1 MEMORANDUM
TO: Jim Madaffer and Jeremy Ogul, Madaffer Enterprises FROM: John Nienstedt and Rachel Lawler
RE: Chula Vista Privacy Focus Group Research – Full Report DATE: Friday, July 29, 2022
INTRODUCTION
The City of Chula Vista, home to more than 265,000 residents, is San Diego County’s second-largest city.
It is currently considering implementing new privacy policies to better protect residents’ personal information, while also striving for more transparency around its data collection practices. The City of Chula Vista Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force, a group of Chula Vista residents and subject matter experts, was formed. It will help develop comprehensive policy recommendations on technology oversight and privacy for City Council review by the fall of 2022.
The City retained Madaffer Enterprises to assist the Task Force. In turn, Madaffer hired Competitive Edge Research & Communication, Inc. (CERC) to conduct research in two phases. The quantitative survey phase is complete and is now being followed by focus groups to gain a deeper understanding of resident concerns and preferences that emerged in the survey. After conducting four focus groups in English, the City decided to conduct two additional groups with Spanish-speaking residents. Together, these pieces of research will provide valuable information addressing residents’ privacy concerns as well as informing the development of thorough, effective, and broadly accepted City privacy policies.
Focus group research explores the rationales for opinions and attitudes; it does not infer from measured data to the larger population. The richness of this research method comes from observing how people react to stimuli, in hearing them talk, and observing how they formulate their opinions. The proceedings are context-based and not statistically projectable to the views of an entire group of people.
The ongoing health concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic made it necessary to hold the sessions online instead of in-person. We recruited and validated participants for full groups of six to eight.
Participants were also screened for articulation. Eight qualified participants were seated in Groups 1 and 2, seven were seated in Group 3 and although eight were initially seated in Group 4, one participant chose to leave the group after several minutes. Eight participants were seated in Group 5 and seven were seated in Group 6, though one participant in each group chose to leave during the session. The English-language groups were moderated by John Nienstedt, a professional moderator and pollster. The Spanish-language groups were moderated by Cris Bain-Borrego, a bilingual professional moderator skilled in conducting groups with Latinos. The discussion guide was principally designed by Nienstedt, Jim Madaffer and Jeremy Ogul of Madaffer Enterprises, with input from the Task Force. It was also reviewed by City staff. Bain-Borrego translated all materials necessary for the Spanish groups.
• Groups 1: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing less than a “very good” job at keeping personal information private
• Group 2: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing better than a “very bad” job at keeping personal information private
2 • Group 3: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing a “good” job at keeping personal information private or are unsure about that
• Group 4: Chula Vista residents who think the City is doing a “bad” job at keeping personal information private or are unsure about that
• Group 5: Chula Vista Spanish-speaking residents who think the City is not doing a “bad” job at keeping personal information private
• Group 6: Chula Vista Spanish-speaking residents who think the City is not doing a “good” job at keeping personal information private
The table below highlights select participant demographics. Groups 1, 2, and 5 were balanced by gender, while Groups 3 and 4 tilted slightly more female; Group 6 contained only 1 male. Ages of participants in all groups skewed toward middle-aged or younger. Also, majorities in all six groups were ethnically non-White.
GROUP 1 GROUP 2 GROUP 3 GROUP 4 GROUP 5 GROUP 6 TOTAL
Male 4 4 3 3 3 1 18
Female 4 4 4 4 4 5 25
White 3 1 1 1 0 0 6
Non-White 5 7 6 6 7 6 37
18-34 2 3 4 3 0 1 13
35-54 6 3 1 2 5 5 22
55+ 0 2 2 2 2 0 8
OBJECTIVES
These focus groups are designed to:
• Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government • Develop suggestions for privacy policies
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Housing affordability, crime and public safety, and homelessness are the top issues residents feel local officials should be most focused on. Privacy issues were not mentioned, so they are not top of mind in the community.
• Knowledge of privacy issues looks to be limited to drones and automated license plate readers.
However, most residents do not intuitively link either of these programs to confidentiality concerns. • Across all our groups, “no news is good news” is the prevailing attitude when it comes to whether the City’s privacy and confidentiality polices are working or not. Absent a significant public data breach, residents will assume Chula Vista takes the necessary steps to secure their personal data. • Only two participants experienced a serious data breach or invasion of privacy – in this case, identity theft. Consequently, participants currently do not show widespread urgency around privacy issues. • An overall lack of awareness about how Chula Vista handles sensitive data is evident. • Only one participant across all six groups claimed to be formally involved with Chula Vista’s boards and commissions. Almost none expressed a desire to sign up. 3 • Most felt the City of Chula Vista does not effectively communicate with residents about civic engagement opportunities. Emails and social media posts on community pages were the most popular suggestions for increasing involvement and essentially amounted to “do a better job getting the word out about privacy issues.”
• Spanish language participants voiced a desire for local officials to get out into the Latino community more as a way to draw attention to privacy issues and policies. • Spanish language participants were generally remarkably similar in their perspectives, desires, and tone to English language participants. Notable exceptions:
o Word-of-mouth appears to be a more important source for local information o Spam calls are seen as invasion of privacy
o More focus on punishing bad actors who violate privacy rules o More focus on the City getting consent from residents who share their information or whose images are captured on video
• There was lack of consensus on whether certain ethnic groups are singled out by Chula Vista law enforcement. Some rejected that notion while others told vivid stories regarding instances when they felt profiling occurred.
• On their own, participants surfaced many ideas on what the City could do to address privacy issues • The policies adopted by Seattle (posting privacy rules and regulations on the City’s website) and Oakland (its privacy advisory board) were generally applauded. However, Berkeley’s banning of facial recognition technology was very controversial. While some participants saw the virtue of a ban, more felt that went too far and would not help Chula Vista deal effectively with crime. • Top policy prescriptions (in order of popularity):
1. Chief Privacy Officer
2. Enhanced Training
3. A Privacy Oversight Board
4. More City Council Oversight of Privacy-relate Expenditures
5. Anonymizing Data
• Mid-level policy prescriptions:
6. Data Sharing with 3rd Parties (law enforcement “yes,” commercial entities “no”
7. Minimizing Data Collection
8. Regular Audits
9. Time Limits on Data Retention
• Unpopular policy prescription
10. Equitable Deployment of Technology
OBSERVATIONS
John and Cris began the groups with a warm-up exercise by asking everyone to introduce themselves and share where they get their local news about their community. Most participants are longtime Chula Vista residents, averaging nearly two decades in the city. Although there were a few newer arrivals, most have been in the area for more than 10 years and several natives reported moving back to Chula Vista after living elsewhere.
News sources varied across online, social media, print, word of mouth, television, and radio platforms.
Most participants mentioned watching local TV news. The most popular stations were the local affiliate stations of NBC Channel 7 (x9), CBS Channel 8 (x7), FOX Channel 5 (x6), and ABC Channel 10 (x5); independent KUSI (x3) and local public TV station KPBS (x1) were also mentioned. Online sources like Google or Apple newsfeeds (x8) were very common, with social media sites Facebook (x12), YouTube 4 (x4), and Nextdoor (x4) being used frequently. Other social media mentioned included (Instagram (x3), Reddit (x1), and Twitter (x1). Newspapers were used by only a few participants (either print or online), and mentions were evenly split between the Union Tribute (x2) and The Star News (x2). Radio stations (x4) in general were also less widespread, while one person said they tuned into NPR. Five people told us they get their local news by word of mouth from family, friends, neighbors, and colleagues. Within the Spanish groups there was a heavy reliance on online and social media sources (Facebook, Instagram, and Whats App groups), as well as on-line parent groups. Word of mouth was also popular, and many got their local information from family. South Bay Community Services came up three times as a source; not a surprise because at least three participants were promotoras from that organization. TV was also part of the overall mix, with FOX mentioned a few times, NBC cited a couple times and KUSI mentioned once.
ISSUES
Participants were then asked to voice the top issues they feel local officials should be most focused on.
Once we tallied the results, it’s apparent Chula Vista generally has three key areas residents are most concerned about: housing affordability, crime and public safety, and homelessness.
Housing affordability tops the list with the most mentions. Although the issue dominated the conversation in almost every group, it was notably absent from Group 3 whose concerns were more varied. Many elevating this issue shared impassioned views about how the difficult housing market impacts them personally.
The interlinked issues of crime and public safety and homelessness tie for the runner-up spots on the list. Both were brought up in all six groups, so these are widespread affecting Latino and non-Latino community. One participant reported experiencing or hearing about a lot of property crimes in his area of Chula Vista, saying there are “break-ins and porch pirates” and the police “aren’t investigating very often.” Another said he has seen “lots of drug use” on the westside. A spike in similar occurrences near where one woman lives made her want to see “more police presence,” while another woman questioned whether there are “enough law enforcement officers to handle Chula Vista’s growth.”
Homelessness is closely tied to a perceived rise in crime – “homelessness brings crime increases” – but residents are also worried about other aspects such as a lack of homelessness programs and the visual stain it leaves on the community. Women tended to focus on homelessness more often. As one woman emphatically stated, “everywhere I go there’s always homeless people – the parks, streets, fast food places, supermarkets, restaurants…they need more programs or to improve the ones they have” while Jodi remarked that she would like to see “more help with mental health and homelessness.” Another’s concerns focused on local schools: “Homelessness around the elementary schools – there’s needles and trash, and teachers and students are not feeling secure at school, it’s really growing.” Based on our discussions, concerns about homelessness seem to permeate all corners of the City, but especially the westside.
Schools, business development, infrastructure, visual blight, the cost of living, and environmental issues were other issues named by more than one person but are much less pervasive than the top three issues mentioned.
No one mentioned privacy issues, so it is not top of mind in the community. Even those in Groups 4 and 6 who are not upbeat about the City managing personal information did not mention privacy during the 5 discussion of important issues. Amid a plethora of issues that impact everyday life – inflation, record- high gas prices, homelessness, housing, and spiking crime – privacy concerns are not front and center.
When John and Cris probed on the issue, it was clear folks want their data to be secure and residents will welcome new or updated privacy policies designed to protect them and their personal data, but they aren’t clamoring for it. However, sentiment could swiftly change if the City of Chula Vista were to experience a serious data breach.
KNOWLEDGE OF PRIVACY ISSUES
Next, the moderators asked whether anyone has been exposed to privacy issues related to the City and whether they have knowledge of specific steps or measures the City has taken to keep personal information confidential. A female in Group 2 remembered hearing about the Chula Vista Police Department being hacked in 2020 in which some personal information was leaked, but no one else could recall specific data leaks from the City. Only a few people were able to identify any steps Chula Vista has taken to keep data safe. No one in the Spanish-language groups was aware of any specific measures intended to keep personal information secure. In fact, most participants were initially slow to acknowledge the importance of privacy as an issue when asked about it directly. One Latina said, “you’ve got to say to people, ‘hey, did you know that [privacy issue]…?’ Only then will people know there’s a potential problem.” To the minimal extent that other residents are cognizant of privacy issues, this knowledge looks to be limited to drones and automated license plate readers.
