT. EVEN
IF WE DID, WE WOULD BE MISSING
THE HISTORICAL DATA ON THAT
VEHICLE, TO KNOW WHETHER -- YOU
KNOW? WHERE IT HAD BEEN, ALL OF
THAT INFORMATION, JUST BECAUSE,
YOU KNOW, ON DAY ZERO, THIS CAR
WAS INVOLVED IN A CRIME, THAT
DOES NOT MEAN THERE IS NOT HUGE
VALUE IN LOOKING AT THE PAST 90
DAYS, WHERE DID THAT VEHICLE
GO, WHAT OTHER CRIMES WERE THEY
INVOLVED IN, WHERE THERE
PATTERNS ? IT GIVES US SO MUCH
INVESTIGATIVE INFORMATION ON
THE VEHICLE. IF A CAR IS
STOLEN, AND USED IN A CRIME, IT
MAY OR MAY WELL BE JETTISONED ,
WITHIN THAT 48 HOURS. AND THEN
WE ARE MISSING THE HISTORICAL
INFORMATION THAT WE NEED , TO,
YOU KNOW, FIGURE OUT WHERE THAT
CAME FROM. TO BASICALLY TRACK
THE MOVEMENTS OF THAT CAR, FOR
THAT INVESTIGATION. AND SO, I
THINK THAT MIGHT ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION. THE ANSWER IS YES, WE
DO NOT ALWAYS KNOW. WE
CERTAINLY WILL NOT KNOW WITHIN
THAT 48 HOUR WINDOW, IF WE LOCK
IT DOWN TO THAT, WE LOSE ALL
CAPACITY FOR INVESTIGATIVE
PURPOSES, TO KNOW THE
HISTORICAL RECORD OF THAT
VEHICLE.
>> I APPRECIATE IT.
>> MR. CHAIR, I HAVE A
QUESTION.
>> GO AHEAD.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I HAVE
A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. THE
FIRST ONE, IT WAS, IS IT 9189
YEARLY INCIDENTS OF STOLEN
VEHICLES WITHIN THE CITY OF
SEATTLE ?
>> YES.
>> THAT IS 191 EVERY WEEK IN
OUR CITY. DO YOU HAVE THE DATA,
HOW MANY, HOW MANY CRIMES ARE
DONE WITH THE VEHICLE? I KNOW
THAT, IN THE COUNTRY, 70% OF
CRIMES ARE DONE WITH THE
VEHICLE. IS THAT -- I DON'T
KNOW, WHAT WOULD IT BE WITHIN
THE CITY OF SEATTLE?
>> SO, WE HAVE REALLY EXPLORED
THAT DATA A LOT AND THERE IS A
STRONG CORRELATION BETWEEN
STOLEN CARS AND CRIMES. WE HAVE
NOT MAPPED IT DECISIVELY BUT
ANECDOTALLY, BASED ON WHAT OUR
CRIME ANALYSTS ARE TELLING US
IS THAT THERE IS A VERY HIGH
CORRELATION BETWEEN THE TWO.
>> GOT IT. UNDERSTOOD. MY OTHER
QUESTION, I SAW 506 NINE
VEHICLES, SINCE 2022, HAVE BEEN
RECOVERED, WITH 11 SPD
VEHICLES. DO YOU HAVE THE
NUMBER OF RECOVERY, BEFORE? IT
HAS BEEN USED SINCE 2006 , THE
TECHNOLOGY, AS I READ IN THE
MEMO. DO WE HAVE HOW MANY WERE
BEFORE THEN, OR WAS THAT JUST A
HIGHLIGHT NUMBER FOR 2022? WAS
THAT THE MOST WE
>> I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND
LOOK AT THE ANNUAL DATA. WE
WOULD NOT HAVE RECORDS GOING
BACK THAT FAR. WE SWITCHED
RECORDS MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS
ALONG THE WAY.
>> GOT IT, UNDERSTOOD.
>> WE SHOULD HAVE FROM ABOUT
2015 TO PRESENT.
>> UNDERSTOOD. I SUPPORT
TECHNOLOGY USES WITHIN OUR CITY
TO CREATE SAFE ENVIRONMENTS,
FOR ME, IT IS NOT THIS, THAT,
IT IS AND. WE NEED THIS AND
INVESTMENT IN OUR SCHOOLS, THIS
AND INVESTMENT IN TECHNOLOGY,
IT IS NOT EITHER/OR. I THINK
PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR CITY HAS
GOTTEN TO BE A LITTLE BIT TOO
PARTISAN. IT SHOULD BE A
NONPARTISAN ISSUE BUT I HAVE
CONCERNS, OBVIOUSLY, ABOUT
MAKING SURE THAT THE PRIVACY
NUMBER FOR THAT TECHNOLOGY, FOR
THAT INFORMATION, IT NEEDS TO
BE STORED PROPERLY WHERE IT
CANNOT BE USED AGAINST FOLKS.
