>> ON THE OPPOSITE COAST, A CITY
THAT I KNOW WELL FOR MY TIME
THERE . THE ACTIVATION OF THE
NATIONAL GUARD, THE TAKING OVER
OF THE METROPOLITAN POLICE
DEPARTMENT IS WRONG. IT IS
UNPRECEDENTED AND IT IS WRONG.
AND I HEAR THE JUSTIFICATIONS ,
AND I THINK THAT , INSTEAD, IF
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WANTS TO
HELP CITIES AND PUBLIC SAFETY,
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE SEATTLE
CONTEXT, THEY SHOULD BE
INTERCEPTING THE FLOW OF GUNS
AND DRUGS INTO OUR CITY,
PRIMARILY ALONG I-5. THAT'S NOT
THE NATIONAL GUARD, THAT IS ATF,
AND DEA, AT VI. THEY SHOULD BE
SUPPORTING THE RECRUITING AND
HIRING OF SWORN OFFICERS, LIKE
OUR WASHINGTON STATE PROGRAM
UNDER GOVERNOR FERGUSON. THEY
SHOULD BE LOOKING TO SUPPORT OUR
FIREFIGHTERS IN STAFFING AND
EQUIPMENT, ESPECIALLY EQUIPMENT,
AND THE NEEDS ARE SO IMPORTANT.
AND NOT IMPORTANT JUST FOR US,
AS WE SAW WITH THE L.A. FIRES.
FIREFIGHTERS FROM THIS REGION,
FROM THE CITY IN THE REGION WENT
TO SUPPORT THEM . WHICH IS A
GREAT TRANSITION TO ANOTHER AREA
WHERE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
SHOULD BE HELPING US IN PUBLIC
SAFETY, NOT SENDING THE NATIONAL
GUARD. BUT TO BE SUPPORTIVE IN
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS. BY
ENSURING FEMA IS WELL SUPPORTED
AND NOT HOLLOWED OUT, WHICH IS
HAPPENING RIGHT NOW, OR SHUT
DOWN COMPLETELY. WE NEED FEMA .
EVERY CITY IN THIS COUNTRY NEEDS
FEMA. WE NEED TO HAVE THAT
SUPPORT. WE'VE SEEN IT AGAIN
AND AGAIN. YET THIS
ADMINISTRATION IS LOOKING TO CUT
IT. AND INSTEAD THEY ARE SENDING
THE NATIONAL GUARD WASHINGTON,
D.C. AS I SAID IN A RECENT
CHAIR,, OUR STANDARDS WITH THE
SEATTLE LEASE DEPARTMENT AND
PUBLIC SAFETY MORE BROADLY IS
PROFESSIONALISM AND TO BE
PROFESSIONAL AT ALL TIMES. THE
IDEA IS SETTING THE STANDARD. WE
NEED FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TO
DO THE SAME. AND IT IS NOT DOING
IT NOW. WE HAVE SEEN IT WITH
I.C.E. . THAT IS NOT THE
STANDARD. ALSO THE STANDARD IS
NOT BRINGING THE NATIONAL GUARD
UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES. WHAT
IS HAPPENING WITH FEDERAL LAW
ENFORCEMENT IS NOT IN KEEPING
WITH THAT STANDARD. AGAIN, AS I
SAID TWO MEETINGS AGO, WE NEED
VARSITY LEVEL. AND WHAT WE ARE
SEEING OUT OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IS REALLY JUNIOR
VARSITY. I WILL ALSO ADD THAT
THE USE OF NATIONAL GUARD AND
LAW ENFORCEMENT FUNCTION IN THIS
COUNTRY TO AMERICAN IDEALS. THE
MILITARY'S ROLE IN THIS IS NOT
THIS, BUT RATHER TO DEFEND THE
NATION. WE NEED LAW ENFORCEMENT
THAT IS OF A GUARDIAN ETHOS, NOT
A WARRIOR ETHOS. WE NEED MORE
LOU, NOT LACK. I SIT HERE, IN
ADDITION TO BEING A
COUNCILMEMBER, BEING A VETERAN.
A MILITARY VETERAN, WITH MY
COLLEAGUE, COUNCILMEMBER SAKA.
AND I THINK I CAN SPEAK FOR
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA , BUT ALSO
OUR THIRD VETERAN ON THE
COUNCIL, TO SAY THIS IS NOT
RIGHT. IN TERMS OF USING
LITERARY PERSONNEL, THE NATIONAL
GUARD, IN THE CONTEXT THAT IT IS
BEING USED. THIS IS NOT A
NATIONAL DISASTER OR SOMETHING
ALONG THOSE LINES. THIS IS
UNPRECEDENTED AND IT IS WRONG.
THAT GUARDIAN MODEL, AND THE
PROFESSIONALISM, THAT IS WHAT WE
HAVE IN SEATTLE. THAT IS WHAT WE
ARE STRIVING FOR. WITH OUR
POLICE DEPARTMENT AND PUBLIC
SAFETY, MORE GENERALLY. THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT IS HERE TO
PROTECT AND SERVE. TO CARRY OUT
ITS MISSION TO PREVENT CRIME,
ENFORCE THE LAW, AND SUPPORT
QUALITY PUBLIC SAFETY. AND DO SO
WITH SEATTLE VALUES AND THE
SEATTLE WAY, WHICH IS SOMETHING
WE SEE, TO TRANSITION TO
TODAY'S SCHEDULE, WITH OUR
LEGISLATION. SEPARATELY, I WAS
GOING TO SAY, REGARDING CRIMINAL
JUSTICE, AND THIS WAS GOING TO
BE THE MAIN COMMENT TODAY, BUT I
WILL BE REALLY QUICK. I HAVE
BEEN HAVING DISCUSSIONS WITH THE
CITY ATTORNEY AND THE PRESIDING
JUDGE OF THE SEVEN SEATTLE
MUNICIPAL COURT. WE NEED A
FUNCTIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEM. WE WILL CONTINUE TO WORK
THAT, AND IN FACT, OUR MEETINGS
IN SEPTEMBER WILL BE FOCUSED ON
THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM,
FOCUSED ON THE CITY ATTORNEY'S
OFFICE AND THE SEATTLE MUNICIPAL
COURT. THOSE EFFORTS, AND THE
EFFORTS MORE BROADLY, DOING WHAT
IT TAKES TO BE SUCCESSFUL AS A
WEST COAST BLUE CITY THAT IS
FOCUSED ON PUBLIC SAFETY AND
CREATING A SAFE SPACE. THAT IS
WHAT WE ARE DOING HERE IN
SEATTLE, THAT IS WHAT WE ARE
DOING WITH THIS COUNCIL OF OURS
AND WITH THIS COMMITTEE. WITH
THAT , CHAIR COMMENT, I WOULD
LIKE TO OPEN UP THE HYBRID
PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. PUBLIC
COMMENT SHOULD RELATED ITEMS ON
THE AGENDA WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF
THE COMMITTEE. HOW MANY SPEAKERS
DO WE HAVE SIGNED UP TODAY?
>> CURRENTLY WE HAVE NINE
IN-PERSON SPEAKERS SIGNED UP AND
SEVEN REMOTE.
>> EACH PERSON WILL HAVE TWO
MINUTES, STARTING IN PERSON. CAN
YOU PLEASE READ THE PUBLIC
COMMENT INSTRUCTIONS?
>> THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
WILL BE MODERATED IN THE
FOLLOWING MANNER. THE PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD IS UP TO 60
MINUTES. SPEAKERS WILL BE CALLED
IN THE ORDER IN WHICH THEY
REGISTERED. SPEAKERS WILL HEAR A
CHIME WHEN 10 SECONDS OR LESS OF
THE TIME. SPEAKERS MICS WILL BE
MUTED IF THEY DO NOT IN THEIR
COMMENTS WITH ENOUGH TIME TO
ALLOW US TO CALL ON THE NEXT
SPEAKER. PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD
IS NOW OPEN, WILL BEGIN WITH THE
FIRST SPEAKER ON THE LIST. THE
FIRST IN-PERSON SPEAKER IS DAN
FRENCH.
>> MY COMMENTS INITIATE AT THE
UNSAFE 130th STREET PROJECT AND
THE FIFTH AVENUE ADJACENT TO
THAT, WHICH IS ALSO UNSAFE AND
DANGEROUS. I HAVE POINTED THIS
OUT TO THE COMMITTEE MULTIPLE
TIMES AND HAVE BEEN BASICALLY
IGNORED. HOW DOES THAT RELATE TO
TODAY'S AGENDA? IT DOESN'T ?
IT DOES. WHEN WE SHOWED THE
BACKUPS AND TRAFFIC PROBLEMS
WERE DANGEROUS, THEY SENT THE
MESSAGE TO S. AND THE RESPONSE
WAS WE HAVE CAMERAS. WELL,
JEEPERS, YOU HAVE CAMERAS. YOU
STILL HAVE A PROBLEM. YOU ARE
PROPOSING TO PUT MORE CAMERAS IN
THERE. GREAT. THE NEWS MEDIA HAS
DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB OF
PROVIDING YOU THE ADVERTISEMENT
FOR PUTTING MORE CAMERAS OUT IN
PUBLIC. THAT'S NOT GOING TO DO
A HECK OF A LOT OF GOOD. IN
FACT, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO VERY
MUCH GOOD AT ALL. YOU MIGHT BE
LUCKY TO CATCH PEOPLE AFTER THE
FACT, IF THEY ARE NOT WEARING A
MASK. IF THEY ARE NOT WEARING A
HOODIE. IF THEY ARE FACING,
STARING AT THE CAMERA. IF THEY
ARE NOT, YOU NEED A COP THERE.
GET MORE ENFORCEMENT, AND DON'T
USE THE FALSE INFORMATION THAT
WAS PROVIDED THE LAST TIME I WAS
HERE. YES, I WATCHED AFTER I
GAVE MY TESTIMONY, THERE WAS AN
INDIVIDUAL WHO GAVE HIS
INFORMATION, AND PART OF THAT
WAS FALSE. I CAN PROVE IT.
NOBODY THANK
YOU, I YIELD MY TIME.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. TO STATE
AGAIN, COMMENTS ARE ON TODAY'S
AGENDA WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE
COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. AND MY
COLLEAGUE'S COMMITTEE, TOO.
>> NEXT UP IS BILL CLIFFORD TO
BE FOLLOWED BY CHARLIE RICHTER.
>> YEAH, I'VE LIVED ON 22nd
AVENUE NEAR FIRST STREET, ON THE
WESTERN EDGE OF YOUR GARFIELD
PROPOSAL SINCE 1979. SHORTLY
AFTER I MOVED IN I WAS RECRUITED
INTO, QUOTE, ONE OF THE OLDEST
BLOCK WATCHES IN THE CITY. WE
ARE STILL GOING. A WEEK AGO
TONIGHT WE CLOSED THE STREET FOR
AN SPD SPONSORED NIGHT OUT. WE
HAVE 30 OR 40 NEIGHBORS THERE ON
AUGUST 5th, AND I DID NOT HEAR
ANYTHING ABOUT THE RTC PROPOSAL.
WE ARE IN IT, WHY WERE WE NOT
NOTIFIED ? I KIND OF GOT THE
IMPRESSION IT WAS JUST
INSTITUTIONS AND BUSINESSES. ON
THE EIGHTH, A NEIGHBOR POSTED A
QUESTION ON OUR GOOGLE GROUP
LIST . OUR BIGGEST ISSUE WAS THE
EROSION OF OUR CIVIL RIGHTS
UNDER THE FOURTH AMENDMENT.
WASHINGTON HAS A REPUTATION FOR
GOING BEYOND FEDERAL BILL OF
RIGHTS . IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE
IT. I YOUR JULY 31st MEETING,
MR. MAXEY THOUGHT SPD COULD GET
A VIDEO, HE THOUGHT THE
LIKELIHOOD WAS VERY LOW. A
PROVOST OF CHAIR KETTLE'S
COMMENTS ON WHERE THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IS GOING. IT FEELS
MORE LIKELY NOW THAN IT DID A
YEAR AGO. WE HAVE LOST ROE V
WADE, VOTERS RIGHTS ACTS BEING
ERODED, MANY MORE PERSONAL
FREEDOMS AND DEMOCRATIC
INSTITUTIONS ARE GOING DOWN THE
DRAIN. THAT'S THE CONTEXT HERE,
BY MY NEIGHBORS WHO ARE
CONCERNED ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.
OUR NEXT BIGGEST ISSUE WAS THE
DISPARATE IMPACT ON MINORITY
YOUTH. I'VE SEEN IT BEFORE, IN
THE CENTRAL AREA , AND, YOU
KNOW, I WOULDN'T WANT THAT JOB.
BUT THERE IS INSTITUTIONAL BIAS
IN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE
PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE, WHICH IS
HARD ON MINORITY YOUTH IN
PARTICULAR. COMING IN THIRD WAS
WHY WAS OUR RESIDENTIAL STREET
INCLUDED IN THIS? 22nd HAS HAD
ITS UP AND DOWNS, BUT IT HAS
BEEN PRETTY QUIET FOR MANY
YEARS. THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS
CHANGED. 25 YEARS AGO, 21st
AVENUE, ONE BLOCK OVER, WAS THE
HOST ROW. IT'S NOT ANYMORE.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH'S
AMENDMENT TAKES THE HEAT OUT OF
THIS ISSUE, BUT THE OTHER MEMBER
ISSUES REMAIN. AM I DONE? OKAY,
SORRY.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP IS CHARLIE
RICHTER.
>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS
CHARLIE, AND I AM HERE TO SPEAK
AGAINST THE USE AND EXPANSION OF
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGIES IN OUR
CITY. CCTV DOES NOT REDUCE
VIOLENT CRIME, IT DOES NOT MAKE
US SAFER, AND IT DOES NOT
PROTECT OUR COMMUNITY. IN FACT,
EVIDENCE SHOWS QUITE THE
OPPOSITE, PARTICULARLY IN HOW
POLICE USED SURVEILLANCE TOOLS.
THERE ARE FAR TOO MANY WAYS FOR
ME TO LIST HERE, BUT I WILL! AND
A BIG ONE. POLICE SHARE DATA
WITH WHOMEVER THEY PLEASE. AND
WITH CLOUD-BASED SOFTWARE, THIRD
PARTIES IN OTHER STATES CAN
ACCESS OUR DATA WITH EVEN
GREATER EASE. I ESPECIALLY WANT
TO MAKE YOU AWARE THAT THE
POLICE SHARE DATA WITH I.C.E. TO
FACILITATE THE VIOLENT ABDUCTION
OF MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. I
HAVE WITNESSED THE COLLUSION
WITH MY OWN EYES AS I.C.E.