Drones
Only two participants mentioned the Chula Vista Police Department’s drones, unprompted, in connection with residents’ privacy and confidentiality. A highly talkative and informed Group 1 participant was the only one who spontaneously recalled anything: “I read something about that. The police have large drones that they fly to almost every call. They are recording every time they are flying.
An advocacy group got involved and want to know how they are protecting the data they collect.” This summary spurred recollection for everyone in Group 1. In Group 3, a Chula Vista native and highly engaged participant was the only other person to spontaneously mention anything about the drones saying, “The police radio scanner has been encrypted. They also now have a drone which is receiving a lot of criticism because people say it impacts their privacy, but it’s only used in certain cases.” Once prompted, five of the eight Group 2 members also expressed familiarity with the police drones, although this only happened to one participant each in Groups 3 and 4. Two panelists recalled hearing drones near their homes but assumed they were private aircraft unrelated to law enforcement efforts. Most participants only connected the drones to personal privacy once they are asked about it directly. Even a male participant who lives “close to the police station” where there is “a high level of drone traffic” did not instinctively connect the dots between the two. There is very little evidence suggesting residents are frequently and intuitively equating drones to an invasion of privacy or confidentiality concerns.
Automated License Plate Readers
Automated license plate readers are another aspect of the privacy issue that most participants in the groups were aware of but do not instinctively link to confidentiality. A lot of folks admitted to knowing about them once asked by John or Cris, and their privacy worries focused on possible errors resulting from cameras doing the job of law enforcement officers as well as their potential misuse by police. As one man put it, “I don’t think it’s appropriate for law enforcement to start running people’s info without a reason.” There was also some confusion in Group 4 about exactly what these cameras are, as three 6 commented about the cameras on the SR-125 toll road. They tended to focus on the need for automated plate readers due to the toll requirement, not to fight crime or ensure public safety, so linking “cameras” to law enforcement is not top-of-mind for these participants. That said, automated license plate cameras generally don’t sit well with some participants, with one commenting, “I get the intent behind the license plate scanners, but it is a bit invasive to scan everyone.” However, their anxiety tends to stem from the potential for data to be misused by law enforcement agencies for unrelated incidents and crimes, rather than the prospect that it will find its way into nefarious hands. Although some don’t love the cameras, many also acknowledged their good crimefighting intent.
Are the City’s Confidentiality Policies Working?
When it comes to whether the City’s policies designed to keep personal information confidential are working, most couldn’t give a firm “yes” or “no” answer. Instead, the prevailing sentiment was “in the absence of news to the contrary – citizens’ privacy is not being undermined.” Although some participants were more hesitant than others to completely trust that their information is safe, this attitude dominated all six groups. One woman embodied this belief, saying, “I think you just assume the City is keeping your information secure. It’s not something I give a second thought to,” while another echoed, “I assume it’s working. I trust that they do but maybe I’m being gullible.” For Chula Vistans, “no news is good news” when it comes to their personal data being kept secure.
One of the less-trusting participants remarked, “I don’t trust that any of our information is completely private. I highly doubt it will be completely private. I’m not confident with some of the leadership in Chula Vista. I don’t know how tech savvy they are.” However, because most participants weren’t aware of any City data breaches, lack of faith was limited. Absent a major public breach, it’s likely most residents will continue assuming Chula Vista takes the necessary precautions to protect their personal data. On the other hand, should a breach occur, residents will quickly lose confidence in the City’s ability to protect sensitive information.
Experiences with Data Breaches
Part of the current lack of urgency around privacy issues can be attributed to most participants not having any personal experience with serious data breaches or invasions of privacy. In total, about half the participants reported experiencing some type of breach or privacy violation, but only two people had serious personal incidents. The most common of the lesser offenses that were mentioned include credit card fraud, theft of mail or personal documents, email or cell phone data breaches, and personal information being used for marketing purposes without consent. These events were very common and came up in all six groups. One also recalled an experience where a drone – which he did not identify as belonging to law enforcement or a private citizen – hovered near his girlfriend’s house and pointed a camera toward her windows for roughly 15 minutes which he deemed “a huge invasion of privacy.” His story drew sympathetic nods from the group, but he was the only one to mention this type of occurrence. Although unpleasant, most of these can be considered ordinary hassles that most people will face at some point in their life and people tend to “come out relatively unscathed.”
The same cannot be said, however, for two women who had their identities stolen (it should be noted that two Group 4 participants also confirmed close family members had their identities stolen, although the participants themselves were not victims). Both detailed a life-altering experience with one describing how the thieves “took my social security number and withdrew from my retirement. Now I have more worry with that type of invasion – that’s your whole life. It impacts everything. I had to close 7 bank accounts every time I opened them.” One participant’s personal information was hacked through an employer payroll data breach that “resulted in identity theft that took quite a long time to fix. My employer outsourced payroll and after this happened, they brought it in-house. It caused tremendous anxiety. They wiped out my checking and savings accounts. I had to open new accounts at a new bank. I still have a lot of anxiety knowing I’m on the dark web – they have my social security number and date of birth.” Unlike the summaries given by those who suffered through less severe violations, it was clear these egregious infringements are still taking both tangible and intangible tolls on the two women in question. People are used to dealing with minor episodes of credit card theft and unsolicited advertising, but identity theft is a whole different kettle of fish. While smaller hacks will certainly erode resident trust, the fallout would not be nearly as dire as if identities were stolen because of a breach of City data.
Evaluations of City Efforts to Keep Personal Information Confidential
In the next exercise, John and Cris asked participants to evaluate how well the City of Chula Vista is doing in keeping certain types of personal information confidential.
Voluntary Information
When it comes to the City keeping information that is voluntarily given to it confidential – such as the payment of parking fines, dog licenses, and recreation class sign ups – most participants have no idea whether Chula Vista is doing a good or bad job. The rationale among the few folks who had a positive opinion mostly hinged – once again – on the idea of “no news is good news” with one commenting, “I haven’t heard about anything on the news, and I have read about other breaches from companies like T Mobile. So, I feel like I would have heard about it if it happened with the City.” Another Spanish-speaking participant said that because she isn’t aware of any breaches, the City is most likely “using the information it collects with good intentions and with the purpose for which it was intended to be used.” A few people did explain that they had positive personal experiences. One related that she has “applied for classes and not had my information used for anything nefarious,” but these tangible proof points of the City doing a good job with this type of data were few and far between. No one voiced solidly negative reviews, but the bulk of positive and neutral opinions were based on assumptions.
Involuntary Information
On the other hand, reactions to whether the City is doing a good or bad job keeping involuntarily given information private – such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles –were much more of a mixed bag. Groups 1 and 4 – where a majority felt Chula Vista is doing a bad job – were mostly critical. The very nature of information being taken from people without their knowledge or consent evidently breeds more hostile views from the get-go.
Rationales for negative views tended to fall into four buckets, the first being concerns about the City staffs’ technological prowess. One woman recalled from her personal experience working for the police department that “the tech support they have is not always up to date to keep security in place and things can get leaked or end up in another database – I’ve seen that in personal experience. They have information you aren’t aware they are collecting so you don’t even know to ask if they are collecting it.” Another echoed this sentiment saying, “older generations don’t have as much understanding of tech and that could lead to something being vulnerable.”
8 A lack of transparency was another cause for concern. A retired park ranger for the City of San Diego explained, “there is quite a bit of info the public doesn’t know we gather; they would be surprised. If something went wrong, they would never know.” Another woman was dismayed because residents “don’t know where data is stored. If it is stored elsewhere (off site) that should be public knowledge,” while one woman articulated, “although we don’t hear anything, but we don’t know what we don’t know. The biggest thing is a lack of transparency in what they do with their data or how they are updating their systems. You never hear about that – you hear about it from other companies, but never Chula Vista.”
Several participants were also worried about this type of data being used for “bad motives” outside of its intended purpose. When probed further, “bad motives” can be described as using or selling confidential data – two panelists adamantly believed private data is being sold by the City – for targeted advertising, immigration enforcement, vehicle speed traps, or political targeting – ala “IRS targeting of political dissidents.” Using private data for essentially anything outside of its original intent is unacceptable to these participants. However, many folks in this category also acknowledged there are good motives for capturing and recording involuntary data, so they don’t have a purely pessimistic outlook. “Good motives” that were mentioned include Amber Alerts, tracking and locating criminals, monitoring pedestrian and traffic patterns, and their ability to help prevent vehicle accidents.
Finally, the assumption rationale comes into play again. Although they have no concrete evidence, a few people assume the City is not doing a good job keeping this type of data safe. For example, one stated, “I have no reason to believe it’s being used inappropriately. But I know when humans have access to data, there is potential for misuse. But I have nothing to base my opinion on.” Another extrapolated from a past unrelated experience saying, “I don’t trust anyone because my information has been stolen by someone I was very close with.”
On the other end of the spectrum, majorities in Groups 2, 3, 5, and even 6 felt positively – or at the very least, indifferent – about City keeping involuntary information confidential. But again, these views are usually based on assumptions that a good job was being done because they hadn’t been notified of any misuse or breach of private data. One summed up this mentality nicely saying, “I think they are doing OK, but we don’t know for sure if they have been breached.” Only a few of the rationales were based on concrete examples, and these were limited to two Spanish speakers in Groups 5 and 6 who happily cited personal experiences whereby crimes were resolved thanks to license plate scanners and video camera images that proved their innocence.
Video Imagery
Next, John and Cris posed the same question about video imagery and data – such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras, and many participants were upbeat about the City’s efforts with this data. One believes the City does a good job saying, “it’s almost impossible to view any of the footage from city cameras; it takes a court order.” Two participants recalled their personal conversations with law enforcement personnel that left them with the impression that this type of data is treated with integrity and is heavily guarded and very secure. A few participants parroted the same “no news is good news” trope – so again, some opinions are based heavily on assumptions. Group 5 was perhaps the most positive, initially. One man said the police are using the video for the reason intended and none think the video surveillance is more targeted at Latinos. As the discussion went on, one woman joked about surveillance, offering, “what if I was cheating on my husband and they had video of that?” That brought laughs but led to one participant commenting that “everything is already public, just don't add 9 to the problem by releasing my private info.” Group 5 hadn’t been thinking much about privacy, but then once they talked about it, they began to see the possibilities of abuse, ala “now that you mention it."