LIKE COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, AND
MIKE COUNCILMEMBER MARITZA
RIVERA HAVE STATED THAT I
UNDERSTAND THE SENSE OF INJURY
-- URGENCY FOR US TO USE THIS,
TO RECOVER STOLEN VEHICLES. I
HAVE LISTENED TO PEOPLE TALKING
ABOUT VEHICLES GETTING STOLEN,
A CATALYTIC CONVERTER, A
DRIVE-BY. SOMEONE, SOMEONE
PARKING THEIR CAR OUTSIDE THE
HOMES OF PEOPLE IN NORTH
CAPITOL HILL AND THEN ROBBING
PEOPLE EVERY NIGHT , AT 1:00,
2:00 A.M. AND I MEAN, IT HAS
GOTTEN TO BE REPETITIVE. AND IT
IS LIKE, OKAY, WHAT CAN WE DO
TO BE ABLE TO CURB THIS, AND
REALLY START MAKING PROGRESS ON
PUBLIC SAFETY? THANK YOU FOR
ANSWERING THOSE QUESTIONS ?
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ?
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR
INDULGENCE, CHAIR. I WANT TO BE
CLEAR, MR. BRIAN MAXEY. THE
INFORMATION THAT COUNCILMEMBER
JUST ASK YOU ABOUT, YOU WOULD
BE ABLE TO RETAIN THAT
INFORMATION? PRETTY MUCH
INDEFINITELY, CORRECT? IF YOU
GET A HIT ON THAT STOLEN
VEHICLE, YOU GET TO RETAIN THAT
INFORMATION FOR AS LONG AS YOU
NEED IT, FOR THE PURPOSES OF
WHAT EVER INVESTIGATION YOU ARE
GOING ON ?
>> UP TO 90 DAYS. SPIN IT UP TO
90. BUT IF IT IS ACTIVE, UNTIL
THE ACTIVE INVESTIGATION IS
COMPLETED. IF YOU GET A HIT,
SO, THIS IS NOT -- CHANGING THE
48-HOUR . WHAT I AM TALKING
ABOUT, I'M SORRY. HOW DO I
MAKE THIS CLEAR? THE WAY THAT
S.I.R. IS , YOU GET TO KEEP, AS
LONG AS YOU NEED IT, 90 DAYS,
OR UNTIL THE INVESTIGATION IS
COMPLETED, ANY HIT ON A STOLEN
VEHICLE. MANY OF THOSE STOLEN
VEHICLES ARE INVOLVED IN
ADDITIONAL CRIMES. SO NOW YOU
HAVE THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE
STOLEN VEHICLE, AND THEN YOU
CAN LOOK AT WHAT OTHER CRIMES
IT HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN,
CORRECT? BECAUSE YOU HAVE THAT
INFORMATION, YOU CAN RETAIN IT
FOR AS LONG AS YOU NEED IT.
>> YES, WE COULD. THAT IS ALL
FUTURE FACING. IT DOES NOT HAVE
THAT 90-DAY HISTORICAL MARKER.
>> YOU HAVE 90 DAYS OR IF AN
INVESTIGATION OPENS OR YOU HAVE
AN ACTIVE INVESTIGATION, YOU
CAN USE THAT, YOU HOLD ONTO
THAT, FOR AS LONG AS YOU NEED
IT.
>> THAT IS CORRECT.
>> THE FOCUS OF THE S.I.R. IS
TO LOCATE WANTED, ENDANGERED,
AND MISSING PERSONS. YOU WILL
GET A HIT QUICKLY IF YOU HAVE A
MISSING PERSONS ALERT, SILVER
ALERT, YOU ARE GOING TO KNOW
THAT, FROM THE HOT LIST,
QUICKLY, YOU WILL LOCATE STOLEN
LICENSE PLATE. YOU WILL GET
THAT OFF A HOT LIST. CANVASSING
THE AREA AROUND THE CRIME
SCENE, OBVIOUSLY, YOU WILL DO
THAT IMMEDIATELY. AND SO, THERE
WILL BE A RECORD OF THIS, YOU
WILL HAVE ACCESS TO PROTECTED
ORDERS, EVERY PROTECTED ORDER,
EVERY SEXUAL ASSAULT ORDER,
EVERY EARTHWORKS ORDER,
ESSENTIALLY ENTERED INTO THE
WASHINGTON STATE DATABASE, THAT
INFORMATION IS ALL BETTER. YOU
WILL HAVE ACCESS TO THAT
INFORMATION, AND YOU WILL BE
ABLE TO RETAIN IT , AS LONG AS
YOU NEED IT, 90 DAYS, OR UNTIL
THE END OF THE INVESTIGATION.
IS THAT CORRECT?
>> THAT SOUNDS CORRECT, YES,
COUNCILMEMBER.
>> THANK YOU. THAT IS THE POINT
I WANT TO MAKE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. JOHNSON, ALSO
MR. BRIAN MAXEY, MS. KERRY
KEEFE, FOR JOINING US. I
UNDERSTAND THE POINTS THAT A
BEEN MADE, AND I HAVE READ THE
S.I.R., THE OTHER DEMO --
MEMOS, AND THE LIKE. AND TO THE
POINT OF COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH , I AM MINDFUL OF
THE POINTS THAT COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE IS MAKING, AS IT RESULTS
TO THE COMMENTS THAT IT MADE.