ABDUCTED PEOPLE STRAIGHT FROM
THEIR APPOINTMENTS AT U.S. CIS
WHILE THE POLICE GASSED AND
FLASH BANG FOLKS WHO TRY TO STOP
THIS FROM HAPPENING. THIS
ILLUSTRATES A COMPLETE LACK OF
PROFESSIONALISM AND A FAILURE TO
PROTECT AND SERVE. SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGIES ARE NOT A TOOL FOR
KEEPING OUR COMMUNITIES SAFE.
THEY ARE A TOOL FOR TARGETING
AND HARMING MARGINALIZED GROUPS.
IF YOU CARE ABOUT CONSTITUENTS,
PLEASE DO NOT LET SEATTLE BECOME
YET ANOTHER POND FOR THE
SURVEILLANCE STATE. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE
PETER KAUNDA.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL. MY
NAME IS PETER, I LIVE IN GREEN
LAKE, DISTRICT 6. I DO NOT WANT
THE POLICE TO WATCH ME AND MY
FAMILY AS WE GO ABOUT OUR DAILY
LIVES. SURVEILLANCE LEADS TO A
LOSS OF PRIVACY, CREATIVITY, AND
INDIVIDUALITY. CCTV HAS NO
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON VIOLENT
CRIME, RESEARCH SHOWS. I AM
ASKING THIS COMMITTEE, REJECT
LEGISLATION THAT WOULD MASSIVELY
EXPAND SPD'S CAMERA NETWORK,
THAT WOULD MAKE PERMANENT PILOT
SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM AND WOULD
EXPAND SPD'S REAL TIME CRIME
CENTER. MORE CAMERAS AND
TECHNOLOGY DO NOT MAKE ME FEEL
SAFE RAISING A FAMILY IN
SEATTLE. THEY MADE ME FEEL LESS
SAFE. AS WE SAW YESTERDAY, THE
PRESIDENT IS LIABLE TO TAKE OVER
MUNICIPAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS.
THIS LEGISLATION WOULD ALLOW THE
POLICE AND WHOEVER CONTROLS THEM
MORE ABILITY TO TARGET WHOEVER
THEY WANT, AND WE DON'T KNOW
WHO THE TARGETS ARE GOING TO BE.
I.C.E. IS ALREADY USING
SURVEILLANCE DATA LIKE THIS TO
HELP KIDNAP AND TERRORIZE
IMMIGRANTS AND OUR NEIGHBORS.
SPD ITSELF HAS A HISTORY OF
BIASED ENFORCEMENT AND
UNPROFESSIONALISM. COUNCIL
SHOULD REJECT ALL LEGISLATION
THAT EXPANDS SURVEILLANCE.
COUNCIL SHOULD, INSTEAD, SPEND
THESE MILLIONS THAT THE
TECHNOLOGIES WOULD COST ON
SAFETIES FOR COMMUNITY-BASED
SUPPORTS, LIKE HOUSING, FOOD
ACCESS, AND LIBRARIES. THANK YOU
FOR LISTENING.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE CONNOR NASH.
>> HELLO. I AM HERE IN
OPPOSITION TO THE EXPANSION OF
SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS IN THE
CITY. FIRST, THESE CAMERAS ARE
INVASIVE AND CAN BE CO-OPTED BY
THE FASCISTS IN THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT. JUST YESTERDAY,
TRUMP TOOK OVER D.C. OVER THE
LIE THAT OUR NATION'S CAPITAL
WAS OVERRUN WITH CRIME, AND SAID
HE WOULD GO MUCH FURTHER. IT IS
OBVIOUS HE WILL TRY TO GO AFTER
SEATTLE, SINCE HE HAS A DISDAIN
FOR OUR CITY, AND YOU ARE GIVING
THEM THE TOOLS TO DO IT.
ALTHOUGH YOU WROTE IN THE
ORIGINAL LAW THAT THE CAMERAS
WOULD STAY IN THE CONTROL OF THE
CITY, THERE WOULD BE SOME
FEDERAL COURT OR THE SUPREME
COURT THAT COULD RULE THEY HAVE
TO TURN OVER THE CAMERAS TO THE
FEDS. AND THERE IS NOTHING YOU
CAN WOULD DO ABOUT IT. FINALLY,
I WILL SAY THAT ALTHOUGH THESE
CAMERAS ARE INVASIVE, THEY HAVE
DONE NOTHING TO USURP CRIME IN
THE NEIGHBORHOOD I LIVE IN,
LITTLE SAIGON. THE CITY NEEDS TO
STOP CREATING HOSTILE
ARCHITECTURE LIKE THESE CAMERAS,
WITH SIGNS THAT SAY YOU'RE
BEING RECORDED, DESPITE FENCES
THAT ARE DETERRING PEOPLE TO
WANT TO GO TO OUR PARKS. OR THE
SIGNS THAT SAY THEY DON'T SELL
STOLEN GOODS, WHICH ARE USELESS,
BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE STILL SELLING
STOLEN GOODS RIGHT BELOW THOSE
SIGNS. INSTEAD, YOU SHOULD ALL
BE ADDRESSING THE ROOT CAUSES OF
CRIME AND INCREASING TREATMENT
RESOURCES THAT ARE DESPERATELY
NEEDED. I CHALLENGE ALL THE
PEOPLE ON THE COUNCIL TO GO THE
1.5 MILES DOWN THE STREET TO
LITTLE SAIGON TO SEE THE
FAILURES OF THIS COMMITTEE ON
ADDRESSING CRIME IN THE CITY.
THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE CS.
>> HI, THANK YOU FOR CHANGING
THE WORDING. HOWEVER, THIS STILL
DOES NOT HAVE MAPS OF THE NEW
AREAS. ITEM 44 NOW ONLY NAMES
THE FIRST ORIGINAL THREE
LOCATIONS BEING PART OF THE
PILOT, LEAVING OUT THE NEW
LOCATIONS. WHILE THE NEW
LOCATIONS AWAIT EVALUATION, THE
LIMIT IS NOT LIMITED TO THE
PILOT. IF THAT IS NOT YOUR
INTENT, IT IS AN EASY FIX TO
MAKE A LEGAL LANGUAGE SAY THAT
ALL SPD OWNED CCTV CAMERAS ARE
IN THE PILOT. REGARDLESS,
APPLYING FOR THE SAKE OF DOING
SOMETHING IS ON THE SAME AS
DOING A GOOD JOB. A DIFFICULT
PROBLEM DESERVES A
WELL-THOUGHT-OUT AND DATA-DRIVEN
DECISION, NOT THROWING THINGS AT
THE WALL AND HOPING THEY MIGHT
STICK. ESPECIALLY WHEN THESE
PRACTICAL APPROACHES ARE NOT
ONLY INEFFECTIVE BUT VERY COSTLY
AND HARMFUL. WE DON'T HAVE THE
FUNDS TO BE PLAYING THESE GAMES.
YOU NEED TO GET SERIOUS BY
LOOKING INTO THE ACTUAL WORK OF
ACADEMICS THAT SHOWS WHAT WORKS
AND WHAT DOESN'T. THE LARGEST
ASSESSMENT TO DATE ON CCTV
SYSTEMS IS THE PEER-REVIEWED
ANALYSIS, A STUDY OF STUDIES.
THE ROBUST META-ANALYSIS WAS 76
STUDIES THAT CCTV HAS NOSING THE
VEGAN EFFECTS ON VIOLENT CRIME.
IT HAS BEEN EXPLAINED REPEATEDLY
THAT OUR LOCAL LAWS DO NOT
PROTECT DATA STORED IN AXON.
EVEN SPD, DUE TO FEDERAL LAW NOT
LOCAL, CONTINUED REFERENCES TO
SEATTLE AND WASHINGTON LAWS THAT
PROVIDING SAFEGUARDS IS WOEFULLY
MISGUIDING THE PUBLIC. SAYING
SEATTLE IS NOT LIKE CHINA SHOWS
THE XENOPHOBIC SIMILARITIES. SPD
WANTS EVERY PUBLIC CAMERA IN
CCTV. PEOPLE ARE BEING CAN ABOUT
THE STREETS AND BEING
DISAPPEARED TO BLACK SITES,
PEOPLE ARE HAVING THEIR OPINIONS
POLICED ON WHAT THEY PUT ON
SOCIAL MEDIA. FUNNY PICTURES
THEY HAVE ON THEIR PHONE ARE
DETERMINING THEIR FATE. IT IS
CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT A SAFE
CITY TO DISSENT IN. THE ONLY
DIFFERENCE IS YOU HAVE THE POWER
TO STOP THE MASS SURVEILLANCE.
JUST BECAUSE IT IS NOT TRUMP
ASKING YOU TO ROLL THIS OUT DOES
NOT MAKE IT GOOD. RESIDENTS
DESERVE BETTER THAN THIS. THANK
YOU.
>> THANK YOU.
>> ARE LAST IN PERSON SPEAKER IS
NATHAN.
>> HI. I AM A GRADUATE OF
GARFIELD HIGH SCHOOL. I AM VERY
PROUD TO BE A GRADUATE OF
GARFIELD. GARFIELD IS THE SCHOOL
IN THE CITY THAT GETS TALKED
ABOUT LIKE IT IS A PROBLEM
SCHOOL. LIKE WE NEED MORE
SURVEILLANCE IN OUR SCHOOL. AND
WE DON'T. OUR SCHOOL IS GREAT,
AND I AM NOT COMFORTABLE WITH A
SURVEILLANCE STATE AROUND
GARFIELD HIGH SCHOOL IN
PARTICULAR. ADDITIONALLY, WITH
WHAT DONALD TRUMP IS DOING IN
OUR COUNTRY, I REALLY, REALLY
ASK AND DEMAND, ESPECIALLY, WE
VOTED FOR DEMOCRATS, NOT
REPUBLICANS. STOP DOING DONALD
TRUMP'S WORK FOR HIM ON THE
COUNCIL. I YIELD MY TIME.
>> THANK YOU. THE FIRST REMOTE
SPEAKER WILL BE MATT OFTEN
BOCKER. PLEASE PRESS STAR SIX
WHEN YOU HEAR THE PROMPT YOU
HAVE BEEN A MUTED.
>> HELLO, COUNCIL. MY NAME IS
MATT, I AM A RESIDENT OF CAPITOL
HILL AND A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER.
THERE'S TWO THINGS I HOPE THAT
YOU WILL KEEP IN YOUR MINDS AS
YOU CONSIDER EXPANDING CCTV
TODAY. THE FIRST ONE IS USING
DATA TO GUIDE YOUR DECISIONS.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF
WELL-DESIGNED STUDIES THAT
DEMONSTRATE INCREASED
SURVEILLANCE DOES NOT REDUCE GUN
VIOLENCE OR HUMAN TRAFFICKING,
AND DOES NOT MAKE PEOPLE SAFER.
ALTHOUGH I WISH WE HAD ENTIRELY
AVOIDED THE EXPENSIVE MISTAKES
OF CITIES LIKE DENVER, IN THE
BLUE STATE OF COLORADO, WHICH IS
AMONG SEVERAL CITY IS NOW
REMOVING THEIR EXISTING
SURVEILLANCE SYSTEMS, I
APPRECIATE THE COUNCIL BUILDING
INTO THE INITIAL CCTV PILOT AND
ANNUAL REVIEW AND TWO YOUR STUDY
OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
PROGRAM. GOOD GOVERNANCE DEPENDS
ON QUALITY DATA. I DO NOT
UNDERSTAND THE RATIONALE
PROGRESSING THIS PROCESS.
EXPANDING A PROGRAM WITHOUT
WAITING FOR INFORMATION IS A
HUGE GAMBLE OF PRECIOUS CITY
RESOURCES, ESPECIALLY WHEN WE
ALREADY HAVE A LOT OF EVIDENCE
THAT IT WILL BE A BAD BET. THE
OTHER THING I WANTED YOU TO KEEP
IN MIND IS THAT TRUST IN PUBLIC
OFFICIALS RIGHT NOW IS AT AN
ALL-TIME LOW. AT THE LAST
MEETING, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH SUGGESTED THAT SHE
HAD TALKED TO BUSINESS OWNERS
WHO WERE TOO FRIGHTENED TO TAKE
A PUBLIC STAND IN FAVOR OF CCTV
BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL
NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THEIR
BUSINESSES. WHEN COUNCILMEMBERS
BREAK AWAY FROM THE TESTIMONY OF
HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE
EXPRESSED THEIR OPPOSITION, AND
INSTEAD DEFERRED TO THE OPINION
OF MYSTERY PEOPLE WHO ARE TOO
SCARED TO COME GIVE PUBLIC
TESTIMONY, IT FRAYS THE FABRIC
OF OUR DEMOCRACY ITSELF. AS A
MAN WHOSE EVERYDAY LIFE WILL BE
DOCUMENTED BY THESE CAMERAS, I
HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW WHO
SUPPORTS THE INVASION OF MY
PRIVACY AND WHAT ARGUMENTS THEY
ARE MAKING THAT OUR ELECTED
REPRESENTATIVES FIND SO
PERSUASIVE. I SUGGEST TO THE
COUNCIL THAT THIS IS A SIGN THAT
A MAJORITY OF SEATTLE REJECTS
CCTV FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOODS.
THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE AMY . SORRY,
I DON'T KNOW HOW TO PRONOUNCE
YOUR LAST NAME.
>> HI, THIS IS AMY, I AM CALLING
TO ASK THE CITY COUNCIL TO
STRIKE DOWN THIS PROPOSAL TO
EXPAND CCTV . A LOT OF FOLKS
BEFORE ME HAVE SAID, THIS TYPE
OF SURVEILLANCE THREATENS OUR
SAFETY AS A COMMUNITY. FOLKS I
TALKED ABOUT COLLABORATION WITH
THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND
I.C.E., AND OTHER ASSAULTS ON
OUR FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS, OUR
FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS. I ALSO
WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE NATURE OF
CRIMINALITY. BEGINNING TO TALK
ABOUT LAW ENFORCEMENT'S FOCUS ON
PROFESSIONALISM, TO PROTECT AND
SERVE, AND I IMPLORE THE ENTIRE
COUNCIL TO THINK ABOUT
PROTECTING AND SERVING WHOM ?
FOR FOLKS LIKE ME WHOSE LAST
NAME IS DIFFICULT TO PRONOUNCE,
AS A WOMAN OF COLOR WALKING
AROUND, WE ALREADY SEE OVER AND
OVER WHAT TYPES OF IMMIGRANTS
ARE CONSIDERED TO BE , SUSPECTED
TO BE ILLEGAL OR SUSPECTED TO BE
UNACCEPTABLE IN THIS COUNTRY.