A large share of participants – including majorities in Groups 4 and 6 – didn’t initially have much to say about the video images. Group 4 members largely felt their knowledge about the confidentiality practices was insufficient to make a judgement. Conversely, some in Group 6 said it’s fine as long as Chula Vista was “controlling it.” Another commented that “it cuts both ways” in that they value the law enforcement aspects, but also see how drones and body cameras could be abused. One offered that he has heard about drone footage on the Internet: “Chula Vista stores videos and then the video is gone… it's kinda strange, because the video isn't then used to hold people accountable.” This then prompted a discussion that clearly revealed some distrust of the police. One said, “police use it [video] to protect themselves. They only release the video to prove they didn't do anything wrong,” and that elicited nods from around the screen. All except Bryan felt police might be manipulating the information to their favor: “they [police] use it [video] to their benefit.” These suspicions seemed natural for a group comprised of participants who do not think the City is protecting data well, in general.
Only two participants surfaced overtly distrustful views, saying, “Even though they haven’t been released to public, personnel in city can share it. They can take a picture with their cell phone and share it – I’ve seen it done,” and people have “no idea what info is taken, where it goes, etc.…you just do not know.”
An overall lack of awareness about how Chula Vista handles sensitive data was evinced. Even those who think it does a good job are relying on the flimsy “no news is good news” rationale. The moment any news comes out about a video breach and leak, residents will become seriously concerned.
Singling Out of Certain Groups
Because “Chula Vista has a lot of diversity,” hardly anyone in Groups 1 or 2 felt certain groups are singled out more than they should be by police. Among the few who thought this does happen, the more common belief was that this happens to homeless people or people with mental health issues rather than people of a certain race or ethnicity. Only one participant mentioned that Latinos are targeted more than others, saying she had seen “DUI checkpoints that turn out to be checkpoints for legal status, registration checks, etc. They primarily target Hispanic people so they can check their immigration status.” More prevalent – though still only voiced by a couple of participants – was the idea that the police aren’t targeting the bad guys or following up on crime enough.
Although a Latino in Group 3 agreed that Chula Vista is a “mixed pot of people,” participants in Groups 3 and 4 were much more likely to think certain groups are singled out by the police. African Americans and Latinos were the primary targets mentioned, although Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders and homeless individuals also came up. One White woman in Group 4 told a poignant story in this regard.
She described how she – despite having two motorcycle cops behind her – was not stopped when she had 13 kids in her car and then told us her husband, who is a Pacific Islander with a goatee, was pulled over for minor and unobvious infractions.
In the first of the two Spanish sessions, the drone section led to a fascinating discussion of whether Chula Vista police are singling out groups. The less skeptical Group 5 didn’t focus on ethnicity, they perceived it was a “look” that got unwarranted attention from the police. One said that the police “focus on tattoos and people who are not clean cut rather than the guy in the suit.” Another backed that up saying he’ll “see the police cars around the tattooed guy and interrogating him.” Only one participant 10 mentioned multiple police cars patrolling Latino neighborhoods, but no other heads nodded at that point. Another panelist thought she was targeted but that was in San Diego, raising the prospect of residents conflating issues across agencies and municipalities. In sum, only two of the seven in Group 5 thought ethnic/racial targeting was occurring.
It was a different story in the more critical Group 6. One Latina felt there's more patrols now that there are more Mexicans and people of color in her neighborhood. Another participant believed there's a lot of force being used against certain ethnic groups. One participant’s Mexican brother, who has darker skin than she does, was stopped because, they said, he fit the physical appearance, so they interrogated him. This vivid memory did not sit right with the sister. This brought us back to the drones. A young Latina in Group 6 felt the drones are singling out Latinos. She claimed 90% are Latino in her area, “and you see a lot of police activity.” Police-worn body cameras again came in for criticism, and some felt video might catch bad police behavior more often, “but police can turn on and off the body cams” when they feel like it and the group felt that’s not right. Only one Group 6 participant, who essentially opined that the police aren't really singling out Latinos – “there's just more Latinos in Chula Vista” – didn’t think racial targeting is going on.
Ideation
John and Cris followed this up by asking participants what should be done to keep these three types of information safe and private. As part of an “easel exercise,” they shared their screen and typed participants’ suggestions into three separate lists.
Keeping Personal Information That You Give the City Private
Suggestions for keeping voluntary information private tended to fall into three buckets: technology upgrades, explicit policies about data access, and personnel roles and responsibilities. Importantly, even though John and Cris emphasized that the suggestions – at this point – were specifically for voluntary information, the participants generally did not differentiate their ideas based on the type of data being captured. Instead, they made suggestions that can apply to any kind of data the City holds, with the exception of the “opt out” option which can realistically only be applied to voluntarily given information. (Note that suggestions appearing across multiple categories are marked with an *asterisk and should be considered priority items.)
Data Access and Usage Policies
Most suggestions fall under this umbrella, and every group proposed at least one idea in this category.
Suggestions that the City of Chula Vista may want to consider include:
• *Increase transparency through disclosure of all data Chula Vista has, where it is stored, who has access to it, and who it is shared with. A version of this recommendation came up in all six groups and was easily the most frequent answer given. Transparency was one of the most common themes throughout the groups. Participants also indicated they would like this information to be easily available to the public and suggested the City website and community social media pages as potential mediums. One participant provided an example of how she would like this information laid out saying, “when we collect xx, we keep it for xx amount of time and then we do xx with your personal data.”
11 • *Establish data expiry dates and deleting extraneous data. This popular suggestion was cited in multiple groups. Although proposals for the appropriate storage length varied from days to years, the intent was clear: Chula Vista should not hold personal data in perpetuity. Deleting superfluous data – even that which is done before the data expiry date – is another related aspect residents would like to see come to fruition. This was an especially potent idea among the folks who generally distrusted the City’s data practices. • *Ban data sales to third parties. The City may already have a ban in place, but some residents still believe their personal data is being sold. If the City does sell data, residents will not tolerate that. Participants were clear this ban should not apply to sharing information with other law enforcement agencies for the purposes of solving crimes, locating missing people or fugitives, etc. However, they are opposed to this information being used for the purposes of looking for crime or immigration status checks.
• Allow residents to “opt out.” Having an “opt out” option for information voluntarily submitted to the City was another suggestion that came up in several of the sessions. This option would allow residents to dictate whether or not the City could store their personal information. Not only would this increase transparency, but it would also give residents more control over their personal information.
Implementing privacy agreements, allowing individuals to access the personal data the City holds on them, and applying stringent access permission standards also came up – and may be worth considering – but were each only mentioned by one group.
Technology Upgrades
Upgrades to existing technology are, perhaps, one of the most tangible and logical changes suggested.
This category earned mentions from every group except Group 6. Suggestions that the Task Force may want to consider include:
• Implement two-step (multi-factor) verification for anyone trying to access data files. Multi- factor authentication is defined as “an electronic authentication method in which a user is granted access to a file, website, or application only after successfully presenting two or more pieces of evidence to an authentication mechanism: knowledge, possession, and inherence.” This is fast becoming the norm for accessing sensitive data. Entities not using this technology may soon be seen as more vulnerable to hacks.
• *Better file encryption. Details from the four groups who suggested this were light – after all, most are not coders or IT professionals. However, there was a strong desire that the City use comprehensive and modern encryption methods when collecting personal data, if it doesn’t already do so.
Storing confidential data on standalone networks like the military’s SIPPER and NIPPER networks and controlling access to data through chip-encrypted ID cards were both brought up in Group 1.
Personnel Roles and Responsibilities
Changes to City personnel roles and responsibilities received fewer mentions overall. • *Increase cyber security resources in the form of additional staff members. Alternatively, creating a role specifically to protect confidential information – such as a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) – and answer for data breaches and leaks came up in two of the groups. An increasing number of companies and municipalities are employing CPOs. A related suggestion was to 12 require any City employee who deals with personally identifiable information be licensed to do so.
• *Hold “best practices” training for employees who handle sensitive data. Participants who brought this up were adamant such training be kept current and required on an annual or biennial basis.
• *Hold staff accountable for privacy violations. Ensuring that the consequences for violations are well known to staff, and then carrying out the specified punishments when breaches occur was more popular in the Latino groups.
Gathering community feedback prior to contracting with companies that collect and store data as well as having an *independent agency review and audit privacy protocols were suggestions that did not fit into any of the three categories and received one mention each.
Keeping Personal Information That the City Collects Private
Recommendations for keeping involuntary information private were sparser, and it was clear that participants struggled to come up with recommendations because most of their key ideas were already captured in the previous category. Ideas that came up again and overlap with the voluntary data category include strict access protocols, data expiration dates, greater transparency around collection practices, increased accountability for data misuse, better digital security programs, more staff in cyber security roles, conducting independent audits, and holding regular employee trainings.
Suggestions that are unique to the involuntary information category include:
• Keep two databases. One database would house voluntary information given to the city, while the other would house involuntary information which would require stricter security protocols. • Only store data that is connected to ongoing legal proceedings. Because this data is taken without the individual’s consent, some participants felt there is no need for the City to retain information that is not linked to an ongoing investigation or legal case. This suggestion may be a difficult-to-implement double-edged sword because it may be impossible to know if data will be relevant to a future case.
• Require permission and/or notify the individual for third-party use of the data. This includes any use of the data outside the parameters for which it was collected, including sharing with other law enforcement agencies.
• Use different colors to distinguish official police drones. This suggestion came specifically from Spanish-speaking Group 6, and the participant felt this would help people more easily distinguish between personal and law enforcement drones. This man felt using a bright, easily noticeable color – and clearly letting residents know about this identifying feature – may help folks quickly recognize official drones.
• Ban cameras being pointed at windows or private (non-public) areas. When this recommendation surfaced, it was acknowledged that residents would feel more comfortable if they are certain that police or security cameras are not encroaching on their reasonable right to privacy on their property. This suggestion is also relevant to the next category – keeping video which the City collects private.
13 Keeping Video the City Collects Private
Like we saw previously, many ideas for keeping video the City collects private overlap with other data categories including data expiry dates, storing data in a secure location, bans on third party sales, strict access protocols, and greater transparency and accountability for misuse.
Suggestions that are unique to the video category include:
• Save only the drone footage capturing the incident in question, not the drone’s entire trip to and from the police station. Participants felt keeping footage of the entire flight was unnecessary. Limiting drone video to the incident minimizes the chances that uninvolved persons will be negatively impacted should a breach occur. • Blur out/remove persons not involved in the incident from any saved footage. Folks felt there was no need for uninvolved individuals to have their image remain on stored video. The worry is that, should the video be released – either intentionally or unintentionally – people who have nothing to do with the incident will be negatively impacted through their assumed involvement or potentially misidentified.
• Notify (or attempt to notify) all people in the video – whether involved in the incident or not – that they are in the video.
• Do not use facial recognition software. Only one group was adamant on this point. • Ensure footage is not manipulated in any way. Use of selective editing or any attempts to use a video to fit a narrative were looked down upon.