IN SOME WAYS, THIS IS A
BALANCING ACT. IN MANY WAYS, IN
TERMS OF THE PARAMETERS . BUT
ALSO, YES, THERE IS CONCERN, AS
IT RELATES, TO OUT-OF-STATE
ACTORS, WITH THE WARRANTS, THEY
ARE COMING IN, BALANCED, YOU
KNOW, WITH WHAT WE HAVE HEARD
AND SEEN ON THE DAIS . AND YOUR
TESTIMONY. AND ALSO WE ALL KNOW
IN TERMS OF THE STOLEN
VEHICLES. THAT IS A REAL PIECE
THAT WE HAVE. TO DATE, I HAVE
NOT SEEN ANYTHING, IN TERMS OF
THE L.A. TIMES, SEATTLE TIMES,
NEW YORK TIMES, WASHINGTON
POST, OUT OF RESPECT FOR THE
CONFIDENTIAL WARRANT SUBPOENA
TO BE PLACED. AND NOW, I
RECOGNIZE THE POSSIBILITY OF
IT. I RESPECT AND UNDERSTAND
THE POINTS MADE BY
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, AND
THROUGH PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE
CONVERSATIONS I HAVE HAD . TO
THAT QUESTION, AND I NEED TO
ASK THIS QUESTION . BECAUSE IT
HAS COME UP, WITH WHAT
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE WAS SAYING,
AND THEN THE CONFIRMATIONS . 90
DAYS, VERSUS 30 DAYS, CAN YOU
SPEAK TO THAT, AS AN ISSUE, IN
TERMS OF THE IMPACT , WHAT
WOULD THAT MAKE, IN TERMS OF
THAT BALANCING ACT, AS OPPOSED
TO, YOU KNOW, THE PRIVACY
CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE. ON ONE
HAND. BUT THEN ALSO, BEING ABLE
TO WORK THE PUBLIC SAFETY
PIECES AND STILL BE AVAILABLE,
OBVIOUSLY, THERE IS A 60-DAY
DIFFERENCE. HOW DOES THAT PLAY
IN? I BRING THAT UP, BECAUSE WE
DO, WE DO, WE DO HAVE A
POTENTIAL WALK ON AMENDMENT TO
GO FROM 90 TO 30, I WANTED TO
SAY, IS IT PARTLY BECAUSE OF
ALL OF THE CONVERSATIONS THAT
WE HAVE HAD, AND ALSO, WITH THE
EXECUTIVES, THE CONVERSATIONS
WE HAVE HAD. I'M GOING TO
>> SO, I THINK, THE QUESTION,
IT IS THE VULNERABILITY , AND I
WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THAT
FIRST, THEN I WOULD LIKE TO
TURN TO THE TIME.? AND THEN
ADDRESS THIS WITH YOU?
>> UNDER THE HISTORIC
MEDICATIONS ACT, THERE IS A
LIMITATION , PROVIDING THAT
INFORMATION, IF IT WERE
SUBJECTED TO THE WARRANT. I
THINK THAT AXON HAS RESPONDED ,
WHEN SERVED WITH A SIMILAR TYPE
OF SUBPOENA IN TEXAS, IT
RESPONDED WITH A MOTION TO
CRASH. AXON TAKES THAT
RESPONSIBILITY VERY SERIOUSLY,
UNDER THE MEDICATIONS ACT ,
THAT PROHIBITS PROVIDING THAT
INFORMATION. BECAUSE IT NEITHER
POSSESSES, NOR CONTROLS THE
INFORMATION. IT IS THE
INFORMATION, WITHIN THE CONTROL
OF THE AGENCY, AND, IT HAS
FALLEN IN, IT HAS OPPOSED AND
IT HAS TAKEN THIS , THE RULING
FROM THE BENCH IN TEXAS, IT
DENIED A MOTION TO COMPEL. IT
WAS BODY CAM FOOTAGE FROM 25
OFFICERS. SO, THERE IS THE
FEDERAL LIMITATION. AND THAT
WOULD APPLY, TOO, HERE, IF AXON
WAS RECEIVING THIS , FOR THE
LPR INFORMATION , THAT WOULD BE
A MOTION, GIVING THIRD-PARTY
NOTICE TO SPD, WITHIN THE STATE
OF WASHINGTON, THERE ARE THOSE
PROTECTIONS BAKED INTO OUR
STATE LEGISLATION . PUTTING THE
FIELD ACT , WE HAVE RCW, 1096
AND RCW 117-0020. AND BOTH OF
THOSE PROHIBIT THE STATE
ACTORS' JUDGES, CLERKS, FROM
COMPLYING EITHER WITH THE
SUBPOENAS OR THE WARRANTS THAT
ARE RELATED TO THE INFORMATION,
PERTAINING TO THE POTENTIAL
HEALTHCARE SERVICES, SO, WITHIN
THE FEDERAL, STATE, THEN ALSO,
THE CITY ORDINANCE , WE HAVE
THESE PROTECTIONS BAKED IN , TO
PROVIDE POLICY. AND THAT IS THE
NARRATIVE, THAT IS THE QUESTION
RELATING TO WHAT IF SOMEONE
FROM IDAHO CAME OVER TO
WASHINGTON TO GET AN ABORTION?