AND IT IS EVEN MORE IMPORTANT TO
THINK ABOUT THE VULNERABLE
PEOPLE WHO WILL BE AFFECTED BY
THIS SURVEILLANCE. SO FOLKS WHO
HAVE SURVIVED SEXUAL ASSAULTS,
STALKING, FOLKS WHO ARE VICTIMS
OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, AND ALL
THE FOLKS WHO ARE PROTESTING AND
SPEAKING OUT ON BEHALF OF THEIR
HUMAN RIGHTS. THIS TYPE OF
SURVEILLANCE CAN ACCESS
INDIVIDUALS WHERE THEY WORK,
WHERE THEY SHOP, WHERE THEY
WORSHIP , AND ANY OTHER
BUSINESSES OR ASSOCIATIONS THEY
ARE PART OF. AS MANY FOLKS HAVE
SAID BEFORE ME, IT DOES NOT
WORK. THERE'S A LOT OF STUDIES
IN THE UK AND OTHER U.S. CITIES
SHOWING THE INEFFECTIVENESS OF
THIS TYPE OF EXPENSIVE
TECHNOLOGY. I JUST WANT TO
EXPRESS MY SINCERE
DISAPPOINTMENT THAT THE COUNCIL
IS NOT INVESTING IN OTHER MORE
COST-EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT
ALTERNATIVES TO REDUCING
COMMUNITY VIOLENCE, SUCH AS
COMMUNITY-BASED VIOLENCE
INTERRUPTION PROGRAMS THAT WE
HAVE SEEN IN OTHER PROGRAMS, THE
RINGER BEACH ACTION COALITION,
OTHER TYPES OF SERVICES THAT
WOULD BE MORE EFFECTIVE WHEN IT
COMES TO REDUCING VIOLENCE AND
POVERTY. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE FLORA RIGHT .
I'M SORRY, IT LOOKS LIKE SHE IS
NOT ON. WE WILL GO TO JULIA
BUCK.
>> GOOD MORNING, COUNCIL, MY
NAME IS JULIA BUCK AND I AM A
RESIDENT OF DISTRICT SIX.
COUNCILMEMBER KETTLE, IT'S
INTERESTING TO HEAR ABOUT
SEATTLE EXCEPTIONALISM WHEN JUST
LAST WEEK POLICE WERE ARRESTING
A TRANS-WOMAN FOR ILLEGALLY
USING A NUDE BEACH. ALSO, ARE
COPS WHERE NEXT GATORS OVER
THERE FACES, THEY WEAR COVERS
OVER THEIR BADGE NUMBERS, AND
MOST OF THE UNIFORMS ARE COVERED
WHEN I SEE THEM OUT. IT IS
NOTABLE THAT THE COUNCIL IS
TRYING TO DO THE EXPANSION OF
CCTV THE WEEK AFTER CCTV
TECHNOLOGY WAS USED AS AN EXCUSE
TO ARREST A RANDOM ENRON
ENGINEER IN WALLINGFORD FOR
ARSON AND MURDER. THE PERSON WAS
INTERROGATED FOR HOURS, DURING
WHICH THEY OFFER THEIR OWN
IN-HOUSE TECHNOLOGY RECORDS AND
THE ROOMMATE TO SHOW THAT THEY
WERE HOME AT THE TIME THE CRIME
WAS COMMITTED. SPD STARTED THE
INVESTIGATION WITH THE NAME AND
THIS CAMERA FOOTAGE. A PERSON
WITH ALIBIS WAS STILL HELD IN
JAIL FOR A WEEK, IN SPITE OF
HAVING A DIFFERENT NAME, AND NOT
BEING THE PERSON CAPTURED BY THE
CAMERA. CCTV IS A PROBABLE CAUSE
GENERATOR. YOU ARE KEEPING THE
CCTV FOOTAGE WHERE TRUMP CAN
ACCESS IT, ON SERVERS
OUT-OF-STATE. IN TRUMP'S
FASCIST CIRCUS , YOU ARE THE
CLOWNS, AND I AND MANY IN
SEATTLE ARE LOSING PATIENCE WITH
YOUR ANTICS. THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE KELSEY BURNS.
>> HI, THIS IS KELSEY BURNS.
I'M HERE TO SPEAK AGAINST THE
EXPANSION OF MASTER
SURVEILLANCE. WHEN THERE IS SUCH
A BLATANT DISREGARD FOR THE LAW
TO FEDERAL LEVEL, THERE ARE ALSO
SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS OF RISKS FOR
MISCONDUCT FROM OFFICERS , FOR
STALKING , AND OTHER THINGS. I
THINK THE LARGEST CONCERN IS
WHEN WE END UP STARTING TO USE
THESE RESOURCES. STARTING TO
MOVE INTO THE CLOUD, WE PUT
IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES AT RISK
WITH I.C.E.. I'VE SEEN WITH MY
OWN EYES COORDINATION BETWEEN
I.C.E. AND SPD, AND THE ABILITY
OF PEOPLE OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT TO ACCESS THESE
RESOURCES THAT ARE BEING ADDED
TO THE CCTV NETWORK ARE
SIGNIFICANTLY WORRYING TO ME. ON
A TECHNOLOGICAL LEVEL, I THINK
THERE ARE ALSO SOME ADDITIONAL
SECURITY CONCERNS THAT ARE
PROBABLY LESS IMPORTANT THAN THE
NUMBER OF LIVES THAT WE ARE
GOING TO BE ENDANGERING
REGARDING THE POTENTIAL
INTERACTION . WITH THE NATIONAL
GUARD TAKING OVER D.C. , DO WE
REALLY WANT TO CROSS THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT? I DON'T THINK THAT
WE'VE ESTABLISHED THE DEGREE OF
TRUST AT A GLOBAL OR FEDERAL
LEVEL TO BE ABLE TO RESPONSIBLY
USE MASS SURVEILLANCE TOOLS.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, I YIELD
MY TIME .
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE
COCO WEBER.
>> HELLO, I AM A TEACHER AND A
RENTER, AND ALL OF MY FRIENDS
ARE RENTERS. THEY LIVE ALL OVER
CAPITAL AND OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS
IN SEATTLE. HAVE I HAD A PACKAGE
STOLEN? SURE. WAS THE STOLEN
PACKAGE A THREAT TO MY SAFETY?
NO. RENTERS IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD
ARE MORE LIKELY TO DIE ON THE
SIDEWALK OUTSIDE, WHILE WALKING
BY THEM AND NOT HELPING THOSE
WHO NEED IT MOST. THAT IS A
PUBLIC SAFETY FAILURE. WERE MY
FRIENDS CAN RECEIVE GENDER
AFFIRMING CARE WITHOUT WORRYING
ABOUT BEING DISAPPEARED. PUBLIC
SAFETY MEANS OUR FRIENDS AND
PARENTS ARE NOT DISAPPEARED BY
ICE BECAUSE OF THEIR
DOCUMENTATION STATUS. KETTLE,
YOU SAID NATIONAL GUARD TAKING
OVER IS WRONG IN D.C. OPEN YOUR
EYES AND SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING
IN OUR COUNTRY. ARE YOU GOING TO
HAND OVER THE MOTHERS AND
FATHERS, INCREASING THE FASCIST
POLICE STATE OF THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT? I AM A TEACHER, I AM
TEACHING YOUR CHILDREN, AND I
WILL NOT BE ABLE TO SHOW THE
PUBLIC SAFETY MEETINGS TO PLEAD
WITH THE DEMOCRATS ON THIS
COUNCIL TO NOT IMPLEMENT A
FASCIST TECHNOLOGY AND WHAT IS
SUPPOSED TO BE A SANCTUARY CITY.
PLEASE WALK AWAY FROM
SURVEILLANCE TECH, CUT YOUR
LOSSES. THIS IS NOT HOW YOU WANT
TO GO DOWN IN HISTORY. PLEASE,
ALL POWER TO THE PEOPLE, AND
STOP SURVEILLANCE CITIES. I
YIELD MY TIME .
>> THANK YOU.
>> NEXT UP WE HAVE DJ LAST.
>> GOOD MORNING. I AM CALLING
AGAINST THE EXPANSION OF CCTV .
I THINK THE BIGGEST SEATTLE
CONTEXT YOU SHOULD KEEP IN MIND
ON THIS IS THE REACTION TO THE
REGIONAL ADOPTION OF THESE
THINGS LAST YEAR WAS
OVERWHELMINGLY NEGATIVE. THE
COMMUNITY MEMBERS OF HUNDRED BY
ALL AND THE MAYOR , NOT ONLY DID
THEY OPPOSE IT, BUT THE POINTING
OUT OF THE INCREDIBLY HIGH
NUMBER OF RESPONSES THAT WERE
OVERWHELMINGLY NEGATIVE TO THIS.
DESPITE THE COMMUNITY INDICATING
THAT THEY DID NOT WANT CCTV AND
RTC AT ALL, THEY WILL PUSH AGAIN
DESPITE WITH THE COMMUNITY
WANTED. OVER $5.7 MILLION A YEAR
ON OUR TCC, AND SERVICES THAT
KEEP PEOPLE ALIVE AND REDUCE
HARM. IF AN OVERWHELMING
OPPOSITION CAME OUT , SPD IS
LYING ABOUT WHAT IT WOULD LOOK
LIKE. TELLING THE PEOPLE OF
SEATTLE THAT SPD WOULD NOT DO
ANY LIVE MONITORING WITH RTCC OR
CCTV CAMERAS. THAT WAS AN
OUTRIGHT LIE. WHEN SEEN THAT SPD
HAS A HISTORY OF RELYING ON
SURVEILLANCE. WE HAVE SEEN THAT
REPORTED WITH SPD IMPACT REPORTS
FOR INFRARED AND SPD'S HISTORY
OF SECRETLY BUYING DRONES AND
CCTV CAMERAS WITHOUT TELLING
EVERYONE. I BRING THIS UP TO
POINT OUT THERE IS NO REASON TO
TRUST ANYTHING THAT SPD HAS SAID
ABOUT ANY OF THEIR SURVEILLANCE,
INCLUDING THAT THIS WILL SOMEHOW
MAGICALLY BE KEPT SEPARATE FROM
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION WITH
THEM UNABLE TO ACCESS IT. WE
HAVE SEEN THIS ACCESS BY FEDERAL
AGENTS. SHARING THE DATA WITH
I.C.E.. THERE IS NO REASON TO
BELIEVE THAT ANYTHING SEATTLE
COLLECTS . AND HOW HAVE THEY
BEEN DOING? THEY HAVE BEEN
RATING NUDE BEACHES AND BARS. IF
TRUMP TOOK OVER SPD NO ONE WOULD
EVER NOTICE.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE
KATIE GENTRY .
>> HELLO, COUNCIL, MY NAME IS
KATIE GENTRY, I LIVE IN D6. I AM
CALLING AND OPPOSED TO EXPANDING
MASS SURVEILLANCE UNDER THE
TRUMP ADMINISTRATION, IT WILL
ONLY TARGET AND FURTHER ENDANGER
SEATTLE'S LGBTQ IA AND
IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES,
PROTESTERS, AND EVERYONE'S CIVIL
LIBERTIES AND RIGHTS TO PRIVACY.
SURVEILLANCE IS A POWERFUL TOOL
OF SOCIAL OPPRESSION, AND
SURVEILLANCE DOES NOT KEEP US
SAFE FROM VIOLENCE. VIOLENCE CAN
BE REDUCED BY INVESTMENTS IN
VIOLENCE INTERRUPTION PROGRAMS,
MENTAL HEALTH TREATMENT,
TREATMENT FACILITIES, AFFORDABLE
HOUSING, EMERGENCY FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE, AND LIBRARIES.
EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT POVERTY,
INCOME INEQUALITY ARE ASSOCIATED
WITH VIOLENCE, ESPECIALLY
HOMICIDE. AS WE APPROACH BUDGET
SEASON, IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE
THAT SURVEILLANCE ACTUALLY
CONTRIBUTES TO THIS INVESTMENT
IN OUR COMMUNITY. SEATTLE IS
REQUIRED TO HAVE A BALANCED
BUDGET. EVERY DOLLAR SPENT ON
SURVEILLANCE IS A DOLLAR THAT
CANNOT BE INVESTED IN THE
EVIDENCE-BASED STRATEGIES FOR
VIOLENCE PREVENTION ABOVE. OR
OTHERWISE INVESTED IN OUR
COMMUNITY . LIKE JOBS , JOB
TRAINING, AND FOOD ACCESS. THIS
YEAR CONSTITUENTS AND DO NOT
EXPAND CCTV. INVEST IN OUR
COMMUNITY BY EXPANDING SUPPORTS
FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. NEXT UP WE HAVE
DAVID HAYNES.
>> THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN
HELP GET COUNCIL VOTERS WITH
HATRED OF TRUMP PURPOSELY NOT
WORKING COLLABORATIVELY TO SOLVE
THE SAFETY CRISIS AND THE
HOMELESS CRISIS. THE GROCERY
STORES ARE MORE ELABORATE IN
THEIR SECURITY APPARATUS AND
CAMERAS IN YOUR FACE, YET I
DON'T HEAR THESE SYMPATHIZERS
OF THE DEVIL COMPLAINING ABOUT
THAT. HERE'S WHERE THEY WANT
MORE PEOPLE TO SUFFER. THERE'S
A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE MENTAL
PROBLEMS IN SEATTLE AND THEY ARE
HAPPY WHEN SOMEONE IS STABBED --
SAD AND MISERABLE. AND THEY GET
JEALOUS AND ENVIOUSLY MAD WHEN
SOMEONE IS SUCCESSFUL. AND IT IS
SHOWING AGAIN THAT PEOPLE WANT
PEOPLE TO BE MESSED UP ON DRUGS
SO THEY CAN BRAG ABOUT HOW MUCH
THEY TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM. BUT
YET, THE BOTTOM OF THE BARREL ,
EXCUSE ME, THIS SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGY IS NOT GOING TO WORK
BECAUSE YOU ARE ALLOWING THE
POLICE CHIEF AND THE BOTTOM OF
THE BARREL LIBERAL DEMOCRATS TO
SABOTAGE THE INTEGRITY OF THE
TECHNOLOGY, YOU ARE GOING TO
TRICK THE LAW-ABIDING COMMUNITY
INTO BELIEVING THAT SOMETHING IS
BEING DONE WITH VIDEO CAMERAS,
BUT YET THOSE CAMERAS ARE
PURPOSELY MEANT TO BE ABLE TO
MAKE OUT THE FACIAL RECOGNITION
TO SPECIFICALLY TARGET IDENTIFY
THE INDIVIDUAL CRIMINALS, BUT
YET YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE A
RANDOM VIDEO THAT CAN IDENTIFY
THE COLOR OF A CAR AND ALL OF A
SUDDEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE
LOOKING FOR A CERTAIN COLOR OF
THE CAR INSTEAD OF THE
DEFINITIVE DETAILS OF THE
INDIVIDUAL WHO IS CONDUCT CIVIL
WAR ON THE COMMUNITY. IT IS
ALMOST LIKE WE STILL HAVE
LIBERALS WHO ARE PULLING THEIR
PUNCHES ON CRIME-FIGHTING AND
THEN SCAREMONGERING PEOPLE INTO
BELIEVING THAT WE LIVE IN A
FASCIST SOCIETY AND EVERYTHING
SHOULD BE BLAMED ON TRUMP. BUT
IT TURNS OUT THEY ARE RUNNING
INTERFERENCE OR EVIL DRUG
PUSHERS THAT ARE CONDUCTING ON
CIVIL WAR. PEOPLE ARE LITERALLY
RUNNING INTERFERENCE FOR DRUG
PUSHERS IN SEATTLE AND YOU ALL
ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM. YOU
WANT TO CATER TO ALL OF THESE
DUMPING THEIR TRAUMA ON EVERYONE
ELSE, IF YOU ALL CAN'T BE MORE
BOLD AND STOP CARRYING THE TRUMP
HATE CARD YOU WANT TO BE KICKED
OUT.