• Publicly release video only for serious crimes, when searching for dangerous criminals, or in cases of police misconduct. Participants felt that limiting public release to only these instances helps keep resident privacy intact and lessens the risk of misidentification and potentially unwarranted negative impacts on uninvolved persons. Having a legal team review the footage for risks before it is released was also suggested.
In general, it’s encouraging to see many of the same suggestions appear across all six groups.
Examples of What Other Cities are Doing
To help participants get a grasp on what policies to protect sensitive information actually look like, John and Cris gave three examples of policies that have been implemented elsewhere and asked folks to comment on what they liked and disliked about them.
Seattle – Keeping the Records You Give the City Confidential
Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions. [removed for Groups 5 and 6] This policy was broadly well-received given the widespread desire for increased transparency surrounding personal data. One of Group 2’s participants captured this sentiment and appreciated that “they are making the effort to be transparent.” One man was even more enthusiastic about it saying, ““Great idea. They should have a website that discloses all the info they capture and why. Also include HOW they do it.”
14 Although there was little pushback to the policy, there was some resistance to the use of a website to communicate with residents. One commented, “it’s nice that they post it, but I think a billboard would be more effective than a website,” while one suggested using bulletins or a “pay wall” where site visitors first watch video about how data is used before moving on to the website. Hispanic residents in Groups 5 and 6 were especially concerned about a website “that would be long and wordy, difficult to find, and generally inaccessible,” and one participant wondered whether the information would be available in Spanish.
Berkeley – Keeping Private the Information the City Collects
Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased.
This policy is divisive and clearly cuts both ways. Many participants – including most Hispanic panelists – are totally on board with facial recognition technology. They see it as “another tool” to use to fight crime and some pointed out it doesn’t need to be “definitive” in terms of identifying criminals. One ethnically White female who opposed this policy used an example to illustrate her point by saying, “If children are taken across state lines, every resource needs to be used. Limit it yes; ban no” while another White male opponent felt “there is no reason to eliminate it, but many reasons to depend on it to an extent.”
Those on the other side of the fence typically argue artificial intelligence is not advanced enough yet to 100% accurately identify people which might “open a Pandora’s box for litigation issues.” Rather than concerns about racial bias, most – but not all -- opposition was rooted in the technology not yet being as good as it needs to be. Even when specifically asked about the potential for racial bias, participants generally didn’t see it that way, including most participants in Groups 5 and 6 who did not believe that facial recognition systems, nor the artificial intelligence behind this technology, is biased and faulty. As one of these folks pointed out, “it’s less biased than people making decisions.” One woman also pushed back on the policy by saying, “they used to use physical pictures; those can also be biased, and they could identify the wrong person.”
Digging a little deeper, John asked respondents who favored a ban on facial recognition on the grounds that technology is not advanced enough yet whether they would change their tune once technology improves. Interesting, most hinted that, if and when the artificial intelligence is more reliable, they’d want Chula Vista to use it. As one woman put it, “The technology is still growing, and the artificial intelligence is still learning, so it can make errors right now. But maybe in 5 to 10 years it might be a different story.” Although these participants softened toward the idea of using facial recognition software in the future, one still took issue with banning it until it improves and used advances in DNA to illustrate her point: “I don’t think they should ban it – it’s another tool. It just needs to improve. Like DNA. We need all the help we can get when it comes to crime.” Given the rift this policy elicited, Chula Vista probably does not want to take a hard stand in either direction at this time. Banning facial recognition completely will be perceived as abandoning a helpful crime fighting tool, but relying on it as the sole source of identification is too risky given the abilities of current AI technology. Finding a happy medium and using the software sparingly and only when necessary is a good bet for the time being. As technology improves, the City can ramp up its use accordingly.
15 Oakland – Keeping Video the City Collects Private
Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council.
Oakland’s Privacy Advisory Board was another well-liked policy with most people across sessions agreeing Chula Vista should investigate adopting something similar. The only hesitation – which emerged in all six groups – stems from concerns about who is on the Board, what their motives are, and whether it would favor the pro- or anti-surveillance contingent. One man opined on this, saying, “Is everyone on the board from a tech company? Who is on the board? I think it is a good way of approaching it with the right people on the board. It could go two ways. Like the San Diego Transit Board seems one sided – very pro public transit. So, this could be similar – like very pro or anti surveillance.” Several residents also questioned whether board members would be representative of the community, i.e., will it have Spanish speakers, men and women, people of different racial/ethnic backgrounds, residents of different socio-economic status and professions, etc.
Some solutions to this anxiety were discussed in several of the groups and included allowing residents to vote on who fills the board positions and rotating members off the board at regular intervals. One suggested the latter saying, “This is something we could benefit from providing people were rotated off the board like every 90 days. The longer people are on, the more opportunity there is for corruption.” Although his time frame – 90 days – is not realistic, the principle of board term limits is highly popular.
Finally, one participant suggested that the board produce regular data-driven reports; this would give the board legitimacy and increase transparency in the decision-making process.
Note: The Oakland policy was unintentionally displayed in English during Group 6. After acknowledging the mistake, the discussion continued and then Cris asked whether participants preferred seeing the policy in English or Spanish. All but two said either was fine, and, while the other two preferred Spanish, they felt they would not have a problem with rules written in English.
Privacy Policies
During the next part of the sessions, John and Cris presented different policy ideas which the City of Chula Vista might adopt. Participants discussed the proposed policies, which came with a line about potential costs or downsides, for their feedback and then support or opposition on each. Each group was presented five policies to evaluate and all materials for Groups 5 and 6 were translated and presented in Spanish (see Appendix C). The policies have been ranked below based on how supportive residents were of each. Except for the Equitable Deployment of Technology policy, all of the policies we tested encountered more support than reservations. (Please note that some participants were unsure how they felt about certain policies and did not vote. As a result, the total number of votes for each policy may not equal the total number of respondents who were exposed to the policy.)
16 Chief Privacy Officer (Groups 2, 4, 6)
“The City would hire a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) responsible for overseeing all City privacy efforts. The CPO would be the in-house privacy protection expert who gathers community input and ideas on privacy and technology, stays up-to-date on the latest developments, is a resource for City staff and helps draft policies for how technology should be used.
The CPO would be appointed by, and answer to, the City Manager, receive a $170,000 salary and have a staff of two.”
Support: 18 Oppose/Have Reservations: 3
The most popular policy we tested, participants agreed a person and department to turn to for answers should a data breach occur would establish accountability for keeping information safe and confidential.
One participant was taken aback that the City did not already have a CPO saying, “I am surprised this is a proposition; that this is not already a position someone is doing,” while one man remarked, “Make it someone’s job and hold them accountable through legislation so they need to be on the ball, and there will be consequences if they were to not do their job.” This was also one of the suggestions made multiple times when participants were asked for recommendations on how Chula Vista should keep personal data safe. The one concern that emerged about the position was the potential for cronyism with the CPO reporting to the City Manager who reports directly to the City Council. Another woman shared this concern explaining, “The way you get positions in government is who you know. And that is not a situation where you want to put resident privacy in the hands of three people.” A few people suggested the CPO should be elected to combat potential cronyism. The consensus was that, regardless of how people are chosen for this position, the CPO’s office should act with a measure of independence.
Training (Groups 1, 3, 5)
“This policy would mandate annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology on how to recognize potential privacy issues when considering whether to buy a new type of technology or software. The City’s lawyers would attend legal training to grow their expertise on recent laws and court rulings on personal privacy, data collection, etc.
There would be a significant additional cost to the city.”
Support: 17 Oppose/Have Reservations: 2
Mandating annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology was another very popular “commonsense” policy. Nearly every participant exposed to it favored it and one resident described good training as “priceless.” It’s also a repeat offender: it was suggested several times by the groups as a means to keeping personal data safe during the ideation phase. Many participants said they must complete a similar training in their jobs, and that “Chula Vista is way behind the times if they don’t already do this.” If the City already has this in place, it should contemplate whether the curriculum needs to be updated or strengthened to remain current. Communicating with residents about the training efforts also appears to be important in gaining public trust. The only reservations related to the potentially high cost of starting a training program, with a couple of folks believing taxpayer dollars should go towards things such as homelessness, schools, and public services. 17 Oversight Board (Groups 2, 4, 6)
“This policy would establish a board of community volunteers who would review how the city is using technology and advise on whether privacy protections are, in their view, working. The board would recommend to the City Council as to whether the use of a technology is worth the costs and potential privacy risks.
Members would be required to have expertise in technology or privacy issues.”
Support: 16 Oppose/Have Reservations: 5
Having an oversight board is another well-received policy, but participants typically wanted it fleshed out. Support generally came down to 1) the board being voluntary and, 2) the need for board members to have expertise in technology or privacy issues. As a female participant put it, “this is a no brainer that it would be good.” One man agreed saying, “I think this is the kind of thing we need to implement these policies. It’s our information they are collecting, so it should be us as a community who decides how it is used.” Although broadly appealing, a few concerns did crop up. Could a panel of community volunteers have the knowledge and expertise to make effective recommendations? Will volunteers have access to confidential information? A few folks suggested assuaging these fears by including non-tech people on the Board and ensuring all members are thoroughly vetted. Some also felt a member’s tenure should be brief, with a preference for only a two-year term. Finally, the phrase “community volunteers” tends to elicit less cynicism about an oversight board than does “citizens” (as used in Oakland’s policy.)
More Oversight by the City Council (Groups 2, 4, 6)
“This policy would require the City Council to review all purchases of technology that collects personal information. The Council currently only reviews purchases costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and city employees can make smaller purchases without the Council’s pre-approval.
The policy would result in the City Council reviewing relatively small budget items.”
Support: 14 Oppose/Have Reservations: 5
More oversight is a recurring theme. It’s something that most participants like and all in Spanish language Group 6 favored making the Council do more work. This policy has far more proponents than detractors, as supporters tend to see this as “two-fer.” Not only will privacy be enhanced, for them, this policy is a means for the City Council to curtail needless spending. One noted, “smaller things start adding up to larger things until it is too late,” and another mentioning it is “very easy for misuse of funds to happen in small amounts; people get away with it.” Another resident observed that many tech products “won’t be expensive for very much longer” and therefore will be overlooked when they fall below the current review threshold. Although she favored the spirit of the policy, one actually felt review shouldn’t be limited to a dollar amount, rather “the origin of where it is being purchased from; I don’t want [the equipment or service] coming from a company that has a history of data breaches.” Among the few opponents, reservations about “red tape and the ability to get things done,” “the effort is not worth the reward,” it is too “overwhelming” and “time consuming” as well as the potential for the Council to lose its focus on other big concerns were all mentioned. 18 Anonymizing Data (Groups 1, 3, 5)
“This policy would require city staff to remove personally identifiable information from data whenever possible. By “de-identifying” data, this policy would reduce the possibility that data would be stolen or used inappropriately.