WHAT IF IDAHO WAS TRYING TO
TRACK THAT PERSON DOWN, HOW
WOULD WE BE ABLE TO GET THAT
ORGANIZATIONS INFORMATION? I
THINK THERE IS A REMOTE
POSSIBILITY, BUT I DO NOT THINK
IT IS VERY PLAUSIBLE. WHEN YOU
LOOK AT THE PROTECTIONS THAT
ARE BAKED IN TO BOTH FEDERAL,
STATE, LOCAL, LEGISLATION, THAT
IS NOT A VERY LIKELY SCENARIO,
AND IT IS ONE, THAT THE
THIRD-PARTY NOTICE, IT WOULD
ALSO BE GIVEN TO THE SEATTLE
CITY ATTORNEY, THE CITY WOULD
BE RESPONDING TO PROTECT THAT
INFORMATION. SO, AS FAR AS THE
PRIVACY RIGHTS GO , I THINK THE
NARRATIVE THAT HAS BEEN PUT
OUT, THE REMOTE POSSIBILITY,
RELATING TO THE PROTECTED
HEALTHCARE SERVICES. IT IS JUST
NOT ONE -- IT IS A REALITY. AND
, LOOKING AT IT, HOLDING UP,
THE POSITIVE ASPECTS , WHAT HAS
BEEN USED AS A TOOL, IN
COMBATING CRIME, VERSUS THE
REMOTE POSSIBILITY THAT IS NOT
REALLY POSSIBLE. THAT IS, I
THINK, WHEN THE CONTINENT
REALLY NEEDS TO CONSIDER THIS,
AS FAR AS THE COST BENEFIT.
>> THANK YOU. NOW,
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA?
>> THANK YOU FOR ALL OF THIS
REALLY ENRICHING AND LIVELY
DISCUSSION. ON THIS LAST
COMMENT, THE LAST QUESTION ,
RATHER. YOU MENTIONED THE
APPLICABLE STATUTES AND LAWS,
INCLUDING THE WASHINGTON
S.H.I.E.L.D. ACT, WHICH IS
REALLY IMPORTANT, AND VERY
HELPFUL. ALSO, IF YOU WERE TO
TAKE IT A STEP FURTHER, YOU
COULD VENTURE DOWN THE CHOICE
OF LAWS ANALYSIS, AND WHOSE
LAWS WOULD BE CONTROLLING IT,
AND UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES,
SOME OF THAT WOULD BE HINGING
ON THE ORGANIZATION'S PERSONAL
PLACE OF BUSINESS, SOME OF THAT
WOULD HINGE ON THEIR STATE OF
INCORPORATION. BUT LOOK, ALL OF
THESE FACTORS THAT I AM TRYING
TO PURGE FROM MY LAW SCHOOL
MEMORY, FROM THE CIVIL
PROCEDURES CLASS, YOU CAN GET
REAL ACADEMIC WITH THIS, AND
REAL QUICK, BUT, BUT, LOOK .
YOU MENTIONED A COMMENT. THIS
IS REALLY, FOR ANYONE, YOU
WOULD HAVE THE BEST POINT OF
VIEW ON THIS, MR. BRIAN MAXEY.
THIS IS A VALID CONCERN, WHAT
WE ARE HEARING TODAY, THIS
DISCUSSION IS CENTERED AROUND
VALID CONCERNS, UNDERPINNING
POLICY AND TRIGGERING
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS, AND GENDER
AFFIRMING CARE, AMONG OTHER
THINGS, SO, YOU MENTIONED , A
MOMENT AGO, IT SEEMS FAIRLY
REMOTE. AND, LESS PLAUSIBLE,
BUT, BUT, WHAT ? WHAT IS THAT
UNDERSTANDING BASED OFF OF ?
HOW ATTENUATED AND/OR REMOTE
ARE THESE , I THINK, VALID
CONCERNS, BASED ON WHAT WE HAVE
SEEN. ALL WE CAN GO OFF OF, WE
ARE NOT THE FIRST JURISDICTION
IN THE COUNTRY OR IN THE WORLD,
LIKE, PROPOSING TO ADOPT AND DO
A WIDESCALE IMPLEMENTATION OF
THIS TECHNOLOGY. I MEAN, WHAT
-- HOW PREVALENT , OR NOT, HOW
REMOTE, OR ATTENUATED, OR NOT,
HOW MANY DOCUMENTED , KNOWN.
MAYBE KNOWN IS A BETTER
INCIDENCE OF THESE SCENARIOS,
WHAT ARE WE SEEING IN THIS
PRACTICE IN OTHER
JURISDICTIONS?