>> THANK YOU, DAVID. NEXT UP WE
HAVE KATE AND CAROL, AND WE WILL
GO BACK TO FLORIDA RIGHT. GO
AHEAD.
>> WELL, THE LAST ONE SEEMS LIKE
A LEVEL OF HATRED FOR THIS AND
YOUR SIDES. TALK ABOUT
GOVERNMENT. DO NOT DO THIS. IT
IS NOT SAFE. IT WON'T WORK. IN
THE RECENT ELECTION RESULTS HAVE
SHOWN THAT PEOPLE ARE AGAINST
THIS. IF YOU ACTUALLY WANT TO
STOP CRIME OR TO PREVENT , TO
CONFRONT CRIME, TO RESPOND TO
CRIME, YOU NEED TO DRILL DOWN
INTO WHICH CRIMES YOU ARE
FIGHTING , HOW YOU ARE FIGHTING
THEM SHOULD DEPEND ON KNOWLEDGE
OF WHAT IS GENERATING THEM AND
HOW YOU CAN SOLVE IT. IT MAY BE
HARD TO BELIEVE THAT THIS IS
CHEAPER AND MORE EFFECTIVE,
GIVEN THE COMMON KNOWLEDGE AND
WHAT IS ACCEPTED AS COMMON SENSE
IN OUR SOCIETY. BUT GIVEN THE
LEVEL OF PROPAGANDA , THAT IS
HOW FAR WE ARE FROM REALITY ,
AND IT IS EQUALLY HARD TO
BELIEVE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE
EVIDENCE THAT THIS IS GOING TO
DO ANYTHING HELPFUL , OTHER THAN
MAYBE THE ONE THING THAT JAMES
WAS RIGHT ABOUT, TO CREATE A
SHOW TO PROVIDE A LACK OF
AWARENESS THAT YOU ARE NOT ABLE
TO DO ANYTHING SUBSTANTIAL. I
GET THAT YOU MIGHT THINK IT
WOULD COST MORE MONEY TO ADDRESS
REAL SOLUTIONS TO ANTI-POVERTY
AND PROVIDING EXTENDED HEALTH
CARE, ET CETERA. BUT GO TALK TO
OLYMPIA THE WAY THEY'RE GOING
TO DO IN ALBANY. THE OTHER THING
IS THAT WHAT HAPPENS FIRST DOES
NOT HAVE THE SERVICES AND THE
BILLING. IT MAKES IT LOOK LIKE A
FAILURE. THAT IS WHAT THEY'RE
GOING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF.
>> THANK YOU. OUR LAST REMOTE
SPEAKER IS FLORA RIGHT. FLORA,
GO AHEAD. FLORA , ARE YOU THERE?
ALL RIGHT. WE CAN HEAR YOU.
>> HELLO, I'M A RESIDENT OF
DISTRICT RECALLING INTO OPPOSED
WILDLY UNPOPULAR MEDICAL CARE
BEING DRASTICALLY CUT, IT IS
IRRESPONSIBLE TO WASTE MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS ON MORE TOYS FOR SPD.
WE KNOW THAT EXPANDING
SURVEILLANCE UNDER THE TRUMPET
MINISTRATION WILL ONLY TARGET
AND FURTHER ENDANGER SEATTLE'S
LGBTQ AND IMMIGRANT COMMUNITIES,
ABORTION SEEKERS, PROTESTERS,
AND EVERYONE'S RIGHT TO
PRIVACY. A RECENT AUDIT FOUND
THAT DATA FROM THE KING COUNTY
HOUSING AUTHORITY HAS BEEN USED
HUNDREDS OF TIMES TO HIT
IMMIGRANTS AND ABORTION SEEKERS
FROM TEXAS DESPITE A STATE
SHIELD LAW. ADDITIONALLY, THE
INVESTIGATION UNCOVERED THAT
PROVIDING I.C.E. AND HOMELAND
SECURITY TO PRIVATE ACCESS FOR
VEHICLE INFO. WE ALSO KNOW THAT
SPD HAS A HISTORY OF ABUSING THE
SURVEILLANCE WAS ALREADY HAS,
INCLUDING SPYING ON PROTESTERS,
STALKING FORMER ROMANTIC
PARTNERS, AND LEAKING
INFORMATION ABOUT DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE VICTIMS. SEATTLE
REPRESENTED THE ABILITY OF
SURVEILLANCE TECH USED ON 2020
PROTEST AND DID NOT FILL THE
OBLIGATION OF TRANSPARENCY. WE
RECENTLY SAW SPD USE CCTV
FOOTAGE TO ARREST AN INNOCENT
PERSON FOR A DEADLY HOUSE FIRE
AND GEL THEM FOR A WEEK, AND
RUSHED AND RACIST
MISIDENTIFICATION. NOW SPEAKING
AS A PLAN TO POTENTIALLY GIVE
SPD ACCESS TO CAMERAS THEY VIEW
INDOOR SPACES , ANOTHER MASSIVE
BREACH OF PRIVACY. THE ONLY
STUDIES THAT SUPPORT CCTV AND
RTCC TECHNOLOGY CONCLUDED ,
QUOTE, NO SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON
VIOLENT CRIME AND A RELATIVELY
SMALL IMPACT ON VIOLENT CRIME
CLEARANCE, WHILE OTHER STUDIES
SHOW THAT RTCC HAS NO EFFECT ON
VIOLENT CRIME CLEARANCE RATES.
THAT IGNORES THE RECOMMENDATIONS
OF THE COMMUNITY SURVEILLANCE
GROUP THAT THEY WERE
UNSUPPORTIVE OF EVEN PILOT
DEPLOYMENTS OF RCT AND CCTV. DO
NOT GET I.C.E. ACCESS TO DATA
THAT WOULD HAVE PREVIOUSLY
REQUIRED A WARRANT . STOP THE
SURVEILLANCE CITY. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. FIRST I WANT TO
SAY THANK YOU FOR COMMENT, BUT I
REALLY APPRECIATE THE SNAPS.
THANK YOU FOR GOING WITH SNAPS.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT.
PUBLIC COMMENT HAS EXPIRED. WE
WILL NOW PROCEED TO OUR ITEMS OF
BUSINESS. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
ARE ENCOURAGED TO EITHER SUBMIT
WRITTEN COMMENT, PUBLIC COMMENT
ON THE SIDE OF CARDS AVAILABLE
AT THE PODIUM, OR EMAIL THE
COUNCIL AT SEATTLE.GOV. I ALSO
WANTED TO NOTE THE COUNCIL
PRESIDENT HAS JOINED US, WHO IS
ON OUR COMMITTEE, BUT ALSO,
COUNCILMEMBER RINK HAS JOINED
US. WILL THE CLERK PLEASE READ
ITEM ONE INTO THE RECORD?
>> CB 121052, AN ORDINANCE
RELATED TO SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGY, IMPLEMENTATION,
AUTHORIZING APPROVAL OF USES AND
EXCEPTING THE 2025 UPDATED
SURVEILLANCE IMPACT REPORT AND
THE 2025 EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW FOR
THE SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S
USE OF CLOSED-CIRCUIT TELEVISION
CAMERA SYSTEMS.
>> THANK YOU. SO WE ARE STARTING
OFF WITH CCTV. MR. DOSS HAS
JOINED US OF THE TABLE. PLEASE
INTRODUCE YOURSELF FOR THE
RECORD AND PROVIDE A QUICK
SUMMARY OF THE CCTV LEGISLATION.
>> THANK YOU, GREG DOSS, CENTRAL
STAFF, HERE TO TALK ABOUT
COUNCIL BILL 121052 ON CCTV,
ALSO ON COUNCIL BILL 121053 ON
THE RTCC . QUICK SUMMARY, YOU
ALL HEARD ON JULY 31st, A
PRESENTATION FROM SPD ON THE
COUNCIL BILL THAT WOULD EXPAND
THE USE OF CCTV , AS APPROVED BY
YOU ALL LAST YEAR UNDER
ORDINANCE 127110. AND THAT
EXPANSION WOULD ADD CAMERAS IN
THREE NEW AREAS, ONE OF THE
CAPITOL HILL NIGHTLIFE DISTRICT
AREA, ONE AT THE STADIUM
DISTRICT, AND ONE NEAR GARFIELD
HIGH SCHOOL. IN SUMMARY, JUST TO
KEEP THIS FLOWING AS ONE
COMMITTEE MEETING, I WILL ALSO
SAY THAT YOU APPROVED ORDINANCE
127111, WHICH APPROVED THE
REAL-TIME CRIME CENTER AND YOU
WOULD EXPAND THAT UNDER THE
LEGISLATION BEFORE YOU TO ALLOW
SPD TO ACCESS AND CONTINUALLY
RECORD SEATTLE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION TRAFFIC AND
CAMERA FOOTAGE AT THE RTCC. AND
THE LAST THING I WILL NOTE IS
THAT UNDER THE LEGISLATION
BEFORE YOU, THE DATA AND
RETENTION POLICIES IN THE
SURVEILLANCE IMPACT REPORTS THAT
WERE ADOPTED LAST YEAR HAVE NOT
CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY. THE ONLY
CHANGES TO THESE POLICIES THAT
GUIDE THE DEPARTMENT AND GOVERN
THE DATA COLLECTION AND USE OUR
THAT THERE ARE NOW THREE NEW
LOCATIONS FOR CCTV AND THE SDOT
CAMERAS FOR SPD. WITH THAT AS A
SUMMARY, I WILL ASK IF THERE ARE
ANY QUESTIONS. BRIAN MAXEY, THE
CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER FOR SPD
IS HERE WITH ME TODAY. I'M
HAPPY TO TAKE YOUR QUESTIONS
INITIALLY, AND IF IT IS
APPROPRIATE FOR SPD TO PROVIDE
MORE INFORMATION AT AN
OPERATIONAL LEVEL, HE CAN DO
THAT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. DAWSON. ALSO,
THANK YOU FOR YOUR CENTRAL STAFF
MEMO, DATED 29 JULY, 2025 ON THE
SAME TOPIC. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I TRUST NOT JUST OUR COLLEAGUES,
BUT MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO
HAVE SEEN IT, AS WELL. YOU
NOTICE MR. MAXEY FROM SPD HERE,
WE ALSO MEMBERS OF OUR COUNTY
SYSTEM HERE TODAY. THEY ARE
ALWAYS WELCOME, WELCOME TO YOU
ALL, WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING
HERE. OKAY, ANY QUESTIONS, I
RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE SOME
AMENDMENTS AND A SEQUENCE FOR
THOSE. BUT ANY QUESTIONS
BEFOREHAND? AS A FOLLOW-UP TO
THE FIRST MEETING , WE HAVE
THESE TWO PIECES OF LEGISLATION.
SEEING NONE, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, I INVITE YOU TO
MOVE YOUR AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. I
APPRECIATE IT. I AM NOT ON AS A
PANELIST . I APPRECIATE IT. I
WOULD RAISE MY HAND, BUT I
APPRECIATE THE VERBAL
INTRODUCTIONS. I MOVED TO AMEND
COUNCIL BILL 121052 AS AMENDMENT
NUMBER ONE.
>> SECOND.
>> PRESENTED ON A BEEN THAT ONE,
CENTRAL STAFF PERMANENT ONE AND
WE WILL GO TO THAT SPONSOR.
>> THANK YOU, I WILL ASK OF THE
CLERK OF THE MAP, PLEASE. SO,
AMENDMENT ONE TO COUNCIL BILL
121052 WOULD RESTRICT CAMERA
INSTALLATION IN THE GARFIELD
AREA TO ARTERIAL STREETS WHICH
MINOR ARTERIAL STREETS SUBMITTED
BY THE EXECUTIVE. THE GRAY AREA
OF PEER , THE BOUNDARY DESCRIBED
IN THE IMPACT REPORT. SPD WOULD
PROPOSE TO PUT CAMERAS IN
ANYWHERE FROM CHERRY STREET ON
THE NORTH, JACKSON ON THE SOUTH,
EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT SHADED,
ALL THE WAY TO MARTIN LUTHER
KING ON THE EAST. WHAT THE
AMENDMENT WILL DO, WITHIN THE
AREA THAT SPD HAS DESIGNATED FOR
CAMERAS, THEY MAY ONLY PUT THE
CAMERAS ON THE MAJOR OR MINOR
ARTERIALS. THAT WOULD BE CHERRY,
23rd, AND JACKSON . THAT
SUMMARIZES MY COMMENTS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. DOSS.
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH, YOU
ARE RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS
AMENDMENT ONE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR, AND
THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP AND
HELPING US TAKE THE FEEDBACK,
WHAT WE HEARD FROM COMMITTEE,
AND , FROM COMMUNITY, AND TRYING
TO PUT IT ALL IN ONE. SINCE OUR
LAST COMMITTEE, I HAVE RECEIVED
A LOT OF MESSAGES FROM RESIDENTS
IN THE CENTRAL DISTRICT WHO ARE
WORRIED ABOUT LOSING THE PRIVACY
TO CAMERAS, PLACING THEM AROUND
GARFIELD NOVA HIGH SCHOOL, AND I
DO UNDERSTAND WHY. I ALSO WANT
TO CLARIFY THAT I HEAR PEOPLE'S
CONCERNS, AND THAT IS WHY I AM
TRYING TO FIND A DELICATE
BALANCE FOR PEOPLE THAT
SUPPORTED THIS INVESTMENT AND
OTHERS THAT SAID NO, TRYING TO
LIMIT THIS ON ARTERIAL WAYS
WHICH ARE CHERRY, JACKSON, AND
23rd. SO I AM PROPOSING A
REVISED MAP THAT PLACES CAMERAS
ONLY ON HEAVILY TRAFFICKED AREAS
ALONG 23rd, WITH THE NORTHERN
BOUNDARY IS GOING FROM THE A.M.