On the other hand, there may be a situation in which knowing who filed a complaint, for example, would help the City address a problem.”
Support: 13 Oppose/Have Reservations: 5
For most folks, this was a “commonsense” policy although the concerns that some participants raised are significant. On one hand, this policy is a winner because it aligns with common practices many participants are aware of at private and public entities. As one man pointed out, “Redacting PII is fairly common – I expect they should be doing this already. Or I would hope they are. Every agency should be doing this unless that information is important for WHAT they are doing.” A female participant also summed up the overall appeal of the policy saying, “I like the idea of removing information that could be stolen or used inappropriately.” Opponents homed in on the inability to follow up with residents who make complaints or the potential for crimes to go unsolved due to a lack of identifiable information. As one man explained, “It’s a lot harder to investigate a complaint if you don’t have the source because not enough information will be there to begin with. I know from personal experience.” Another backed him up saying, “I’ve seen anonymous complaints; they are hard to address, and lead to a waste of resources.” Many of those whose worries hinged on the inability to adequately investigate crimes believed the benefits of confidentiality do not outweigh the drawbacks of a lack of information that could be used by law enforcement. Finding a balance between anonymizing data and still being able to follow-up is generally what our participants want.
Data Sharing (Groups 2, 4, 6)
“This policy would limit Chula Vista’s ability to share with outside third parties the personal information the City has collected. This policy limits the sharing of license plate data with police departments in other cities.
Some crimes in other cities would likely go unsolved.”
Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 7
This policy received majority support as written. However, its popularity ratcheted up if one carve-out is made: most participants want police departments in other municipalities to have access to the data “for solving crimes or keeping community safe.” This dovetails completely with the group suggestions that the City should ban third-party sales but allow exceptions for most law enforcement activities. Law enforcement is fine, even encouraged; marketing uses are not, as panelists vehemently do not want their personal data shared commercially. As long as the City sticks to these stipulations, participants believe this policy will be a success.
19 Minimizing Data Collection (Groups 1, 3, 5)
“This policy would require that city staff minimize the amount of personal information collected.
According to this policy, if it not absolutely necessary for the City to collect a type of personal information, then that information would not be collected.
This policy would result in less information for the City to use to make decisions, and it may be impossible to know what personal information is absolutely necessary for it to do its job.”
Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 7
Elements of this policy arose during previous exercises, but this version does not perform as strongly as one might have initially anticipated based on the preceding discussions. While the concept is well-liked, some felt the language was vague and didn’t include enough detail – after all, what qualifies as “absolutely necessary?” Others said the very nature of the policy suggests the City is already capturing and keeping data they don’t need, which didn’t sit well with some: “If the information is not needed, why do they need to take it?” Still others with reservations also contemplated the data’s potential future usefulness saying, “I don’t like the idea of minimizing data that would lead to less efficient practices in the city,” and “data is important. Even if it is not used now, it may be used later down the line when a new project comes up or another task is needed.” Participants would have benefited from clarifying language that finds a balance between limiting data collection and having useful data on hand for when it is needed.
Regular Audits (Groups 2, 4, 6)
“This policy would require the City to retain a privacy auditing firm to regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom.
The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised.
There would be a significant additional cost to the City.”
Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 9
Those favoring this policy tended to see it as “commonsense,” saying, “A majority of agencies require a third party to step in and audit. After people do something for a while, neglect can happen, like people overlooking things, getting lazy, or watching cat videos at work. And it shouldn’t just be one entity; one can do the audit for certain period of time and then switch to someone else because that agency also needs to be kept in check.” The chief criticism of the policy centered on the unknown costs.
Spanish speaking Group 6 brought up an observation: the policy description raised doubts they did not previously hold about how Chula Vista now collects data, shares data, etc. The wording “regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom. The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised” suggests the City is currently not doing this which sets off alarm bells.
20 Time Limits on Data Retention (Groups 1, 3, 5)
“This policy would require the City to delete any personal information after one year. Keeping information only for only a year and then deleting it would lessen the chance that personal information could be stolen or used inappropriately.
On the other hand, keeping information longer could provide greater benefits, for example, if a crime is being investigated or a missing person’s report has been filed after a year.”
Support: 12 Oppose/Have Reservations: 9
Given how popular data expiry dates were during the suggestion exercise, it’s surprising to find this policy is not a superstar. The barrier to wider popularity seems to be the specified duration for which the data is held by the City. However, residents did express an interest in determining expiration dates based on the reasoning behind the data being held; an amendment allowing for longer retention for active criminal investigations was suggested that emerged in three of the groups. Some also suggested that a year was not long enough because the data could be needed for future investigations, while others felt a year was entirely too long. Further research is likely needed to determine the optimal data retention length.
Equitable Deployment of Technology (Groups 1, 3, 5)
“This policy would prohibit the use of technology in ways that might impact certain neighborhoods or groups. City staff would be required to find alternatives to a particular technology that might disproportionately impact women, Black residents, or non-English speakers, for example.
On the other hand, there may be no effective alternatives to some technologies and, in the rare instances that the technology is imperfect, the courts will protect the innocent.”
Support: 0 Oppose/Have Reservations: 15
This policy received no support, as even those who agreed earlier with Berkeley’s ban were not willing to accept this policy. Participants found it to be “vague,” “confusing,” and “ambiguous” with one resident not being able to “understand what you are agreeing to.” The word “equitable” also turned some off with one male participant calling it “BS.” There was also general confusion about how technology can be biased, with one noting, “the only thing that can be biased is the person behind the technology.” If that is what this language was trying to get at, it failed.
Community Involvement
Only one participant across all six groups claimed to be formally involved with Chula Vista’s boards and commissions. One woman reported taking part in volunteer efforts, recounting her time with a City of Chula Vista volunteer security effort, like a neighborhood watch. She was driven to do so after having her house broken into twice. A few people expressed some interest in getting involved, but most were unenthusiastic about doing so. The primary barriers to this sort of civic engagement include a lack of time and a lack of passion for the subject. A couple of participants already volunteer elsewhere – “I’m already really committed to my children’s school” – and didn’t want additional responsibilities. 21 Many folks felt “the City doesn’t do a good job communicating on stuff” and the top suggestions to encourage more community engagement included emails, mailers, and social media posts. One proposed a dedicated city website such as “joinCV.com” or “volunteerCV.com” that “makes it easy for people” to apply to be on committees or find volunteer opportunities. Using community social media pages – “places where people are going to see it” – to advertise opportunities was the most popular idea with one participant advocating for “compact outreach,” which he explained is “30-second-long (or less) outreach for those in the younger generation.” Another recommended including the topics for discussion for official meetings or on the boards/committees “because I would be interested in certain topics” and residents might show more interest in attending or signing up to serve on them.
Other suggestions included announcements on the Chula Vista Police Department’s digital billboard and having informative materials and a physical presence at local street fairs, churches, and schools.
Regardless of the medium used, one man said he would like the public to be made aware of what the ideas from these types of efforts transform into; for example, what decisions or changes are made from the findings of these focus groups.
The Spanish language groups tended to focus on what elected officials are doing or not doing. The thing Group 6 rallied around was they would want to see more of these leaders in their communities (i.e., PTA meetings, meet and greets, workshops, etc.) where they would be informed and welcomed to the discussion of city issues. They felt a more frequent physical presence of leaders in Latino neighborhoods would make them feel that their voices mattered and would lead to more engagement.
APPENDIX
A
Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL
n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022
1 Tuesday, June 21st
Grp #1 (Q4 = 2 or 3 or 4 or 8): [5:30 SD] Grp #2 (Q4 = 1 or 2 or 3 or 8): [7:30 SD]
Thursday, June 23rd
Grp #3 (Q4 = 1 or 2 or 8): [5:30 SD] Grp #4 (Q4 = 3 or 4 or 8): [7:30 SD]
HOLD
First Name______________________________ Last name ________________________________
Gender = M F Age = 1 2 3 4 Hispanic (Q14) = Yes No
Address ___________________________________________________________________________
City: _________________________ Zip: 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915
Chula Vista area (Q2): West Central East Q4: 1 2 3 4 8
Database ph. #(_________)_____________________ Alternate ph. #(________)_________________
Email Address__________________________________________
Payment = Venmo Amazon Gift Card
Interviewer VOXCO ID__________________ Date recruited __________________________________
Tech Check: Time: ____ AM PM Day: _____________ Date: _______________
Hello, may I speak with RESPONDENT FROM LIST? This is [INTERVIEWER] of Competitive Edge Research, a national public opinion polling firm, calling because we are conducting a paid, online evening focus group about important local issues on either Tuesday, June 21st or Thursday, June 23rd. To ensure we receive opinions from a variety of people, we’d like you to participate in a 90-minute online webcam group from your home. For your participation, you will receive $110 by your choice of cash via Venmo or an Amazon gift card, Would this be of interest to you? (IF “YES,” CONTINUE; IF “NO” OR HESITANT, TERMINATE)
Great! First, I need to ask a few confidential questions to see if you fit the study guidelines…
Q1. Do you still reside in the (READ ZIP CODE FROM SCREEN) ZIP Code?
1. Resides in listed ZIP Code (91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915)
2. Resides in different ZIP Code (ENTER NEW ZIP CODE)
3. No, does not reside in 91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915 (THANK AND TERMINATE)
Q2. And do you reside west of Interstate 805, between the 805 and the 125 or east of the 125?
1. West [MIN 4/MAX 8]
2. Central [MIN 2/MAX 5]
3. East [MIN 1/MAX 3]
8. UNSURE [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE]
Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL
n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022
2 Q3. Please tell me what is the most important issue facing Chula Vista? (IF UNSURE, PROBE. IF STILL UNSURE, CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE) (CRITERION: CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THE RESPONDENT AND DO THEY EXPRESS A THOUGHTFUL ANSWER?)
1. Extremely thoughtful and clear [MAX 4 PER GROUP; IF FULL, SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
2. Very thoughtful and clear
3. Somewhat thoughtful and clear
4. No details [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
5. Nothing/Unsure [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q4. The City of Chula Vista collects and maintains residents’ personal information, including phone numbers, property addresses, e-mail addresses, and video from security cameras. When it comes to keeping that personal information private, do you generally think the city is doing a good job or a bad job?
(IF GOOD JOB ASK: “Is that a very good job or a somewhat good job?”)
(IF BAD JOB ASK: “Is that a very bad job or a somewhat bad job?”)
1. Very good job [GROUP 2 OR 3]
2. Somewhat good job [GROUP 1, 2 OR 3]
3. Somewhat bad job [GROUP 1, 2 OR 4]
4. Very bad job [GROUP 1 OR 4]
8. UNSURE [MAX 5]
9. REFUSED [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q5. Including volunteer work, do you or anyone in your household work for any of the following?