>> I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY IN
THIS AREA. I WOULD NOTE, IN THE
SCENARIO THAT IS OF CONCERN, IT
IS A VALID CONCERN, SPOKANE.
THAT IS THE CLOSEST MAJOR CITY
TO IDAHO, THE SPOKANE POLICE
DEPARTMENT HAS ALPR
CAPABILITIES AND THEY HAVE NOT
RECEIVED ANY TYPE OF WARRANT
FOR THOSE RECORDS. AND THAT
WOULD BE THE MOST LIKELY CITY.
THE CLOSEST MAJOR CITY TO IDAHO
THAT PROVIDES HEALTHCARE
SERVICES. AND SO, IT IS NOT
TAKING PLACE, IN SPOKANE, WE
CONFERRED WITH OUR COLLEAGUES
IN SPOKANE, I AM NOT AWARE OF
ANY JURISDICTION IN WASHINGTON
THAT HAS RECEIVED ANY TYPE OF
REQUEST FOR THAT TYPE OF DATA.
AND, --
>> COUNCILMEMBER, THIS IS
IMPORTANT. I STARTED OUT BY
SAYING, THESE WERE FLAGGED AND
INVESTIGATED, TO ENSURE THAT WE
WOULD NOT BE PROBE PUTTING --
TRYING TO PUT ANY PRIVACY
ISSUES AT RISK. I HAVE READ
ONLINE, WHAT IS GOING TO
HAPPEN, BUT WHAT I DO NOT SEE
IN ANY DOCUMENTS IS A CITATION
TO ANY EVIDENCE OR RECORDS. I
KNOW THAT THERE WAS RESEARCH
THAT WAS DONE. I BELIEVE IT WAS
CEDAR RAPIDS. I MIGHT BE
GETTING THAT WRONG. BUT IT IS A
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS
ORGANIZATION, PROVIDING RIGHTS
WITHIN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON,
THEY DECIDED TO DISCONTINUE
THEIR SEATTLE, WASHINGTON
BRANCH, BUT I THINK MAYBE
EVERETT, SNOHOMISH, RENTON,
THEY HAD INFORMATION ABOUT
INCREASED LEVELS OF SERVICES,
THAT MEANS THAT IT IS HAVING AN
IMPACT. AND TO THE POINT,
SPOKANE, THEY HAVE REPORTED
SIGNIFICANTLY-INCREASED LEVELS,
THAT IS WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT,
BECAUSE IF YOU ARE DRIVING,
YES, IT IS PERFECTLY POSSIBLE
THAT SOMEONE DRIVES ALL THE WAY
TO SEATTLE TO OBTAIN THAT
SERVICE, BUT IT DOES SEEM MORE
LIKELY MAY BE THAT IT WOULD BE
FROM OUT IN ELLENSBURG,
SPOKANE, SOMEWHERE ON THE
EASTSIDE. WE DO NOT KNOW, WITH
THOSE INCREASED SERVICE LEVELS,
LIKE IN THE RENTON AREA, PEOPLE
FLYING IN, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT
IS PEOPLE DRIVING IN, YOU KNOW,
THIS REQUIRES YOU TO BRING YOUR
VEHICLE. AND AGAIN, THIS IS WHY
I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE CELL
PHONE, IF YOU WANT TO TRACK IT,
SIMILARLY, YOU WOULD HAVE
ACCESS, WITH CALIFORNIA BEING
CLOSEST TO THEM, TO HAVE A
STATE WHERE IT WAS ALL FULLY
LEGAL, AND NOT RESTRICTED IN
ANY WAY, WHERE I HAVE READ IN
THE LITERATURE, IT IS, ONE OF
THE BIGGEST CONCERNS IS HAVING
ACCESS TO SERVICES CLOSE TO
YOUR HOME. AND IT IS A BURDEN
TO GO THERE, IT IS NOT A TRIP
THAT ANYONE ENJOYS. BUT THE
CLOSENESS OF THAT, THAT IS
IMPORTANT TO PROVIDING
BLANKETED REPRODUCTIVE
SERVICES, AND REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS, IF THAT REMAINS TRUE,
YOU KNOW, I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY
EVIDENCE OF ANY JURISDICTION
WHERE THIS TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN
REQUESTED. AXON DENIES IT,
MICROSOFT, THERE IS THE AZURE
CLOUD, THAT ADDS ANOTHER LAYER,
THIRD-PARTY STORAGE. AND, WE
HAVE NOT. SPOKANE HAS NOT. BUT
I AM NOT SEEING IS ANY EVIDENCE
OF THIS ACTIVITY. I FULLY SEE,
THEORETICALLY, IT IS POSSIBLE,
IT WARRANTS DUE ISSUE, I CANNOT
IMAGINE THAT THESE REPRODUCTIVE
RIGHTS HAVE BEEN CRIMINALIZED
ANYWHERE, BUT I HAVE BEEN, AND
I DO NOT KNOW, HOW AGGRESSIVE
THOSE JURISDICTIONS ARE ABOUT
TO BE. I DO NOT HAVE ANY
EVIDENCE OF IT. AND, NOR, HAVE
I SEEN ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT
PRODUCED IN ANY OF THE
LITERATURE REVIEWED.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ?