P.M. TO THE HIGH SCHOOL, AND ON
THE SOUTHERN BOUNDARIES WHICH GO
FROM WASHINGTON MIDDLE SCHOOL TO
MLK. I TRIED TO FIND THE BEST
BALANCE HERE BETWEEN EVERYONE'S
FEEDBACK. I KNOW SOME PEOPLE
DON'T AGREE, SOME PEOPLE DO
AGREE. I ALSO WANTED TO
RECOGNIZE THAT I HEARD FROM
FOLKS THAT WE NEED TO MAKE
INVESTMENT IN OTHER THINGS THAT
MAKE PEOPLE SAFE. I AGREE, AND I
THINK THAT SEATTLE DOES DO THAT
AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO THAT, IT
IS A MIX OF EVERYTHING AND WE
WANT TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE
INVESTMENTS TO OUR COMMUNITY
PARTNERS THAT MAKE PEOPLE SAFE
AND CONTINUE TO INVEST IN FOOD
ACCESS, CONTINUE TO INVEST IN
SCHOOL AND HEALTH AND WELLNESS,
AND THE ODESSA BROWN CLINIC THAT
IS ON JACKSON STREET, THAT JUST
OPENED UP IN THE CENTRAL
DISTRICT . ALL THESE GREAT
THINGS WE WILL CONTINUE TO
INVEST IN, AS WELL. I TRY TO
FIND A BALANCE HERE. AND
COLLEAGUES, EYES APPRECIATE YOUR
SUPPORT ON THIS. I WAS IN THE
COMMUNITY AND TRY TO ADDRESS
CONCERNS THEY HAVE WITH THE
CAMERAS, MAKING SURE THEY WERE
WE ARE NOT VIOLATING PEOPLE'S
CIVIL LIBERTIES. BUT IT DOES
COME AT A TRUST. PEOPLE WANT TO
TRUST IN THE GOVERNMENT. I
UNDERSTAND THAT. AND I HAVE TO
CONTINUE TO WORK ON THAT, ME
BEING PART OF, ANY TIME I HEAR
SOMEBODY SAY THE CITY OF
SEATTLE, I AM REALIZING THAT I
AM PART OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE.
AND SO, TRYING TO CONTINUE TO
BUILD THAT TRUST WITH COMMUNITY
IS WHAT I WILL CONTINUE DOING IN
MY ROLE AS THE CITY COUNCIL
MEMBER. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH. ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE,
COLLEAGUES? COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON?
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR BRINGING THIS
FORWARD . IT DID PROMPT ME TO
REACH OUT TO SPD TO FIND OUT,
ARE WE INTENDED TO INSTALL
CAMERAS ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS
GOING FORWARD ? AND WHAT WOULD
BE GOING TO THAT. I WAS
WONDERING IF THERE IS ALREADY A
POLICY AND HOW THIS AMENDMENT
COULD INFORM WHAT WE DO GOING
FORWARD.
>> YEAH, I CAN SPEAK TO THE
SURVEILLANCE IMPACT REPORT. BOTH
THE SURVEILLANCE REPORTS
GENERALLY PROVIDE LEEWAY TO THE
DEPARTMENT TO DETERMINE WHICH
STREETS TO PUT THEM ON, BASED ON
THEIR GOLD GLOVE DETERRING AND
COMBATING VIOLENT CRIME IS THE
CASE THAT IF THEY WENT ON A
RESIDENTIAL STREET, ANY OF THE
HOUSES, WINDOWS, EVERYTHING
WOULD BE MASKED, BY SPD POLICY,
AND THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS
CURRENTLY HAPPENING. BEYOND
THAT, I WOULD NEED MR. MAXEY TO
GET UP HERE AND GIVE YOU
INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT THE
OPERATIONAL REASONS FOR PUTTING
UP CAMERAS AND NEIGHBORHOODS
MIGHT BE .
>> I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE
NECESSARY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH
FOR REMINDING ME OF THE MASKING.
I REMEMBER THAT BEING ANCIENT
AND PREVIOUS PRESENTATIONS. I
JUST DID NOT KNOW IF , AND I
REMEMBER THAT BEING MENTIONED
FOR ARTERIALS, OR MAYBE THE
EXAMPLE SHOWN ON THE SCREEN
APPEARED TO BE ARTERIAL. BUT IT
OCCURS THAT THAT CAN BE THE SAME
THING ON RESIDENTIAL STREETS, AS
WELL. BUT, IN ANY CASE, THANK
YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT
EXPLANATION.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT,
YES, THIS PILOT ARE ALL ON
ARTERIALS. AURORA, THIRD AVENUE,
AND THE LIKE. PUBLIC FACING
STREETS, SIDEWALK ONLY, AS
NOTED. I HAVE SEEN THE MASKING
MYSELF. IF THERE WAS AN
APARTMENT BUILDING ON THAT
ARTERIAL. PASSING THE TECHNOLOGY
USE. I SHOULD NOTE THERE IS NO
FACIAL RECOGNITION. IT IS ONLY
HELD FIVE DAYS ON-SITE, THAT IS
THE REASON FOR THE FIVE DAYS. IT
IS ONLY POOLED IF BROUGHT IN FOR
AN INVESTIGATION. I JUST
HIGHLIGHT THOSE THINGS, BECAUSE
WE HEAR DIFFERENT POINTS MADE,
AND I JUST WANTED TO HIGHLIGHT
THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR
COMMENTS FROM COLLEAGUES?
>> JUST A FOLLOW-UP. I FEEL THAT
THIS IS, EVEN IF THE INTENT WAS
NOT TO PUT THEM ON RESIDENTIAL
STREETS, THIS JUST KIND OF MAKES
SURE THAT THAT WILL NOT BE THE
CASE. BY PUTTING IT IN WRITING.
IT IS AN ADDITIONAL, I GUESS, IT
MAKES THE INTENT CLEAR . THANK
YOU.
>> YES, EXACTLY . OKAY, SEEING
NO QUESTIONS, I AM LOOKING BOTH
AT MY SCREENS AND DOWN THE LINE
. I DON'T SEE ANY. WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLL ON
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT NUMBER
ONE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ ?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH ?
COUNCILPERSON NELSON ?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA ? CHAIR
KETTLE? NONE OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU, AMENDMENT IS
ADOPTED. WE WILL MOVE TO OUR
SECOND AMENDMENT. I WILL MOVE
IT. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED
TO NOTE NOW IS EACH COMMUNITY IS
SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT. IN THE
BEGINNING I SAY ON THE AGENDA OR
IN THE PURVIEW OF THE COMMITTEE
, NOT EVERY COMMITTEE IS THE
SAME ON THAT. THE OTHER THING
RELATES TO AMENDMENTS, FOR THOSE
INDIVIDUALS ON THE COUNCIL WHO
ARE NOT PART OF THE COMMITTEE .
I THINK THIS IS A MUCH BETTER
OPPORTUNITY TO ENGAGE, SO I WILL
BE SPONSORING THE AMENDMENT ON
BEHALF OF MY COLLEAGUE WHO DOES
NOT SIT ON THE COMMITTEE. SO I
MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
121052 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
TWO .
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND
THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT TWO. CENTRAL STAFF,
YOU ARE RECOGNIZED TO DESCRIBE
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO.
>> MR. CHAIR, AS YOU JUST
MENTIONED, THIS AMENDMENT THAT
YOU ARE BRINGING FORWARD WAS
AUTHORED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINK .
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD REQUIRE THE
OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR
PUBLIC SAFETY TO INCLUDE IN ANY
CONTRACT WITH A VENDOR FOR THE
EVALUATION OF THE REAL-TIME
CRIME CENTER AND CCTV PILOT
PROJECTS, IN METHODOLOGY THAT
DETERMINES IF CCTV IN
COMBINATION WITH THE RTCC DETERS
VIOLENT CRIME , HUMAN
TRAFFICKING, OR PERSISTENT
FELONY CRIME. IT SAYS THAT IF
THE EVALUATION DOES NOT SHOW
THAT CCTV DETERS VIOLENT CRIME
THAN THE EXECUTIVE WOULD NEED TO
CONSIDER IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
EXISTING SURVEILLANCE IMPACT
REPORT POLICIES, DISCONTINUING
THE PILOT PROJECT. I WILL TAKE
ANY QUESTIONS.
>> THANK YOU, MR. DOSS . ANY
QUESTIONS? ACTUALLY, BEFORE
QUESTIONS I WILL ASK
COUNCILMEMBER RINK, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS AMENDMENT
NUMBER TWO.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR KETTLE , AND
THANK YOU FOR BEING WILLING TO
SPONSOR THE AMENDMENTS THAT MY
OFFICE HAS AUTHORED TODAY. THANK
YOU FOR THE OVERVIEW, GREG. WELL
EXPLAINED. YOU THOROUGHLY
EXPLAIN THE INTENT OF WHAT WE
ARE TRYING TO DO HERE.
COLLEAGUES, THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
REQUIRE THE OFFICE OF THE
INSPECTOR GENERAL FOR PUBLIC
SAFETY TO INCLUDE IN ANY
CONTRACT THAT THE METHODOLOGY
DETERS VIOLENT CRIME . IF THE
EVALUATION DOES NOT SHOW THAT
CCTV DETERS VIOLENT CRIME, THEN
THE EXECUTIVE, AND COMPLIANCE
WITH THE SURVEILLANCE IMPACT
REPORT, WOULD CONSIDER
DISCONTINUING THE PILOT PROJECT.
COLLEAGUES, THE AMENDMENTS THAT
I AM BRINGING FORWARD TODAY HELP
TO ENSURE THAT HE IS PILOT
MEASURES A CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN THESE TECHNOLOGIES AND
THE INTENDED OUTCOME OF REDUCING
VIOLENT CRIME. IF THESE
EVALUATIONS DO NOT SHOW THAT
THERE IS A DIRECT IMPACT IN
DETERRING VIOLENT CRIME, THEN I
ASK WHY ARE WE AS A CITY
AVOIDING THE TRUST OF THE PEOPLE
AND OVER SURVEILLING OUR
CONSTITUENTS IN THE FACE OF
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT
CONTINUES TO PUSH AGAINST OUR
CIVIL LIBERTIES? WE AS AN
ELECTED BODY SHOULD BE
INSTILLING TRUST IN OUR
COMMUNITY AND NOT PUSHING FOR
EXPANSION OF PROGRAMS BEFORE
GETTING DATA AND INFORMATION
ABOUT THEIR EFFECTIVENESS. THANK
YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RINK
. COLLEAGUES, ARE THERE ANY
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ON
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO? OKAY.
HEARING AND SEEING NONE, I
WANTED TO , OH, COUNCIL
PRESIDENT NELSON .
>> I WANT YOU TO SPEAK FIRST.
>> OKAY. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCILMEMBER RINK FOR JOINING
US TODAY AND FOR THE AMENDMENTS,
TO WORK THROUGH THE ISSUES THAT
ARE PART OF THIS PROCESS, I
THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO DO SO.
I RECOGNIZE THE INTENT, I
RECOGNIZE WHAT WE ARE LOOKING TO
DO HERE, AND WE DO HAVE TO HAVE
THIS REVIEW. AND THIS REVIEW IS
PART OF THE SYSTEM. MY CONCERN
WITH THE AMENDMENT IS THAT IT
NARROWS, IN A SENSE THAT WITH
CCTV, THIS SET, WE ARE LOOKING
AT VIOLENT CRIME, GUN VIOLENCE,
AND THE LIKE. FELONY CRIME. AND
THAT IS A BROADER PIECE. IT GOES
TO THIS, TOO, AND I WILL SPEAK
TO IT, IT'S TOO EARLY. BUT THE
ABILITY AND RESPONSE TIME FOR
SPD. HOW DOES THIS IMPACT SPD
'S ABILITY TO WORK ON FELONY
CRIME , IN TERMS OF PARTY ONE
ABILITY RESPONSE TIME, AND THEIR
ABILITY TO EFFECTIVELY COVER,
PETITIONER LEAGUE IN THE
CHALLENGES OF A GROWING CITY,
AND AS WE KNOW IN THE NORTH,
WHERE THE NORTHERN PRECINCT HAS
A MASSIVE SPAN OF AREA WITH VERY
LITTLE STAFFING RELATIVE TO
THAT. SO, THESE ARE FACTORS THAT
NEED TO BE PART OF THE REVIEW. I
WOULD ALSO NOTE, THAT IN TERMS
OF FELONIES, AND I KIND OF
TALKED ABOUT THIS RELATED TO THE
BEGINNING COMMENT ABOUT THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM AND
ENSURING THAT WE HAVE A
FUNCTIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE
SYSTEM. BECAUSE EVERY STEP
FORWARD OR TWO STEPS FORWARD
THAT WE MAKE IN PUBLIC SAFETY,
WE CAN STEP BACK 10 TIMES IF THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM STARTS
TO FALTER. WE HAVE HAD ELEMENTS
OF THIS AT TIMES, THIS IS WHY WE
HAVE MEETINGS WITH THE CITY
ATTORNEY OR THE PRESIDING JUDGE
AT SEATTLE MUNICIPAL COURT AREA
DOOR WHEN WE HAD OUR KING COUNTY
DAY RECENTLY HERE ON THE
COMMITTEE, WITH KING COUNTY
PROSECUTING ATTORNEY LISA
MANION, THE PRESIDING JUDGE OF
THE KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT,
JUDGE SHAW, AND WE ALSO HAD KING
COUNTY HEALTH, ALSO PART OF THAT
SYSTEM. SO, ANOTHER FACTOR, TOO,
IS HOW DOES THIS AID THE ABILITY
OF THE KING COUNTY PROSECUTOR OR
THE CITY ATTORNEY TO PROSECUTE
THE CASES? AND TO DO SO SMARTLY
AND EFFECTIVELY? THIS IS GOT TO
BE PART, AND THIS GOES TO THE
OVERALL PIECE OF ATTACKING
FELONY CRIME OVERALL. IT IS FOR
THOSE REASONS , AND, BY THE WAY,
BODY WORN VIDEO IS ALSO KIND OF
INSTRUCTIVE ON THIS, IN TERMS OF
HOW IT HELPS, IN TERMS OF THAT
PROCESS. IT ALSO HELPS IN TERMS
OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE
PUBLIC AND THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT, AND THE PUBLIC
SAFETY SYSTEM OVERALL. IT'S NOT
JUST THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT. SO, FOR THOSE
REASONS, AND AGAIN, I
UNDERSTAND. THIS IS INCLUDED IN
TERMS OF THE OIG, OFFICE OF
INSPECTOR GENERAL, WHO IS
WORKING WITH THE ACADEMICS TO
LOOK AT THIS PILOT PROJECT. BUT
I THINK , AND THIS IS PART OF
THE EVALUATION AS WE DO A CROSS,
IT COMES OUT OF SURVEILLANCE
ORDINANCE, THIS BROADER PIECE.