A news media company [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE]
A high tech or computer company
A market research company [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] In law enforcement [NOTE: RETIREES ARE INELIGIBLE PROBE AS NEEDED; IF RESPONDENT OR SOMEONE IN HOUSEHOLD IS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] An elected official [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE]
An attorney or law firm [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE]
NONE OF THESE
Q6. What is your occupation? IF RETIRED, NOTE AND ASK: What was your occupation? __________________________________________________________
EXCLUDE LAW ENFORCEMENT, LEGAL, NEWS MEDIA, POLITICAL
Q7. And in what industry is that? ________________________________________________________
Q8. Which of the following describes your experience with video conferencing platforms like Zoom and Microsoft Teams while on your laptop or desktop computer?
1. I have talked with people online with my webcam on my desktop or laptop
2. I haven’t tried that [THANK AND TERMINATE]
3. I don’t have a laptop or a desktop [THANK AND TERMINATE]
8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL
n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022
3 Q9. Does the computer or laptop you would use for the focus groups have a webcam, audio speakers or earphones, and a microphone?
1. Yes
2. No [THANK AND TERMINATE]
8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q10. Do you use Chrome, Firefox or something else to browse the Internet?
1. Chrome
2. Firefox
3. Something else [THANK AND TERMINATE]
8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q11. Is your broadband Internet connection speed where you would use your computer or laptop for participating in the online discussion…
1. Less than 10 megabits upload and download (ex: can only stream music from Spotify or Pandora, email, and basic web browsing) [THANK AND TERMINATE]
2. More than 10 megabits upload and download (ex: can Skype and Facetime calls, play online video games, stream video from Netflix)
8. UNSURE: Please go to BandWidthPlace.com and press the “start” button in the middle of the orange circle to determine download and upload internet speeds.
Q12. You'll read and evaluate materials on your computer screen as well as write some notes on paper. Do you have limitations that would make your participation difficult? (IF YES, PROBE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE RESPONDENT CAN PARTICIPATE. PARTICIPATION ONLY VIA COMPUTER OR
LAPTOP)
1. Respondent can participate
2. Respondent CANNOT participate [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q13. In terms of gender, how do you identify? (DO NOT READ)
1. Male
2. Female
3. Non-binary
4. Prefer to self-describe: _________________________
Q14. What is your racial or ethnic heritage?
1. White or Caucasian
2. African American or Black [MIN 1]
3. Hispanic or Latino [MIN 4/MAX 8]
4. Asian American [MIN 1]
5. Native American
6. Multi-ethnic
8. Something Else (SPECIFY AND CODE ABOVE, “EUROPEAN” IS WHITE, IF REFUSED, DO
NOT INVITE)
Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL
n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022
4 Q15. In what year were you born? ________________ (ENTER YEAR BORN)
1. 1989-2003 (18-32) [MIN 2/MAX 6 PER GROUP]
2. 1976-1988 (33-46) [MIN 2/MAX 6 PER GROUP]
3. 1964-1975 (47-58)
4. 1950-1963 (59-72)
5. 1949 or earlier (73+) NONE [TERMINATE]
Those are all my questions. I’ll place you on hold a moment to make sure we have room for you in the focus group. I’ll be right back (CHECK QUOTAS)
IF INVITING:
Q16. We'd like you to participate in a 90-minute webcam focus group on [Tuesday the 21st/Thursday the 23rd] at [5:30pm/7:30pm]. Afterward you would be paid $110 via Venmo or an Amazon gift card. Would you commit to participating?
1. Yes – Grp #1 5:30pm, Tuesday the 21st
2. Yes – Grp #2 7:30pm, Tuesday the 21st
3. Yes – Grp #3 5:30pm, Thursday the 23rd
4. Yes – Grp #4 7:30pm, Thursday the 23rd
5. No (THANK AND TERMINATE)
Q17. Would you like to receive your payment via an Amazon gift card or Venmo?
1. Amazon gift card
2. Venmo GET THEIR VENMO ID: @___________________& Phone #attached to Accnt___________
Q18. May I have your e-mail address so we may send you the confirmation and participation instructions? (REPEAT IT BACK LETTER-FOR-LETTER AS YOU WRITE IT DOWN
EMAIL: ______________________________________________@___________________________
Q19. We will need to perform simple equipment and Internet speed checks with you on the PC or laptop on which you will be participating. What is the good time in the next 48 hours to call you back and perform this check?
Time: _______ AM PM Day: _________ Date: _________
Following the equipment check you’ll then receive a link for the online focus group with log in details.
You will also receive an invite e-mail which will include further instructions along with a non-disclosure agreement. Please read it carefully. If you have any questions, please write down this number and call us. (PAUSE FOR RESPONDENT TO GET PEN AND PAPER). It is 1-915-329-2102.
May I please have an alternate number we can reach you at? (________)____________________.
Thank you very much. Again, if you don’t hear from us within the next 48 hours, please call us at 1-915-329- 2102 and let us know. Goodbye.
IF NOT INVITING: I’m sorry. I can’t invite you to participate because the quotas for your profile have been filled. We’ll call you in the future for another research project. Thanks and have a great day!
Chula Vista Privacy FG Recruitment Screener FINAL
n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Tues/Thurs, June 21 and 23, 2022
5 IF HOLD: I’m sorry, but all the quotas for your demographics have been filled, so I am unable to invite you to participate. However, it’s likely that a participant will cancel at the last minute. If that is the case, should we re- contact you to see if you’re still available?
IF “OK”: Great! Again, we will only be contacting you if someone drops out. It may even be early that afternoon. (FILL OUT THE FRONT. GET E-MAIL ADDRESS AND ALTERNATE NUMBER) Thanks, and if we don’t contact you this time, hopefully we can speak with you next time we do research in your area. Goodbye.
Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022
1 Grp #1 (Q4 = 1 or 2 or 8): [5:30 SD] Grp #2 (Q4 = 3 or 4 or 8): [7:30 SD] HOLD
First Name______________________________ Last name ________________________________
Gender = M F Age = 1 2 3 4 Record source: L2 Client
Address ___________________________________________________________________________
City: _________________________ Zip: 91902 91910 91911 91913 91914 91915
Q2: West Central East Q4: 1 2 3 4 8
Database ph. #(_________)_____________________ Alternate ph. #(________)_________________
Email Address__________________________________________
Payment = Venmo Amazon Gift Card
Interviewer VOXCO ID__________________ Date recruited __________________________________
Tech Check: Time: ____ AM PM Day: _____________ Date: _______________
[START IN ENGLISH]
Hello, may I speak with RESPONDENT FROM LIST? This is [INTERVIEWER] of Competitive Edge Research, a national public opinion polling firm, calling because we are conducting a paid, online evening focus group about important local issues on Thursday, July 21st. The majority of the meeting will be conducted in Spanish. To ensure we receive opinions from a variety of people, we’d like you to participate in a 90-minute online webcam group from your home. For your participation, you will receive $110 by your choice of cash via Venmo or an Amazon gift card. Would this be of interest to you? (IF “YES,” CONTINUE; IF “NO” OR
HESITANT, TERMINATE)
[SPANISH]
Hola, ¿puedo hablar con RESPONDENT FROM LIST? Habla [INTERVIEWER] de Competitive Edge Research, una firma encuestadora de opinión pública nacional, y estamos realizando un grupo de discusión nocturno pagado en línea sobre temas locales importantes el jueves 21 de julio. Para garantizar que recibamos opiniones de diversas personas, nos gustaría que usted participara en un grupo en línea de 90 minutos por cámara web desde su hogar. Para agradecer su participación, recibirá $110 a elección suya como efectivo mediante Venmo o una tarjeta de regalo de Amazon. ¿Esto es algo que le interesaría? (IF “YES,” CONTINUE; IF “NO” OR HESITANT, TERMINATE)
¡Estupendo! En primer lugar, necesito hacerle algunas preguntas confidenciales para ver si usted se ajusta a las directrices del estudio...
Q1. ¿Todavía reside en (READ FULL ADDRESS FROM SCREEN)?
1. Resides in listed ZIP Code (91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915)
2. Resides in different ZIP Code (ENTER NEW ZIP CODE)
3. No, does not reside in 91902, 91910, 91911, 91913, 91914 OR 91915 (THANK AND TERMINATE)
Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022
2 Q2. Y, ¿usted reside al oeste de la Interestatal 805, entre la 805 y la 125 o al este de la 125?
1. West
2. Central
3. East
8. UNSURE
Q3. Hágame el favor de decirme cuál es el tema más importante que enfrenta Chula Vista. (IF UNSURE, PROBE. IF STILL UNSURE, CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE) (CRITERION:
CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THE RESPONDENT AND DO THEY EXPRESS A THOUGHTFUL ANSWER?)
1. Extremely thoughtful and clear [MAX 4 PER GROUP; IF FULL, SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
2. Very thoughtful and clear
3. Somewhat thoughtful and clear
4. No details [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
5. Nothing/Unsure [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q4. La Ciudad de Chula Vista recopila y mantiene información personal de los residentes, incluyendo números telefónicos, direcciones de propiedades, direcciones de email y videos de cámaras de seguridad. En cuanto a mantener privada esa información personal, ¿generalmente piensa que la ciudad hace un buen o mal trabajo manteniendo esa información personal privada?
(IF GOOD JOB ASK: “¿Es un trabajo muy bueno o algo bueno?”)
(IF BAD JOB ASK: “¿Es un trabajo muy malo o algo malo?”)
1. Very good job [GROUP 1]
2. Somewhat good job [GROUP 1]
3. Somewhat bad job [GROUP 2]
4. Very bad job [GROUP 2]
8. UNSURE [MAX 4]
9. REFUSED [CODE INELIGIBLE; SKIP TO Q15, THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q5. Incluyendo el trabajo voluntario, ¿usted o alguien de su hogar trabaja en alguna de las siguientes áreas?
Una empresa de medios informativos [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] Una empresa de alta tecnología o empresa de computación Una empresa de estudio de mercado [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] En cuerpos policiales [NOTE: RETIREES ARE INELIGIBLE PROBE AS NEEDED; IF RESPONDENT OR SOMEONE IN HOUSEHOLD IS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT, SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE] Un funcionario electo [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE]
Un abogado o firma de abogados [SKIP TO Q15, THEN TERMINATE]
NONE OF THESE
Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022
3 Q6. ¿A qué se dedica? IF RETIRED, NOTE AND ASK: ¿A qué se dedicaba? __________________________________________________________
EXCLUDE LAW ENFORCEMENT, LEGAL, NEWS MEDIA, POLITICAL
Q7. Y, ¿a qué industria pertenece eso?
________________________________________________________
Q8. ¿Cuál de las siguientes opciones describe su experiencia con las plataformas de conferencias de video como Zoom y Microsoft Teams cuando usa su laptop o computadora de escritorio?