>> SORRY, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY,
I DIRECTED MY QUESTION TO YOU.
IF OUR CENTRAL STAFF EXPERT HAS
THEIR OWN POINT OF VIEW ON THAT
QUESTION, WE WOULD LOVE TO HEAR
THAT, AS WELL.
>> THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO,
YOU KNOW, I WAS , I WAS
BASICALLY, I WAS GOING TO
REITERATE WHAT WAS JUST SAID.
IN THE SENSE THAT, I AM NOT
AWARE OF THE SPECIFIC INSTANCE
WHERE ALPR DATA HAS BEEN SOUGHT
FROM A THIRD PARTY VENDOR FOR
THIS PURPOSE, HOWEVER, I AM
GOING TO SAY THAT FOLKS WILL
PROBABLY BE AWARE OF THE RECENT
CASE SETTLED BETWEEN THE TEXAS
A JOURNEY -- ATTORNEY GENERAL,
RELATED TO TEXAS ATTEMPTING TO
COMPEL SEATTLE CHILDREN'S
HOSPITAL TO DISCLOSE
INFORMATION RELATING TO YOUNG
PEOPLE SEEKING GENDER AFFIRMING
CARE , WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT
THE SAME TYPE OF RECORDS,
TYPICALLY SPEAKING, OR THE SAME
TYPE OF TECHNOLOGY, I DO THINK
THAT IT IS, IN A SENSE, THE
EXAMPLE OF THE TYPE OF
OUT-OF-STATE, YOU KNOW, THE
SAME TYPE OF OUT-OF-STATE DATA
ACCESS POTENTIAL, AND THE
RISKS. AND THE RISKS THEREIN.
AND , I , YOU KNOW , THE OTHER
THING, IN THAT REGARD, IT IS,
THE MORE, THE GREATER AMOUNT OF
DATA THAT EXISTS, THE GREATER
THE OPPORTUNITY OR THE GREATER
THE INCENTIVE IS POTENTIALLY,
FOR OUT-OF-STATE REQUESTERS TO
TRY TO ACCESS IT. I AM NOT
DISAGREEING WITH ANYTHING THAT
WAS SAID EARLIER , BUT I DO
THINK, YOU KNOW, TO MY
KNOWLEDGE, THIS COULD BE THE
LARGEST DEPLOYMENT OF ALPR , IN
THE STATE, TO DATE. AND IT IS
ONE OF THESE THINGS THAT IS
HARD TO PREDICT THE DATA HAS
NOT EXISTED ON THE SCALE THAT
HAS, UP UNTIL NOW, THERE MAY
NOT HAVE BEEN THAT SAME KIND OF
ATTENTION PAID TO
>> THANK YOU FOR THAT
ADDITIONAL CONTEXT. YOU APTLY
NOTED AN EXAMPLE I WAS NOT
AWARE OF, BUT I AM GLAD YOU
PROVIDED APPROPRIATE CONTEXT,
IN TERMS OF DISTINGUISHING THE
PATTERN BETWEEN THERE, AND
HERE, BETWEEN WANTING TO DRAW
REASONABLE INFERENCES , BUT NOT
AT ALL THE SAME UNDERLYING
TECHNOLOGY ISSUE, SOME OF THE
MORE BROUGHT ISSUES SIMILAR,
CAN YOU, SINCE THIS IS AN ISSUE
THAT I WAS NOT PREVIOUSLY AWARE
OF, CAN YOU COMMENT ON, WHETHER
OR NOT, TEXAS WAS SUCCESSFUL?
SUCCESSFUL IN HONORING AND
SUCCESSFULLY RETAINING THE
GENDER AFFIRMING CARE
INFORMATION FROM SEATTLE
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL ? WERE
THEY SUCCESSFUL ON THE MERITS
OF THE MOTION? THAT IS
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
>> THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION. MY
UNDERSTANDING , IN BRIEFING THE
CASE, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF
TEXAS HAD BROUGHT SUIT TO TRY
TO COMPEL CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL
IN SEATTLE TO PRODUCE DATED,
RELATING -- DATA , RELATING TO
TEXAS RESIDENTS. TRYING TO
RETAIN CERTAIN FORMS OF
HEALTHCARE AT CHILDREN'S
HOSPITAL. I BELIEVE THAT THE
CASE WAS SETTLED. AND THE
SETTLEMENT INCLUDED THE FACT
THAT CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL WOULD
NOT DISCLOSE THE DATA , IN
RETURN, THEY AGREED TO NOT DO
BUSINESS IN TEXAS, I BELIEVE
THEY HAD SOME EMPLOYEES, SOME
REMOTE EMPLOYEES RESIDING IN
TEXAS WORKING FOR SEATTLE
CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL. THEY
AGREED TO DISCONTINUE THAT
PRACTICE AS PART OF THE SETTLED
ARGUMENT.
>> THANK YOU.
>> THIS WILL BE THE LAST TIME,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> PICK YOU, THANK YOU, YEAH.