IT IS BECAUSE OF THE BROADER
PIECE, WHICH I STILL THINK IS IN
KEEPING WITH WHAT MY COLLEAGUE
HAD SAID, AS THE REASON WHY I
WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS
AMENDMENT. I SEE YOU'VE COME
OFF, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, BUT I
SEE COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ.
>> THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK
COUNCIL MEMBER RINK FOR BRINGING
THIS FORWARD. WHILE I APPRECIATE
AND I UNDERSTAND THE SPIRIT AND
THE INTENT, AND I GET IT, BUT AS
A FORMER PUBLIC DEFENDER AND
JUDGE, AND LAWYER,
CONTRACTUALLY, UNDER CONTRACT
LAW, WHEN YOU HAVE A MEETING OF
THE MINDS YOU ACTUALLY PUT IN A
CONTRACT WHAT YOU CAN MEASURE,
WHAT PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY, WHAT
CONDITIONS CAN BE MET , HOW THEY
ARE ENFORCED . AND THOSE ARE
USUALLY OBJECTIVE. IN FACT, WE
CAN LOOK AT DIFFERENT CONTRACTS,
EVEN WHEN WE DO COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENTS, WE LIST
WHAT TWO PEOPLE AGREED TO, AND
THEY CAN BE MEASURED, ENFORCED,
AND IF THERE'S ANY KIND OF
DEFAULT ON THAT CONTRACT THERE
ARE REMEDIES FOR THAT. THE
PROBLEM I HAVE WITH THIS, AGAIN,
I UNDERSTAND WHERE COUNCILMEMBER
RINK IS COMING FROM. WE'VE SEEN
THIS ISSUE WITH THE ACLU,
LEASING IT WITH CAMERAS ALL THE
TIME. WE WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME
MEASURING AND ENFORCING WHETHER
OR NOT THE CAMERAS ARE ACTUALLY
DETERRING VIOLENT CRIME .
BECAUSE IF WE COULD DO THAT, WE
WOULD'VE DONE THAT. SO THAT
PUTS AN OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE
SPIN ON IT, INTO HANDS THAT CAN
CHANGE AND CAN BE POLITICIZED.
AND THAT IS MY CONCERN. WHAT
WOULD BE CONSIDERED DETERRING
VIOLENT CRIME IN ONE
NEIGHBORHOOD MIGHT NOT WORK IN
ANOTHER NEIGHBORHOOD. I KNOW WE
STARTED OUT WITH AURORA, THE
DOWNTOWN COMMERCIAL CORPS IN
BELLTOWN. I APPRECIATE
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH ,
THE AMENDMENT I SUPPORTED ON THE
GARFIELD, WHICH MADE SENSE,
PRIVACY CAN BE MEASURED, YOU CAN
LOOK AT IT ON THE MAP, YOU CAN
MAKE IT MORE NARROW, YOU CAN GET
AWAY AND PROTECT PEOPLE'S RIGHT
TO PRIVACY. I CAN ALSO SEE THE
ISSUES ON CAPITOL HILL, IT IS A
DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOOD. AND
CERTAINLY IN THE STADIUM
DISTRICT. SO, FOR THAT REASON, I
WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS
AMENDMENT. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ.
>> MR. CHAIR? IF I MAY , TO
SPEAK YOUR COMMENTS,
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ .
EVERYTHING YOU SAY, OF COURSE,
IS CORRECT. I DID WANT TO
INTERJECT, THOUGH, THAT THE
OPERATIVE LANGUAGE IN THE
AMENDMENT, SPECIFICALLY ABOUT
THE METHODOLOGY AND DETERMINING
DETERRENCE WITH THE CAMERAS ,
STAFF TOOK THAT OUT OF THE
CONTRACT THAT IS BEING SUGGESTED
BY THE YOU PIN RESEARCHERS TO
THE OIG . ALSO RAN THAT LANGUAGE
BY THE OIG AND THEY ARE BOTH IN
CONCURRENCE THAT THIS IS THEIR
PLANNED STUDY AND COULD BE DONE.
>> I GUESS IF I CAN FOLLOW UP, I
UNDERSTAND FROM THE AMENDMENT
AND THE MEMO THAT YOU WROTE, AND
THE OTHER ISSUES, I MEAN, IT IS
STILL A CONCERN. THAT'S ALL
I'M SAYING. SO I AGREE. BUT
RESPECTFULLY, THESE ARE MY
CONCERNS. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, MR. DOSS, FOR THAT
CLARIFICATION. I WOULD NOTE THAT
MY COMMENTS , IT DOES NOT REALLY
ADDRESS MY COMMENTS IN MY
RATIONALE. SO COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON.
>> SO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR
BRINGING THIS FORWARD. FIRST OF
ALL, I WILL SAY THAT I SUPPORTED
THE UNDERLYING LEGISLATION THAT
APPROVED THE USE OF CCTV AND RCT
BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT THEY
PROVIDE ADDITIONAL TOOLS TO
ENHANCE PUBLIC SAFETY. THAT IS
WHY BLUE CITIES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY, LARGE BLUE CITIES HAVE
ALSO IMPLEMENTED THEM. THEY ARE
AN EXTRA TOOL. THOSE UNDERLYING
PIECES OF LEGISLATION REQUIRED
AN EVALUATION, AS NOTED ALREADY.
THAT ALSO IS GOOD. INDEED, I
HAVE BEEN FOLLOWING CLOSELY THE
SIMILAR ACADEMIC REPORTS ON
OTHER CITY PROGRAMS SINCE I HAVE
BEEN IN OFFICE, INCLUDING THE
STUDY LED BY THE YOU DUB
ADDICTIONS AND ALCOHOL INSTITUTE
ON SEATTLE'S CONTROLLED
SUBSTANCES ORDINANCE, TO
EVALUATE WHETHER OR NOT, IN
ENGLISH, A STUDY ON MERIT
HARRELL'S PUBLIC USE OF DRUGS.
THIS IS WHAT WE DO, WE STUDY THE
IMPACT OF OUR ACTIONS, OF OUR
LEGISLATION, SO THAT IS FINE. I
BELIEVE, I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT
THE CONCLUSIONS, WELL, I WILL
JUST CUT TO THE CHASE. I THINK
IT IS VERY DIFFICULT TO DRAW
CAUSAL CONCLUSIONS BASED ON AN
EVALUATION, BECAUSE MANY RINGS
COULD BE IMPACT THE TRENDS THAT
WE SEE AFTER THESE, IT AFTER
THIS TECHNOLOGY IS IMPLEMENT
THEM. WE HAVE SEEN SOME SUCCESS
STORIES. THERE WAS AN ARTICLE ON
KING TV ABOUT AN AUGUST 6th
INCIDENT, AND ASSAULT ON THIRD
AVENUE, AND OFFICERS CALLED THE
FOCUS OF THE CENTER AND ASKED
FOR INFORMATION. AND PROVIDED
INFORMATION THAT ALLOWED THEM TO
APPREHEND A SUSPECT WHEN THEY
HAD ALREADY BEEN THINKING ABOUT
SOMEBODY ELSE. MY POINT IS THAT
I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS
TECHNOLOGY AND THE EVALUATIONS
WILL GENERATE CONCLUSIONS THAT
SHOW THAT THIS IS HELPING MAKE
OUR CITY SAFER. WHETHER OR NOT
THEY ARE DETERRING CRIME, I
DON'T KNOW IF THAT CAN BE
ASSERTED WITH CONFIDENCE. ONE
THING THAT I NOTED , THOUGH, IN
YOUR COMMENTS, YOU ARE FOCUSING
ON THAT AS THE BENEFIT OF YOUR
AMENDMENT . BUT I THOUGHT OF THE
POINT OF THE AMENDMENT WAS TO
PROVIDE INFORMATION FOR
DECISIONS THAT ARE GOING TO BE
MADE LATER. SO, COULD YOU TALK
MORE ABOUT THAT?
>> I WOULD DEFER TO THE SPONSOR.
>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION,
COUNCIL PRESIDENT, OF COURSE
UNDERSTANDING OUR MIDSTREAM
PILOT AND UNDERSTANDING THE
SEQUENCING THIS AMENDMENT WOULD
BE RELATED TO AS WE EXPAND THIS
PILOT TO STILL GARNER SOME OF
THAT INFORMATION, I THINK,
AGAIN, WHAT IS PROPOSED IN THIS
AMENDMENT, AS GREG STATED,
CONCURRED WITH THE RESEARCHERS
AND OIG WOULD OFFER AN
OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO STUDY A
CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP, EVEN IF IT
IS AFTER THIS PILOT EXPANSION. I
THINK THAT DATA IS IMPORTANT TO
UNDERSTAND.
>> DEFINITELY, OTHERWISE WHY DO
WE HAVE THE DATA? THANK YOU VERY
MUCH FOR EXPLAINING THAT. WE DO
NEED INFORMATION AND THEN WE CAN
USE IT TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT
WE WANT TO CONTINUE WITH THE
PROGRAM. I AGREE WITH THE SPIRIT
OF THE AMENDMENT, AND I AM
PROCESSING WHETHER OR NOT IT
WILL PROVIDE ENOUGH DATA TO
GENERATE THE CONCLUSIONS THAT
YOU ARE , THAT YOU DESIRE FOR
THE CONTINUATION OF THE PROGRAM.
WE SHOULD ALWAYS STUDY THE
IMPACTS, WHETHER OR NOT THE
STUDY IS, WE CAN DRAW
CONCLUSIONS THAT WE FEEL
CONFIDENT IN, DEPENDING ENTIRELY
ON THE QUALITY OF THE STUDY.
>> YES, COUNCIL PRESIDENT, DR.
NELSON. EXACTLY. COUNCILMEMBER
RINK, ANY LAST WORDS BEFORE WE
MOVED TO A CALL OF THE ROLE ?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WILL BE
BRIEF. AGAIN, COLLEAGUES, I ASK
FOR YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS
AMENDMENT AND I THINK IT IS
IMPORTANT THAT WE INVEST IN
THINGS THAT WILL WORK, AND WE
WON'T KNOW IF THESE WILL WORK
UNTIL WE HAVE GOOD DATA AND
UNDERSTAND SOME OF THESE CAUSAL
RELATIONSHIPS. SO, I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT ON THIS AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. WILL THE CLERK
CALL THE ROLL ON THE ADOPTION OF
AMENDMENT NUMBER TWO?
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCILMEMBER SAKA .
>> NAY .
>> CHAIR KETTLE.
>> AMENDMENT TWO IS NOT ADOPTED.
THANK YOU. OKAY, WE ARE GOING TO
MOVE INTO AMENDMENT NUMBER
THREE. I MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL
BILL 121052 AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT THREE. IT IS MOVED AND
SECONDED TO AMEND THE BILL AS
PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT THREE.
CENTRAL STAFF IS RECOGNIZED TO
DESCRIBE AMENDMENT THREE.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. AS YOU
MENTIONED, THIS IS AN AMENDMENT
TO 121052, THE CCTV BILL. IT IS
AUTHORED BY COUNCILMEMBER RINK .
THE EFFECTIVENESS IS TO ENSURE
THAT SPD PROVIDES IN THE ANNUAL
REPORT THAT IT WILL ALREADY SEND
UNDER REQUIREMENTS FROM THE
PREVIOUS LEGISLATION ANY
INFORMATION ABOUT WHETHER IT
WARRANT, SUBPOENA, OR COURT
ORDER THAT HAS INCLUDED A
NONDISCLOSURE ORDER HAS BEEN
USED TO OBTAIN CCTV OR REAL-TIME
CRIME CENTER DATA. IT IS THE
CASE THAT THIS REPORT WAS
REQUIRED UNDER THE ORIGINAL
LEGISLATION, AND WHEN STAFF
WROTE THE AMENDMENT, I TARGETED
THE AMENDMENT TOWARDS THE
EXISTING REPORTING STRUCTURE. I
THINK THAT WAS NOT CONSISTENT
WITH THE COUNCILMEMBERS ORIGINAL
INTENT, THAT SUCH A REPORT BE
PROVIDED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.
SO, I WANT TO NOTE THAT THAT IS
SOMETHING THAT I CONTACTED THE
LAW DEPARTMENT ON OVERNIGHT, AND
LEARNED THAT IT IS POSSIBLE TO
HAVE A FASTER REPORT. SO THAT IS
NOT INFORMATION THAT
COUNCILMEMBER HAD WHEN SHE WAS
DRAFTING THIS AMENDMENT. I WILL
ASK IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS.
>> CAN YOU STATE THAT AGAIN,
PLEASE, JUST FOR THE RECORD?
>> IN SHORT, IT'S AN ANNUAL
REPORT ON NONDISCLOSURE
WARRANTS, AND I THINK THE
COUNCILMEMBER INTENT IS TO HAVE
A REPORT BE MORE FREQUENT OR
MORE TIMELY THAN ANNUAL , SAY,
WITHIN 48 HOURS OF LEARNING THAT
A NONDISCLOSURE WARRANT WAS USED
TO OBTAIN CCTV DATA. SO, THIS
AMENDMENT WOULD MAKE IT ANNUAL .
I WOULD LEAVE IT TO THE
COUNCILMEMBER TO SPEAK TO HER
INTENT AS TO WHETHER OR NOT SHE
WANTS TO EVENTUALLY DO SOMETHING
THAT WOULD BE EVEN MORE TIMELY.
>> THANK YOU, MR. DOSS.