1. He hablado con personas en línea con mi cámara web en mi computadora de escritorio o laptop
2. No lo he intentado [THANK AND TERMINATE]
3. No tengo laptop o computadora de escritorio [THANK AND TERMINATE]
8. NO ESTÁ SEGURO [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q9. ¿La computadora o laptop que usaría para los grupos de discusión tiene una cámara web, altavoces o audífonos, y un micrófono?
1. Yes
2. No [THANK AND TERMINATE]
8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q10. ¿Usa Chrome, Firefox u otra cosa para navegar por Internet?
1. Chrome
2. Firefox
3. Something else [THANK AND TERMINATE]
8. UNSURE [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Q11. La velocidad de su conexión de Internet de banda ancha donde usaría su computadora o laptop para participar en la discusión en línea es de...
1. Menos de 10 megabits de subida y descarga (p.ej., solo puede transmitir música de Spotify o Pandora, enviar/recibir emails, y navegación web básica) [THANK AND TERMINATE]
2. Más de 10 megabits de subida y descarga (p.ej., puede hacer llamadas por Skype y Facetime, jugar videojuegos en línea, transmitir videos de Netflix)
8. UNSURE: Por favor diríjase a BandWidthPlace.com y presione el botón “start” en la parte de en medio del círculo naranja para determinar las velocidades de subida y descarga de su Internet.
Q12. Usted leerá y evaluará materiales en la pantalla de su computadora, también escribirá algunas notas en papel. ¿Tiene limitaciones que dificultarían su participación? (IF YES, PROBE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE RESPONDENT CAN PARTICIPATE. PARTICIPATION ONLY VIA COMPUTER OR
LAPTOP)
1. Respondent can participate
2. Respondent CANNOT participate [THANK AND TERMINATE]
Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022
4 Q13. Por lo que respecta al género, ¿cómo se identifica? (DO NOT READ)
1. Male
2. Female
3. Non-binary
4. Prefer to self-describe: _________________________
Q14. ¿Cuál es su origen racial o étnico?
1. Blanco o caucásico
2. Afroamericano o negro
3. Hispano o latino [MIN 10]
4. Asiático-americano
5. Nativo americano
6. Multiétnico
8. Otro (SPECIFY AND CODE ABOVE, “EUROPEAN” IS WHITE, IF REFUSED, DO NOT
INVITE)
Q15. ¿En qué año nació? ________________ (ENTER YEAR BORN)
1. 1989-2003 (18-32) [MIN 2/MAX 7 PER GROUP]
2. 1976-1988 (33-46) [MIN 2/MAX 7 PER GROUP]
3. 1964-1975 (47-58)
4. 1950-1963 (59-72)
5. 1949 or earlier (73+) NONE [TERMINATE]
Esas son todas mis preguntas. Lo pondré en espera un momento para asegurar que haya espacio para usted en el grupo de discusión. Vuelvo enseguida (CHECK QUOTAS) IF INVITING:
Q16. Nos gustaría que participara en un grupo de discusión de 90 minutos por cámara web el jueves 21 a las [5:30pm/7:30pm]. Posteriormente recibirá $110 como pago mediante Venmo o una tarjeta de regalo de Amazon. ¿Se comprometería a participar?
1. Yes – Grp #1 5:30pm, Thursday the 21st
2. Yes – Grp #2 7:30pm, Thursday the 21st
3. No (THANK AND TERMINATE)
Q17. ¿Le gustaría recibir su pago mediante una tarjeta de regalo de Amazon o por Venmo?
1. Amazon gift card
2. Venmo GET THEIR VENMO ID: @___________________&
3. 18. ¿Sería tan amable de compartirme su dirección de email para que pueda enviarle la confirmación y las instrucciones para la participación? (REPEAT IT BACK LETTER-FOR-LETTER AS
YOU WRITE IT DOWN
EMAIL: ______________________________________________@___________________________ Chula Vista Privacy Spanish FG Recruitment Screener FINAL n=10-12/Group, 90 minutes Rec ID_________ (enter from screen) Thurs, July 21, 2022
5 Q19. Necesitaremos realizar algunas sencillas revisiones de equipo y de velocidades de Internet con usted en la computadora o laptop en las que usted participará. Solo tardará unos 5 minutos en completarse y es muy básico. ¿Cuándo sería un buen momento en las próximas 48 horas para volverle a llamar y realizar esta revisión?
Time: _______ AM PM Day: _________ Date: _________
Después de la revisión del equipo, recibirá un enlace para el grupo de discusión en línea con los detalles de acceso. También recibirá un email de invitación que incluirá instrucciones adicionales junto con un acuerdo de confidencialidad. Por favor léalo con atención. Si tiene alguna pregunta, por favor escriba este número y llámenos. (PAUSE FOR RESPONDENT TO GET PEN AND PAPER). Es el 1-915-329-2102.
¿Podría decirme un número alternativo en el que podamos contactarlo? (________)____________________.
Muchas gracias. Nuevamente, si no escucha de nosotros dentro de las próximas 48 horas, por favor llámenos al 1-915-329-2102 y háganoslo saber. Adiós.
IF NOT INVITING: Lo siento. No puedo invitarlo a participar porque los cupos para su perfil se llenaron. Lo llamaremos en el futuro para otro proyecto de investigación. ¡Gracias y que tenga un estupendo día!
IF HOLD: Lo siento, pero todos los cupos para su demografía se llenaron, por lo que no me es posible invitarlo a participar. Sin embargo, algún participante podría cancelar a último minuto. Si eso llegara a pasar, ¿deberíamos consultar si usted aún está disponible?
IF “OK”: ¡Estupendo! Solo lo contactaremos si alguien cancela. Incluso podría ser en esa misma tarde. (FILL OUT THE FRONT. GET E-MAIL ADDRESS AND ALTERNATE NUMBER) Gracias, y si no lo contactamos en esta ocasión, esperamos poder hablar con usted la próxima vez que hagamos una investigación en su área. Adiós.
APPENDIX
B
1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE
Group 1: non-Very Good Job
FINAL
Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies.
Ground Rules :30
1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential.
2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time.
3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful.
4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously.
5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly.
Warm-up :35
Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves.
I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information.
SEND DROPS TO TECH
Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night…
I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed…
Issues :40
What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP
IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue?
2 Knowledge :50
Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me.
Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not?
Experiences with Data Breaches :55
Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP:
Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Evaluations :05
So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it -- like parking tickets, dog licenses and the recreation classes you may take -- confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job keeping that data and information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out?
Ideation :20
3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues.
Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential.
What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Examples :35
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN
Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE
Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE
Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the city about approving any surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to a citizens group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council.
4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE
Policy: Data Retention :45
OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on how long the city should retain your data... ADVANCE SLIDE
Time limits on data retention: This policy would require the City to delete any personal information after one year. Keeping information only for only a year and then deleting it would lessen the chance that personal information could be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, keeping information longer could provide greater benefits, for example, if a crime is being investigated or a missing person’s report has been filed after a year.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the City was required to delete any personal information after 6 months? What about 2 months?
Policy: Training :50
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on training of City staff… ADVANCE SLIDE
Training: This policy would mandate annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology on how to recognize potential privacy issues when considering whether to buy a new type of technology or software.
The City’s lawyers would attend legal training to grow their expertise on recent laws and court rulings on personal privacy, data collection, etc.
There would be a significant additional cost to the city.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the city was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Equitable Deployment :55
5 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would deploy technology…
ADVANCE SLIDE
Equitable deployment of technology: This policy would prohibit the use of technology in ways that might impact certain neighborhoods or groups. City staff would be required to find alternatives to a particular technology that might disproportionately impact women, Black residents, or non-English speakers, for example. On the other hand, there may be no effective alternatives to some technologies and, in the rare instances that the technology is imperfect, the courts will protect the innocent.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the city was unable to use facial recognition tools designed to catch criminals, for example?
Policy: Minimal Data Collection :00
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the amount of data Chula Vista would collect…
ADVANCE SLIDE
Minimizing data collection: This policy would require that city staff minimize the amount of personal information collected. According to this policy, if it not absolutely necessary for the City to collect a type of personal information, then that information would not be collected. This policy would result in less information for the City to use to make decisions, and it may be impossible to know what personal information is absolutely necessary for it to do its job.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to identify unforeseen hazards in certain neighborhoods, for example?
Policy: Anonymizing Data :05
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on keeping citizen identities secret… ADVANCE SLIDE
6 Anonymizing data: This policy would require city staff to remove personally identifiable information from data whenever possible. By “de-identifying” data, this policy would reduce the possibility that data would be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, there may be a situation in which knowing who filed a complaint, for example, would help the City address a problem.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to contact citizens to follow-up on their concerns, for example?
Community Involvement :10
You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city?
Thank and dismiss :15
You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session.
Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night.
1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE
Group 2: non-Very Bad Job
FINAL
Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies.
Ground Rules :30
1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential.
2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time.
3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful.
4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously.
5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly.
Warm-up :35
Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves.
I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information.
SEND DROPS TO TECH
Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night…
I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed…
Issues :40
What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP
IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue?
2 Knowledge :50
Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me.
Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not?
Experiences with Data Breaches :55
Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP:
Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Evaluations :05
So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it, like parking tickets, dog licenses and the classes you may take, confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job keeping that data and information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out?
Ideation :20
3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues.
Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential.
What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Examples :35
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN TO SHOW EXAMPLE
Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give to the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE
Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE
Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council.
4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE
Policy: Audits :45
OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on auditing City policies... ADVANCE SLIDE
Regular audits: This policy would require the City to retain a privacy auditing firm to regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom. The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised. There would be a significant additional cost to the City.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the City was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Chief Privacy Officer :50
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on hiring a chief Privacy Officer… ADVANCE SLIDE
Chief Privacy Officer: The City would hire a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) responsible for overseeing all City privacy efforts. The CPO would be the in- house privacy protection expert who gathers community input and ideas on privacy and technology, stays up-to-date on the latest developments, is a resource for City staff and helps draft policies for how technology should be used. The CPO would be appointed by, and answer to, the City Manager, receive a $170,000 salary and have a staff of two.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
Policy: Equitable Deployment :55
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would share data… ADVANCE SLIDE
5 Data sharing: This policy would limit Chula Vista’s ability to share with outside third parties the personal information the City has collected. This policy limits the sharing of license plate data with police departments in other cities. Some crimes in other cities would likely go unsolved.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Do you really consider your license plate contain personal information?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the City would be unable to sell the City’s data to generate revenue?
What if this policy outright banned the City from sharing personal information with outside third parties?
Policy: Minimal Data Collection :00
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how much information the City could collect…
ADVANCE SLIDE
Oversight board: This policy would establish a board of community volunteers who would review how the city is using technology and advise on whether privacy protections are, in their view, working. The board would recommend to the City Council as to whether the use of a technology is worth the costs and potential privacy risks. Members would be required to have expertise in technology or privacy issues.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
Policy: Anonymizing Data :05
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the City Council’s role… ADVANCE SLIDE
More oversight by City Council: This policy would require the City Council to review all purchases of technology that collects personal information.