TWO POINTS. ONE IS, THE SHIELD
LAW WAS PASSED APRIL 27th,
2023, SO IT HAS ONLY BEEN IN
EFFECT FOR A LITTLE OVER ONE
YEAR. AND SO, IT HAS NOT BEEN A
LOT OF TIME, A LOT OF TIME FOR
PEOPLE, FOR US TO SEE . AND, IN
TERMS OF WHAT IS HAPPENING
ELSEWHERE, AND, I DO NOTE, THIS
IS DATA THAT WAS PRESENTED TO
US BY THE ACLU, IN 2023, 71
CALIFORNIA POLICE AGENCIES IN
22 COUNTIES WERE SHARING ALPR
DATA WITH POLICE IN
ANTI-ABORTION STATES, DESPITE
SUCH SHARING BEING IN VIOLATION
OF CALIFORNIA LAW, AND IN 2022.
A YEAR BEFORE THE SHIELD LAW
WAS PASSED, A REPORT BY THE UW
SAID THAT DATA THAT WAS
COLLECTED IN CERTAIN
WASHINGTON. JURISDICTIONS WAS
BEING SHARED . VANCOUVER SHARED
ITS DATA WITH 600S BEFORE
AGENCIES, INCLUDING I.C.E. AND
WASHINGTON, D.C. THIS SPECIFIC
PATTERN HAS NOT HAPPENED YET, A
NAUTILUS PATTERNS HAVE
HAPPENED, IN FACT. THANK YOU.
>> NOTING THE SOURCES OF THAT.
BECAUSE, IF THOSE SOURCES ARE
CORRECT, ONE WOULD THINK, THE
L.A. TIMES, CHANNEL TIMES, NEW
YORK TIMES, CNN, WASHINGTON
POST, ALL ACROSS THE BOARD,
WOULD BE REPORTING ON THAT.
THIS IS ALL PART OF THE
BALANCING ACT. I AM DEFINITELY
IN SUPPORT OF PRIVACY CONCERNS,
AND THE LIKE. BUT, I AM ALSO
CONCERNED ABOUT STOLEN VEHICLES
BEING USED IN VIOLENT CRIMES IN
SEATTLE.
>> FROM WHAT I HAVE HEARD
THERE, AND I HAVE READ THAT
SAME LANGUAGE, THOSE WERE
EITHER POLICE DEPARTMENTS THAT
WERE VIOLATING THE LAW OR
POLICE DEPARTMENTS THAT WERE
VOLUNTARILY SHARING ALPR DATA
WITH JURISDICTION. WE WILL DO
NEITHER OF THOSE. IF I MAY, AS
WELL, JUST TO CONFIRM, WHAT MR.
BRIAN MAXEY SAID, IN
PARTICULAR, THE UW REPORT
HIGHLIGHTS WHAT APPEARS TO BE,
YOU KNOW, THE DEPARTMENTS BEING
OUT OF COMPLIANCE WITH
WASHINGTON STATE LAW, IN
REGARDS TO THE SHIELD ACT AND
TO KEEP WASHINGTON WORKING,
WHICH IS PROTECTING URBAN AND
INTERURBAN COMMUNITIES. WHAT I
WOULD ADD THERE, THAT, THAT IS
DISTINGUISHABLE , FROM
COMPELLED DISCLOSURE, DIRECTLY
FROM THE THIRD-PARTY VENDOR,
WHICH WE HAVE NO EVIDENCE OF, I
DO THINK, THAT, THAT, THAT
INFORMATION DOES SPEAK TO THE
LEVEL OF INTEREST, THAT OUTSIDE
LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES, AND,
POTENTIALLY, BODIES OF THE
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE.
AS WELL AS A DISTINCT ISSUE, TO
REITERATE WHAT I SAID BEFORE,
IT SPEAKS TO THE LEVEL OF
INTEREST THAT IS THERE, THE
UTILITY TO FOLKS OUTSIDE.
>> YOU KNOW WHAT ? WE ARE GOING
TO MOVE ON , BUT IT IS
INTERESTING. IT IS INTERESTING
THAT THE SEATTLE PD, THE CITY
OF SEATTLE, THEY HAVE THE BEST
ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM IN THE
COUNTRY. PROBABLY BECAUSE OF
THE CONSENT DECREE. SO, HERE IS
A CASE, WHERE OUR SYSTEM WILL
BE BENEFICIAL TO US. WE JUST
HAD, INSPECTOR GENERAL JUDGE
WAS SPEAKING TO HER OVERSIGHT
RESPONSIBILITIES. AS IT RELATES
TO TECHNOLOGY. THIS WILL BE
COVERED BY DISTRICTS IN
CALIFORNIA, WHO WERE
DISOBEYING, TO YOUR POINT,
DISOBEYING THE SHIELD LAW, WE
HAVE THE BEST ACCOUNTABILITY
SYSTEM. ON TOP OF THAT, THAT IS
PART OF THE OIG, REVIEWING THE
USE OF TECHNOLOGY, OF WHICH
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY GOING TO BE
THE TOP OF THE LIST, OR PRETTY
MUCH BETTER. SO, I AM JUST
GOING TO USE THAT AS THE FINAL
POINT. AT THIS POINT, I WOULD
LIKE TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH,
FOR YOUR REMARKS, MR. TAMASO
JOHNSON, MR. BRIAN MAXEY, AND
MS. KERRY KEEFE. AT THIS POINT,
I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT
COUNCIL PASS COUNCIL BILL 120
778.