COUNCILMEMBER RINK ?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR KETTLE. I
WILL FILL IN THE BLANKS ON THIS
ONE. THE THIRD AMENDMENT IS IN
LINE WITH WHAT BRIAN MAXEY AND
THE EXECUTIVE STATED ON THE DAIS
DURING OUR LAST MEETING. WITH
THIS AMENDMENT WOULD INCLUDE IN
THE ANNUAL REPORT WEATHER
INFORMATION THROUGH CCTV HAS
BEEN ACCESSED BY OTHER
JURISDICTIONS . WE WANT TO
ENSURE THAT ANY VIOLATION OF OUR
CITY DATA NEEDS ARE TO BE
REMEDIED, WHICH MAY INCLUDE
TERMINATION OF THIS PILOT
PROJECT. AS GREG HAD MENTIONED
WHEN WE WERE DRAFTING THE
AMENDMENT, THE SPIRIT AND
ORIGINALLY DRAFTING WAS TO TRY
AND FIND AN IMMEDIATE WAY TO
REMEDY IT. I WANTED TO STILL
BRING FORWARD THE AMENDMENT
TODAY FOR INCLUSION IN AN ANNUAL
REPORT, I THINK THAT IS STILL
MEETING WILL STEP FORWARD. BUT I
WANT TO PUBLICLY STATE MY
INTENT, GIVEN TO THIS UPDATED
INFORMATION WILL BE BRINGING
FORWARD AN ADDITIONAL AMENDMENT
BEFORE FULL COUNCIL THAT WOULD
GIVE US AN OPPORTUNITY TO MORE
IMMEDIATELY ADDRESS DATA
BREACHES SUCH AS WITHIN 48 HOURS
OF IT HAPPENING. THANK YOU,
CHAIR, AND COLLEAGUES, I ASK FOR
YOUR SUPPORT.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER RINK
. COLLEAGUES, TWO THINGS. ONE IS
I NOTE THAT THIS IS AN AMENDMENT
TO THE BILL RELATED TO CCTV,
ALTHOUGH IT DOES REFERENCE THE
ALP ARE AND OTHER DATA THAT MAY
BE BODY WORN. I JUST WANTED TO
NOTE THAT THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED
BY THE LAW, SO I DON'T THINK
THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH CROSSING
DIFFERENT PIECES. I DID WANT TO
MOVE TO AMEND AMENDMENT NUMBER
THREE, AS PRESENTED IN VERSION 2
OF AMENDMENT THREE, I FOCUSING
AND SUGGESTING A PAUSE IN THE
CCTV PROGRAM , IN THE SECOND TO
LAST SENTENCE, AND RESTATE THAT
IN THE LAST SENTENCE. BECAUSE I
DO SUPPORT THE REPORTING PIECE.
I SUPPORT THE INTENT OF THIS.
BUT I THINK IT'S BEST TO PAUSE,
IF , IN THAT CIRCUMSTANCE, SO
THAT ALL THE PIECES CAN BE
FACTORED IN, NOT TO HAVE THE
RUSHED JUDGMENT INTO THE PROGRAM
WHEN, IN FACT, CONDITIONS MAY
CHANGE OR CONDITIONS ARE
ADDRESSED IN SOME FASHION. SO,
COLLEAGUES , I WOULD LIKE TO
FORMALLY MOVE AMENDMENT THREE,
AS PRESENTED IN VERSION 2 OF
AMENDMENT THREE. AS PRESENTED IN
WHAT IS BEING HANDED OUT RIGHT
NOW.
>> SECOND.
>> THANK YOU. THE AMENDMENT TO
THE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED, AND I HAVE ALREADY
SPOKEN TO THAT . BUT I WILL
STATE, AGAIN, I DO BELIEVE I
SUPPORT THIS AMENDMENT
GENERALLY, AND I BELIEVE THAT IF
THERE ARE ISSUES RELATED
PARTICULARLY TO UNDISCLOSED
WARRANTS , THAT IS AN ISSUE THAT
WE HAVE TO ADDRESS AND WE HAVE
TO REVIEW AND UNDERSTAND . AND I
BELIEVE THAT WE SHOULD DO IT AND
PAUSE THE PROGRAM, AS OPPOSED TO
END IT. BECAUSE IF WE WERE TO
END IT AND GET ADDITIONAL
DETAILS AND THE LIKE, THEN IT IS
A WHOLE DIFFERENT PIECE. MORE
FROM A GOOD GOVERNANCE POINT OF
VIEW, LOOKING AT THE DIFFERENT
PIECES AS WE WORK THROUGH THESE,
THAT WE SHOULD PAUSE THE
PROGRAM, IN LIGHT OF ANY ISSUES
RELATED TO NONDISCLOSURE ORDERS
. ARE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS? COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ
?
>> THANK YOU, FOR A POINT OF
ORDER, ARE WE GOING TO HEAR FROM
COUNCILMEMBER RINK ON WHAT HER
FEELINGS, HER POSITION IS ON
WHETHER WE ELIMINATE OR PAUSE?
BECAUSE THOSE ARE BIG THINGS. I
DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WERE GOING TO
DO THAT.
>> YES.
>> THANK YOU. ALTHOUGH YOUR HAND
WAS QUICKER THAN COUNCILMEMBER
RINK 'S. BUT YOU ARE RIGHT.
THIS IS KIND OF A UNIQUE
SITUATION, BECAUSE TECHNICALLY
IT IS MY AMENDMENT SINCE I'M
SPONSORING. BUT THANK YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ, AS WE KIND
OF DO THIS BACK-AND-FORTH. I DO
WANT TO GIVE YOU THE FIRST AND
LAST WORD ON THIS AMENDMENT TO
THE AMENDMENT BEFORE WE GO TO
THE LAST WORD ON THE AMENDMENT
ITSELF.
>> ONE QUICK POINT OF ORDER.
THIS IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO
COUNCILMEMBER RICK 'S.
>> YES, THIS IS A FRIENDLY
AMENDMENT, AND I AM IN SUPPORT
OF THE AMENDMENT. I JUST WANTED
TO PUT THIS LITTLE SLIGHT
CHANGE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR, AND THANK
YOU, COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ. I
THINK, JUST AS A POINT OF
CURIOSITY, I AM WONDERING IF
THERE IS OPENNESS TO THIS BEING
ADDITIVE, RATHER THAN EITHER OR.
MANY WE WANT TO GIVE LATITUDE TO
THE EXECUTIVE. WE HAVEN'T HEAR
THE LANGUAGE STATING
DISCONTINUES COLLECTING CERTAIN
DATA, OR PAUSE , OR END. I'M
WONDERING IF YOU WOULD BE OPENED
TO CREATING ADDITIVE OPTIONS
THAT ALLOW FOR FLEXIBILITY FOR
RECONSIDERATION OF THE PROGRAM.
SO, THE QUESTION BACK TO THE
SPONSOR OF THE AMENDMENT TO MY
AMENDMENT, IF THERE'S OPENNESS
TO AN ADDITIVE APPROACH TO
CREATE THAT LATITUDE, RATHER
THAN A SWAP.
>> OKAY, COLLEAGUES . IF YOU CAN
WORK WITH ME, BASICALLY SET UP
TWO PIECES IN THIS SENTENCE THAT
, INCLUDING STEPS THAT MIGHT BE
TAKEN TO DISCONTINUE COLLECTING
CERTAIN DATA , AND WHETHER TO
PAUSE OR END THE PILOT PROGRAM.
SO, I AM WRITING THIS DOWN , A
CLERK WILL WORK WITH OUR OTHER
CLERKS, AS WELL, TO EITHER PAUSE
OR END THE PROGRAM.
>> ARE YOU GOING TO SAY END OR
ELIMINATE?
>> THAT WAS THE SECOND TO LAST
SENTENCE THAT I WAS REFERRING
TO. YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE
SECOND TO LAST SENTENCE?
>> YES.
>> OKAY, IS EVERYBODY
UNDERSTANDING THAT CHANGE? MY
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO THE
AMENDMENT?
>> MR. CHAIR, POINT OF ORDER. I
THINK I UNDERSTAND, BUT I THINK
WE HAVE TWO PENDING MOTIONS
BEFORE THIS BODY, AS I
UNDERSTAND IT . DO YOU CONSIDER
THIS UPDATED, THAT WE ARE SEEING
LIVE ON THE SCREEN HERE? UPDATED
WHETHER TO PAUSE OR IN THE
PROGRAM. DO YOU DO THAT AS A
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT?
>> YES.
>> OKAY. AND IS ON THE SCREEN.
>> THANK YOU, I THINK WE ARE
GOOD NOW.
>> MR. DOSS HAS REVIEWED, SPOKEN
TO OUR CLERK.
>> YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO POINT
OUT THE COUNCIL WOULD BE MAKING
A CHANGE IN THE FIRST PLACE THAT
YOU SEE READ THEIR. WHETHER TO
PAUSE OR END THE CCTV PROGRAM.
BEEN IN THE LAST SENTENCE, THE
LANGUAGE ALREADY SAID PAUSE OR
ELIMINATE, SO YOU DON'T NEED TO
CHANGE THAT.
>> OKAY, THANK YOU. SO, I SEE
THE POINT, THANK YOU . THE
AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDMENT HAD
STRIKE OR ELIMINATE. SHOULD WE
HAVE ELIMINATE BE REPLACED BY
END SO IT IS IN SYNC?
>> CHAIR, I WOULD SUPPORT THAT
CHANGE.
>> OKAY, CLERK? OKAY,
COLLEAGUES, ON YOUR SCREEN IS
THE UPDATED AMENDMENT TO THE
AMENDMENT AFTER THE CONVERSATION
, AFTER THE DISCUSSION. AGAIN,
THIS IS A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT TO
THE AMENDMENT THAT I SUPPORT,
JUST LOOKING TO HAVE THAT ,
THANK YOU . ALTHOUGH THAT WAS
ALREADY PULLED FROM THE
ORIGINAL, DO YOU NEED TO STRIKE
IT OUT WHEN IT IS ALREADY NOT IN
? JUST IN CASE, LEAVE IT THERE.
OKAY, ANY OTHER DISCUSSION,
COLLEAGUES? ANY OTHER ADDITIONAL
COMMENT FROM OUR CENTRAL STUFF?
OKAY. WITH THAT SAID, WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLE ON
THE AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT THREE
, IN REFERENCE TO AMENDMENT
THREE AS MODIFIED?
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH ?
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON? AS A
MEMBER SAKA ? COUNCILMEMBER
KETTLE ? FIVE IN FAVOR, AND
UNOPPOSED.
>> THE AMENDMENT IS NOW
OFFICIALLY AMENDED. ARE THERE
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, OR CAN
I GO TO THE AMENDMENT SPONSOR
UNOFFICIALLY? COUNCILMEMBER
RINK?
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR KETTLE. AND
THANK YOU FOR YOUR COLLABORATION
AND ADJUSTING THE LANGUAGE , I
CERTAINLY APPRECIATE THE
FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. COLLEAGUES,
I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL
COMMENTS BEYOND I THINK THIS IS
AN IMPORTANT MEASURE , AT
MINIMUM, TO HAVE THIS IN AN
ANNUAL REPORT, STATING MY INTENT
TO WORK TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL
AMENDMENT THAT ALLOWS US TO
ADDRESS A MORE IMMEDIATE BASIS,
FOR US TO TAKE UP THAT FULL
COUNCIL. BUT FOR DAY I THINK
THIS CREATES A MEANINGFUL
OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO EVALUATE
THE PROGRAM IF THERE ARE ANY
DATA BREACHES. THANK YOU, CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK. WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE ON THE ADOPTION OF
AMENDMENT THREE?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER JUAREZ?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? COUNCIL
MEMBER KETTLE? FIVE IN FAVOR,
AND UNOPPOSED.
>> THE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED. NOW
TIME TO VOTE ON THE BILL AS
AMENDED. ARE THERE ANY FINAL
COMMENTS ON THE BILL AS AMENDED?
SEEING NONE, HEARING NONE.
CLERK, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE
ROLE ON THE COMMUNITY
RECOMMENDATION TO PASS 121052 AS
AMENDED?
>> COMES MEMBER JUAREZ?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
COUNCIL MEMBER NELSON ?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA? COUNCIL
MEMBER KETTLE? FIVE IN FAVOR,
AND UNOPPOSED.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES, AND THE
COMMUNITY RECOMMENDATION THAT
THE BILL PASSED AS RECOMMENDED
WILL BE SENT TO THE SEPTEMBER
2nd CITY COUNCIL MEETING. WE
WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER
TWO, WHICH IS SOMEWHAT SPOKEN TO
BY MR. DOSS. WILL MOVED TO THE
SECOND ITEM OF IS THIS. CLAIRE,
PLEASE READ ITEM TWO INTO THE
RECORD.
>> COUNCIL BILL 121053, AND
ORDINANCE RELATING TO
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY
IMPLEMENTATION, AUTHORIZING
APPROVAL OF USES AND ACCEPTING
THE 2025 UPDATED SURVEILLANCE
IMPACT REPORT AND 2025 EXECUTIVE
OVERVIEW FOR THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT USE OF THE REAL-TIME
CRIME CENTER SOFTWARE.
>> MR. DOSS, ANY FURTHER
COMMENTS?
>> NO, I WILL JUST SAY THAT THIS
IS THE EXACT SAME AMENDMENT FROM
AMENDMENT TWO THAT YOU VOTED ON
WITH THE CCTV BILL ABOUT THE
EVALUATION, AND I APOLOGIZE TO
THE COUNCILMEMBERS FOR NOT
MENTIONING EARLIER THAT I HAD
DONE THAT WORK BEHIND THE SCENES
. I SHOULD'VE PROVIDED THAT
BACKGROUND. THAT IS THE SAME
EXACT AMENDMENT.
>> THANK YOU, MR. DOSS . OKAY, I
MOVED TO AMEND COUNCIL BILL
121053 AS PRESENTED ON AMENDMENT
ONE.
>> SECOND.
>> MOVED AND SECONDED TO AMEND
THE BILL AS PRESENTED ON
AMENDMENT ONE, AND CENTRAL STAFF
IS ALREADY SPOKE INTO IT. I AM
TYPICALLY THE SPONSOR AGAIN, BUT
COUNCILMEMBER RINK, YOU ARE
RECOGNIZED TO ADDRESS AMENDMENT
NUMBER ONE.
>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. I WILL SAVE
US ALL A COUPLE OF MINUTES AND
SAY IT IT IS THE EXACT SAME
AMENDMENT THAT WE HAVE ALREADY
HAD SOME DISCUSSION ON, BUT
RELATED TO RTCC . I HOPE YOU
WILL CONSIDER SUPPORTING IT.
THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
RINK. COLLEAGUES? AGAIN, AS
COUNCILMEMBER RINK NOTED, THIS
IS THE SAME, AND AS MR. DOSS
NOTED, THE SAME FOR THE CCTV. AS
CHAIR, I WANT TO SAY, WE AGAIN
APPRECIATE THE POINTS IN IT, AND
IT IS INCLUDED, IN SO MANY WAYS,
AS WE RING IN , MY POSITION IS
THAT BROADER PEACE IN TERMS OF
PRIORITY ONE RESPONSE TIMES, THE
BROADER CRIMINAL JUSTICE, THE
BROADER FUNCTION OF THE CRIMINAL
JUSTICE SYSTEM AND THE ABILITY
OF THE KING COUNTY PROSECUTOR
AND CITY ATTORNEY TO BRING THE
CASES FORWARD BETTER, SMARTER,
AND FOR THOSE PIECES AS IT
RELATES TO FELONY CRIME, PART OF
THE SET AS IT RELATES TO THESE
PROGRAMS. I WILL NOT BE
SUPPORTING IT. OKAY. WILL THE
CLERK PLEASE CALL THE ROLE AND
ADOPTION OF AMENDMENT NUMBER
ONE?
>> COUNCILMEMBER JUAREZ?
>> NO.
>> COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH?
>> YES.
>> COUNCIL PRESIDENT NELSON?
>> ABSTAIN.
>> COUNCIL MEMBER SAKA? CHAIR
KETTLE?
>> NO.
>> ONE IN FAVOR, THREE OPPOSED,
ONE ABSTENTION.
>> THANK YOU, AMENDMENT ONE IS
NOT ADOPTED . OKAY, ARE THERE
ANY FINAL COMMENTS ON THE BILL
AS AMENDED FOR THE REAL-TIME
CRIME CENTER AND MORE BROADLY, I
GUESS? ANY QUESTIONS? I'M NOT
SEEING ANY , BUT AS CHAIR, I
WANTED TO NOTE THAT THERE'S A
LOT OF COMMENTS, THERE'S A LOT
OF POINTS MADE RELATED TO
REAL-TIME CRIME CENTER AND CCTV.
AND I DO TAKE IT IN. I REVIEW. I
SEE DOCUMENTS , LIKE THE ONE I
HAVE HERE, THAT IS TALKING ABOUT
THIS AND IT SAYS, IT TALKS ABOUT
CARSON ROLE AND SURVEILLANCE. IT
STARTS OFF BY SAYING CARSON WILL
SURVEILLANCE IS USED TO TRACK
PEOPLE'S MOVEMENTS, SOUND, AND
BIOMETRICS IN ORDER TO
CRIMINALIZE AND INCARCERATE
PEOPLE. THE SYSTEM, THE CCTV IN
THIS CASE, OR RTCC, IS NOT
CRIMINALIZING AND INCARCERATING
PEOPLE. IT IS THE ACTIONS OF
THOSE INDIVIDUALS THAT IS
GETTING THEM ON THE PATH TO
BEING POSSIBLY CHARGED AND
INCARCERATED. I THINK THIS IS
IMPORTANT. THIS IS HOW THE
REPORT STARTS OFF, AND I THINK
WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE
INDIVIDUAL PIECES . IT GOES TO
MY POINT ABOUT COMPASSION AND
WISDOM, IN A WAY, BUT ALSO
LOOKING AT THE BROADER CITY. AND
THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE. I
SEE REPORTS TALK ABOUT , OR
ARTICLES TALKING ABOUT A LPR,
AND IT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT
AUSTIN HAS ENDED IT'S A LPR
PROGRAM. WELL, IT'S VERY
DIFFERENT. WE HAVE A VERY
DIFFERENT SYSTEM HERE IN
SEATTLE. AND I THINK IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO
HIGHLIGHT THAT, AND IT HAS COME
UP. IT NOTED THAT AUSTIN, IN
TERMS OF THE BACKGROUND ON THIS,
WAS USING FIXED POSITION A LPR.
THEY USE FLOCK TECHNOLOGY. WE DO
NOT USE FLOCK . SO THERE'S A
LOT OF DIFFERENCES. IF YOU LOOK
AT OUR BILLS, ALL THE PIECES WE
IN REFLECT OUR SEATTLE VALUES.
AND, AS NOTED, WE DON'T DO
FIXED POSITION. WE DO NOT WORK
WITH FLOCK . AND IT'S IMPORTANT.
IN TERMS OF THIS, USING AUSTIN
AS AN EXAMPLE, OFTEN TIMES
PEOPLE SAY HEY, THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT IS GETTING ACCESS TO
THE DATA AND SO FORTH. THIS IS
HAPPENING. AND THESE ARE THE
ARGUMENTS MADE. BUT THE
ARGUMENTS MADE ARE AS IF WE ARE
A JURISDICTION IN SOME RED
STATE, RED COUNTY IN AMERICA,
AND WE DON'T HAVE THAT. WE
BUILT AND, LAST YEAR WE HELD IN
SO MANY DIFFERENT PIECES. YOU
KNOW, WE RESTRICT THOSE WHO CAN
ACCESS THE DATABASE. IT IS
SOLELY WITH THE DETECTIVES AND
CIVILIAN ANALYSTS OF THE RTCC .
EACH SEARCH IS LOGGED AND
AUDITED BY THE OIG . WE HAVE
ACCOUNTABILITY PARTNERS. A LOT
OF THE JURISDICTIONS AROUND THE
COUNTRY DO NOT HAVE
ACCOUNTABILITY PARTNERS. THE OIG
IS ON THIS. AND, BY THE WAY,
CURRENTLY BECAUSE OF THE PILOT .
SO, THE PEOPLE WITH ACCESS IS
REALLY RESTRICTED AND TRACKED .
THIS IS WHAT'S HAPPENING A LOT
OF TIMES, WHAT'S HAPPENING IS
LIKE AN INSIDER THREAT. IN SOME
OF THESE OTHER LOCATIONS WHERE
INDIVIDUAL IS PASSING THE DATA.
FROM MY OWN WORLD,
COUNTERINTELLIGENCE IS
CONCERNED. THAT'S NOT WHAT'S
HAPPENING HERE. BECAUSE WE BUILT
AND SAFEGUARDS. IN SEATTLE WE'VE
DONE IT DIFFERENTLY. AND IT'S
REALLY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT.
ALSO, THERE'S A LOT OF TALK
ABOUT THE FLOCK DATA , AGAIN,
THEY EXTENDED THE PERIOD THAT IT
WAS BEING HELD. WE CAN'T, AXON
IS NOT ALLOWED TO DO THAT. EVEN
HERE, WITH CCTV, SPD DOES NOT
USE 30, THEY USE FIVE DAYS. THAT
IS DUE TO THE CAMERA ITSELF.
THAT DATA IS NOT SITTING IN
ARIZONA. IF IT DOES GET POLLED,
IT IS BECAUSE IT IS PART OF AN
INVESTIGATION, AND SO FORTH, AND
THERE ARE DIFFERENT RULES THAT
FALL UNDER THAT, DIFFERENT
PROTECTIONS THAT FALL UNDER
THAT. SO I BRING THIS UP,
BECAUSE ONE OF THE CHALLENGES AS
WE WORK THROUGH THESE THINGS IS
WORKING FROM THE SAME PLACE. AND
FOR THIS EXAMPLE, IT IS QUITE
CLEAR , WHEN I HEAR THE
ARGUMENTS, THE ARGUMENTS ARE NOT
MADE AGAINST THE SEATTLE
PROGRAM. IT'S MADE AGAINST A
GENERIC PROGRAM, OR A PROGRAM,
LIKE IN AUSTIN, THAT HAS
DIFFERENT PIECES TO IT. FLOCK,
FOR EXAMPLE, AND, BY THE WAY, AS
I NOTED IN OUR LAST MEETING,
THEY HAVE AN ATTORNEY GENERAL IN
TEXAS, KEN PAXTON, WHO IS VERY
DIFFERENT FROM OUR ATTORNEY
GENERAL HERE , ATTORNEY GENERAL
BROWN. OH, BY THE WAY, ATTORNEY
GENERAL BROWN IS WORKING THIS
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON AND WE ARE DOING OUR
PART HERE IN THE CITY. SO I JUST
BRING THIS UP BECAUSE I GET THE
PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT I ALSO GET
THE EMAILS. AND REALLY, BY THE
WAY, I APPRECIATE EMAILS WHEN
THEY COME FROM SOMEBODY'S
PERSONAL ADDRESS AND THEY WRITE
IN THEIR OWN VOICE. AGAIN, I
LOOK FOR THESE PIECES, BUT ALSO,
EVEN IN THESE, I SEE SOME
SIMILAR THINGS WHERE IT IS A
TALKING POINT, WHICH IS A VALID
TALKING POINT GENERALLY, BUT NOT
VALID HERE IN THE SENSE THAT WE
HAVE IN DIFFERENT PROTECTIONS
AND WE HAVE DIFFERENT LAWS.
THERE'S VERY DIFFERENT, UNIQUE
CIRCUMSTANCES. AND I SEE THIS
FROM THE ACTION NETWORK EMAILS,
AS WELL, WHERE THEY ARE GOING
THROUGH AND IT DOES NOT HELP THE
ARGUMENT WHEN YOU ARE MAKING THE
ARGUMENT AS IF WE ARE IN SOME
OTHER LOCATION, AS OPPOSED TO
SEATTLE, WITH OUR SEATTLE
VALUES. ARE WE PERFECT? I HEAR
THE PUBLIC COMMENTERS. NO. WE
ARE MOVING IN THAT WAY. AND
CHIEF BARNES , AS THE LEADER OF
THE DEPARTMENT, HAS MADE POINTS
IN TERMS OF HOW WE DO BUSINESS.
THE PROFESSIONALISM THAT CHIEF
BARNES TALKED ABOUT AND THE
STANDARDS AND THE LIKE. SO, I
APPRECIATE THE ENGAGEMENT, I
LOOKED FOR THE PIECES, LIKE HOW
WE CAN DO THINGS BETTER. I
APPRECIATE COUNCILMEMBER RINK
BRINGING THIS AMENDMENT THAT
WE'VE ADDED, AND I ANTICIPATE
THE OTHER ONE THAT SHE HAS
NOTED. BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE AN
ISSUE . BUT, AS I NOTED, OFTEN
TIMES IT COMES FROM THE INSIDER
PIECE. AND WE HAVE ALREADY BUILT
SAFEGUARDS ON THAT, AND SO WE
ARE CONTINUING TO WORK THESE
PIECES, AND I ALWAYS LIKE TO
CARRY ON THE CONVERSATION ON
THESE PIECES. SO, AS I FINISH MY
COMMENTS , I JUST WANTED TO MAKE
THOSE NOTES. AND COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ HAS RAISED HER HAND.
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. FIRST I
WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR
LEADERSHIP ON THE PUBLIC SAFETY
COMMITTEE. I WANT TO THANK GREG
DOSS FOR EXCELLENT MEMOS, FISCAL
NOTES, AND SUMMARIES. I NOTICE
YOU PUT A LOT OF WORK ON THAT, I
READ THEM AND APPRECIATE IT. I
ALSO WANT TO THANK BRIAN MAXEY
FOR THE INFORMATION HE PROVIDED.
BUT A SPECIAL THANK YOU TO YOU,
COUNCILMEMBER RINK , BECAUSE YOU
PROPOSE A QUESTION ON AUGUST
8th, AND WE GOT A RESPONSE FROM
THE CHAIR TO THE SEATTLE POLICE
DEPARTMENT. MR. MAXEY DID
RESPOND ON AUGUST 8th AND IT
ENCAPSULATED WHAT YOU JUST SAID,
CHAIR. FIRST OF ALL, IT IS GOOD
TO SEE YOUNG LEADERSHIP
UNDERSTANDING AND SPOTTING THESE
ISSUES, HAVING THE BRAVERY TO
COME FORWARD AND ASKED MORE
QUESTIONS. THANK YOU, CHAIR, FOR
SHARING THE RESPONSE FROM MR.
MAXEY TO THE REST OF COUNCIL,
BECAUSE I WOULD'VE NOT KNOWN
THAT AUSTIN AND FLOCK, I HAVE
BEEN READING ABOUT FLOCK, AND I
DID NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE
CONNECTION WAS THERE. IT IS
IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT SPD WILL
NOT BE SHARING THIS DATA WITH
I.C.E.. STATE, LOCAL, AND
SEATTLE POLICE DEPARTMENT
PROHIBIT POLICE DEPARTMENT
OFFICERS FROM PROACTIVELY
COOPERATING WITH I.C.E.. I KNOW
WE HAD A LOT OF PUBLIC COMMENT,
THOSE WHO CALLED IN AND THOSE
WHO SHOWED UP, AND WE WILL STAY
ON TOP OF THAT. I KNOW THAT
PIERCE COUNTY AND TACOMA IS
HAVING A DIFFERENT ISSUE WITH
THEIR PROSECUTOR AND THEIR CITY
ATTORNEY. WE DON'T HAVE THAT
HERE. AND FOR SOMEONE WHO HAS
BEEN AROUND THIS A FEW TIMES, WE
WILL STAY ON TOP OF THAT. SO I
WANTED TO THANK ALL THE
LEADERSHIP HERE FOR FOLLOWING
THIS ISSUE. THANK YOU, MR.
CHAIR.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCILMEMBER
JUAREZ. COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON?
>> TO ME, THE BOTTOM LINE IS WE
CANNOT BE SATISFIED WITH THE
STATUS QUO. WE HAVE TO ALWAYS BE
LOOKING FOR MORE METHODS AND
TOOLS TO MAKE OUR CITY SAFER. WE
CANNOT BE HAPPY WITH KIDS
GETTING SHOT AT BUS STOPS OR
WITH THE WRONG SUSPECT
APPREHENDED, OR WHAT HAVE YOU.
SO THAT IS, IT'S OUR
RESPONSIBILITY TO ALWAYS BE
LOOKING FOR WAYS TO IMPROVE
PUBLIC SAFETY IN OUR CITY. THAT
IS WHAT I THINK THESE TWO PIECES
OF LEGISLATION ARE TRYING TO DO.
>> THANK YOU, COUNCIL PRESIDENT
NELSON. ANYBODY ELSE? OKAY.
SEEING NO OTHER HANDS RAISED OR
SEEING ANY, AS I LOOK LEFT AND
RIGHT, CLERK , WILL YOU PLEASE
CALL THE ROLE IN THE COMMUNITY
RECOMMENDATION TO PASS COUNCIL
BILL 121053 AS AMENDED?
>> COUNCIL MEMBER JUAREZ?
COUNCILMEMBER HOLLINGSWORTH ?
COUNCILMEMBER NELSON?
COUNCILMEMBER SAKA ? CHAIR
KETTLE?
>> AYE.
>> FIVE IN FAVOR, NOT OPPOSED.
>> THANK YOU, THE RECOMMENDATION
OF THE HILL PASS AS AMENDED WILL
BE SENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
MEETING. WE HAVE REACHED THE END
OF TODAY'S AGENDA. IS THERE ANY
NEW BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE
MEETING BEFORE WE ADJOURN?