>> SO MOVED.
>> SECONDED.
>> SO IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. NORMALLY I WOULD GIVE
OUR COMMENTS, BUT WE HAVE GONE
LONGER. THIS FOLLOWS UP THE
MEETING THAT WE HAD AHEAD OF
THE FULL COUNCIL. I BELIEVE
THAT CENTRAL STAFF, THEY HAVE
GIVEN THEIR PRESENTATION ON
THIS AS WELL. AND SO, I WILL
MOVE, AT THIS POINT, I WILL ASK
IF THERE ARE ANY AMENDMENTS TO
THE BILL?
>> THANK YOU, JEFF. YES, I HAVE
AN AMENDMENT. AMENDMENT ONE,
EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE A COPY OF,
THIS IS TO ADDRESS THE PUBLIC
RECORDS REQUEST CONCERN WITH
THE LEGISLATION. THIS
EFFECTIVELY CODIFIES WHETHER
SPD , WHEN THEY RECEIVE A
PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST , WHICH
IS THAT THEY ARE PROVIDING ,
NOT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION,
THE INFORMATION WITH A LICENSE
PLATE ABLE TO BE TAGGED ?
>> [ INDISCERNIBLE - LOW VOLUME
]
>> I'M SORRY?
>> CAN YOU MOVE IT.
>> AT THIS TIME, I WILL MOVE
AMENDMENT ONE TO COUNCIL BILL
120778 AND I WILL ASK FOR A
SECOND SPENT SECOND.
>> IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED. COUNCILMEMBER MOORE,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED . I THINK
YOU HAVE ALREADY ADDRESSED IT.
>> I AM DONE, THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS ON AMENDMENT ONE, ON
THE DAIS? THANK YOU. I HAVE
READ IT MYSELF AND I HAVE GONE
THROUGH IT, OBVIOUSLY, AND I
SUPPORT IT. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT ONE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH
? COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA ?
>> AMENDMENT ONE IS ADOPTED. AT
THIS POINT. THERE HAS BEEN A
DISCUSSION. AND I DON'T THINK
, I WILL LOOK DOWN, THE
POSSIBILITY OF THE 30 DAY AREA.
SO, AT THIS POINT, I WILL PASS
ON AMENDMENT TWO. ARE THERE ANY
FINAL COMMENTS, ON THE BILL, AS
PRESENTED AND AMENDED BY
AMENDMENT ONE?
>> YES, COUNCIL CHAIR.
>> COUNCILMEMBER MOORE.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR
INDULGENCE. I AM GOING TO BE
VOTING AGAINST. I AM GOING TO
BE ABSTAINING. I WILL VOTE ON
THE UNDERLYING BILL, BECAUSE I
AM IN THE PROCESS OF REDUCING
THE RETENTION PERIOD FOR THE
NON-K SPECIFIC DATA . TO 48
HOURS. AND PROCEDURES ,
RELATING TO THAT. AND SO, THAT
SHOULD BE COMING , HOPEFULLY,
TO COMMITTEE, IN A SHORT PERIOD
OF TIME. UNTIL THAT IS
CONSIDERED, I AM NOT
COMFORTABLE VOTING ON THIS
UNDERLYING LEGISLATION DID I
WANTED TO EXPLAIN MY VOTE.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
MOORE. BY THE WAY, THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE, AND
EVERYONE, FOR THE CONSULTATION
AND DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE
BEEN HAVING, I HAVE BEEN HAVING
MANY WITH COUNCILMEMBER MOORE
AND I AM NOT SURPRISED BY THIS
AT ALL. AND , SO, THAT GOES TO
THE AMENDMENT TO PEACE. ANY
OTHER FINAL COMMENTS? OKAY.
THANK YOU. WILL THE CLERK
PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON THE
PASSAGE OF COUNCIL BILL 120778
AS AMENDED ?
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH.
COUNCILMEMBER MOORE ?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA ? CHAIR
CATTLE ? THERE ARE FOUR YES
VOTES, ZERO NO, AND ONE
ABSTENTION.
>> COUNCIL BILL 120778 WILL BE
SENT TO THE FULL CITY
CONTRADICTED I RECOGNIZE THAT
WE HAVE GONE OVER BY NEARLY
HALF HOUR. OKAY ? GETTING TO
THE LAST POINT. WE HAVE REACHED
THE LAST POINT IN THE MATTER.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER BUSINESS
TO COME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE
BEFORE WE ADJOURN? HEARING
NONE, SAYING NONE, NO FURTHER
BUSINESS . WE ARE ADJOURNED.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.