The Council currently only reviews purchases costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and city employees can make smaller purchases 6 without the Council’s pre-approval. The policy would result in the City Council reviewing relatively small budget items.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the City Council is slower to act on other important policy issues?
Community Involvement :10
You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city?
Thank and dismiss :15
You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session.
Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night.
1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE
Group 3: Good Job
FINAL
Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies.
Ground Rules :30
1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential.
2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time.
3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful.
4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously.
5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly.
Warm-up :35
Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves.
I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information.
SEND DROPS TO TECH
Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night…
I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed…
Issues :40
What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP
IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue?
2 Knowledge :50
Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me.
Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not?
Experiences with Data Breaches :55
Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP:
Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Evaluations :05
So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it -- like parking tickets, dog licenses and the recreation classes you may take -- confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job keeping that data and information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out?
Ideation :20
3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues.
Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential.
What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Examples :35
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN
Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give the City and how it uses that information are on its website.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE
Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE
Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the city about approving any surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to a citizens group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council.
4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE
Policy: Data Retention :45
OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on how long the city should retain your data... ADVANCE SLIDE
Time limits on data retention: This policy would require the City to delete any personal information after one year. Keeping information only for only a year and then deleting it would lessen the chance that personal information could be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, keeping information longer could provide greater benefits, for example, if a crime is being investigated or a missing person’s report has been filed after a year.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the City was required to delete any personal information after 6 months? What about 2 months?
Policy: Training :50
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on training of City staff… ADVANCE SLIDE
Training: This policy would mandate annual privacy training for City staff who work with technology on how to recognize potential privacy issues when considering whether to buy a new type of technology or software.
The City’s lawyers would attend legal training to grow their expertise on recent laws and court rulings on personal privacy, data collection, etc.
There would be a significant additional cost to the city.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the city was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Equitable Deployment :55
5 Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would deploy technology…
ADVANCE SLIDE
Equitable deployment of technology: This policy would prohibit the use of technology in ways that might impact certain neighborhoods or groups. City staff would be required to find alternatives to a particular technology that might disproportionately impact women, Black residents, or non-English speakers, for example. On the other hand, there may be no effective alternatives to some technologies and, in the rare instances that the technology is imperfect, the courts will protect the innocent.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the city was unable to use facial recognition tools designed to catch criminals, for example?
Policy: Minimal Data Collection :00
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the amount of data Chula Vista would collect…
ADVANCE SLIDE
Minimizing data collection: This policy would require that city staff minimize the amount of personal information collected. According to this policy, if it not absolutely necessary for the City to collect a type of personal information, then that information would not be collected. This policy would result in less information for the City to use to make decisions, and it may be impossible to know what personal information is absolutely necessary for it to do its job.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to identify unforeseen hazards in certain neighborhoods, for example?
Policy: Anonymizing Data :05
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on keeping citizen identities secret… ADVANCE SLIDE
6 Anonymizing data: This policy would require city staff to remove personally identifiable information from data whenever possible. By “de-identifying” data, this policy would reduce the possibility that data would be stolen or used inappropriately. On the other hand, there may be a situation in which knowing who filed a complaint, for example, would help the City address a problem.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the city was unable to contact citizens to follow-up on their concerns, for example?
Community Involvement :10
You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city?
Thank and dismiss :15
You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session.
Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night.
1 Chula Vista Privacy MODERATOR’S GUIDE
Group 4: Bad Job
FINAL
Objectives: Explore privacy issues and concerns related to Chula Vista government. Develop suggestions for privacy policies.
Ground Rules :30
1. So I can participate without having to take a lot of notes, this is being recorded, but it’s all for research purposes and everything tonight will remain 100% confidential.
2. The format is intended for a free flow of discussion, but we only have about 90 minutes, so please excuse me if I get us back on track from time to time.
3. I want everyone to have a chance to speak so please allow others to finish what they’re saying before adding to the conversation. Let’s all be respectful.
4. The only wrong opinion is the one that’s not expressed. All comments will be helpful; negative ones are as helpful as positive ones. You’ll get some exercises to do tonight and this process only works if you cooperate by doing them quickly and conscientiously.
5. Tonight we’re going to talk about some pretty deep topics. I want you to know you’re in a safe environment. It’s like in pre-covid times when we’d get together in a neighbor’s living room. So please relax and speak frankly.
Warm-up :35
Let’s begin by quickly introducing ourselves.
I’m your professional moderator, John. I’ll go around my screen and have you introduce yourselves, tell us how long you’ve lived in Chula Vista and where you get your local news and information.
SEND DROPS TO TECH
Before we go on, please make sure your cell phones are off. We had a gentleman last night…
I think we’re going have a great group this evening, you’re all well informed…
Issues :40
What do you think are the top issues facing Chula Vista right now, that is, the issues that you think local officials should be most focused on? START WITH LAST PARTICIPANT IN WARM UP
IF “PRIVACY”: What is it about privacy issues that’s so important? Who else believes privacy is a very important issue?
2 Knowledge :50
Does anyone know of any specific measures or steps the city of Chula Vista has taken to keep personal information confidential? Just use your raise hand icon at the bottom. Please describe them for me.
Do you think those policies are working? Why? Why not?
Experiences with Data Breaches :55
Now I want to ask about your experience. Please raise your hand if you’ve experienced a serious invasion of your privacy in the past five years? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their data breached? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP: Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Has anyone had their information misused without their consent? FOR THOSE WITH HANDS UP:
Please briefly tell us what you can about that experience?
Evaluations :05
So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it, like parking tickets, dog licenses and the classes you may take, confidential is one part of privacy. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping the information you submit to it confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job in that regard? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that involuntarily collected information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video. By a show of hands, who thinks the city is doing a good job keeping that data and information confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
And who thinks the city is doing a bad job keeping that video from cameras confidential? What’s the main reason you say that?
Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out?
Ideation :20
3 OK, now I want to go back and see what we can do about these issues.
Let’s take the first one we talked about, keeping the records you give the city confidential.
What do you think should be done to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN SPREADSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the second privacy category we talked about, keeping information private that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 2nd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Let’s take the third privacy category we talked about, the video that the city collects. What rules should there be to keep that information safe and private?
OPEN 3rd WORKSHEET AND LIST IDEAS
Examples :35
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping the records you give the city confidential. SHARE SCREEN TO SHOW EXAMPLE
Seattle’s privacy policies detailing what personal information citizens voluntarily give to the City and how it uses that information are on its website. For example, it lets people know that their cell phone location could be used to help the City monitor traffic conditions.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping private the information the city collects. ADVANCE SLIDE
Berkeley bans the City’s use of any facial recognition technology. City leaders point out that facial recognition systems sometimes incorrectly identify people as criminals and that the artificial intelligence behind the technology can be biased.
What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them?
Here are some examples of what other cities have done with regard to keeping video the city collects private. ADVANCE SLIDE
Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council.
4 What do you like about these rules? What do you dislike about them? How would you improve them? ADVANCE SLIDE
Policy: Audits :45
OK, now that you’ve expressed your opinions on privacy issues in Chula Vista and you’ve heard what other cities have done, I want you to consider some policy ideas for Chula Vista. Here’s the first one on auditing City policies... ADVANCE SLIDE
Regular audits: This policy would require the City to retain a privacy auditing firm to regularly review who has access to data collected by the City and review what data has been viewed, downloaded, or shared, and by whom. The goal is to help the City proactively identify whether privacy has been or might be compromised. There would be a significant additional cost to the City.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, as part of this policy, the cost to the City was more than $5 million per year? Policy: Chief Privacy Officer :50
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on hiring a chief Privacy Officer… ADVANCE SLIDE
Chief Privacy Officer: The City would hire a Chief Privacy Officer (CPO) responsible for overseeing all City privacy efforts. The CPO would be the in- house privacy protection expert who gathers community input and ideas on privacy and technology, stays up-to-date on the latest developments, is a resource for City staff and helps draft policies for how technology should be used. The CPO would be appointed by, and answer to, the City Manager, receive a $170,000 salary and have a staff of two.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
Policy: Data Sharing :55
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how Chula Vista would share data… ADVANCE SLIDE
5 Data sharing: This policy would limit Chula Vista’s ability to share with outside third parties the personal information the City has collected. This policy limits the sharing of license plate data with police departments in other cities. Some crimes in other cities would likely go unsolved.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Do you really consider your license plate contain personal information?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the City would be unable to sell the City’s data to generate revenue?
What if this policy outright banned the City from sharing personal information with outside third parties?
Policy: Oversight :00
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on how much information the City could collect…
ADVANCE SLIDE
Oversight board: This policy would establish a board of community volunteers who would review how the city is using technology and advise on whether privacy protections are, in their view, working. The board would recommend to the City Council as to whether the use of a technology is worth the costs and potential privacy risks. Members would be required to have expertise in technology or privacy issues.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
Policy: City Council :05
Here’s the next policy I want you to consider on the City Council’s role… ADVANCE SLIDE
More oversight by City Council: This policy would require the City Council to review all purchases of technology that collects personal information.
The Council currently only reviews purchases costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and city employees can make smaller purchases 6 without the Council’s pre-approval. The policy would result in the City Council reviewing relatively small budget items.
What are your thoughts on this policy?
Now that we’ve discussed this policy, use your hand raise tool to indicate that you support it.
Thanks, now use your hand tool to indicate that you oppose it.
What if, because of this policy, the City Council is slower to act on other important policy issues?
Community Involvement :10
You guys have done great. The last thing is the city would like to know how to get more Chula Vistans engaged in city issues or volunteering on boards. What suggestions do you have for the city?
Thank and dismiss :15
You guys have been great tonight. Thanks for your help and that concludes our session.
Competitive Edge will get you your payment tomorrow. Please remember not to discuss the proceedings. Goodbye and have a great night.
APPENDIX
C
Chula Vista Stimuli
So, when we’re talking about privacy, we’re talking about a few things. The city keeping the information you submit to it, like parking tickets, dog licenses and the classes you may take, confidential is one part of privacy.
Así que, cuando hablamos de la privacidad, estamos hablando de tres cosas en general: Un aspecto de la privacidad es que la Ciudad mantenga la confidencialidad de la información que uno da en forma de multas de estacionamiento, licencias para perros y clases que uno toma en un parque de su vecindario.
Another aspect of privacy is when the city collects data that you’re not giving it voluntarily, such as when the police use license plate readers to scan for stolen vehicles.
Otro aspecto de la privacidad ocurre cuando la Ciudad recopila datos que uno no le da de manera voluntaria: por ejemplo, cuando la policía utiliza lectores de placas de autos para identificar vehículos robados.
Another aspect relates to video. There are cameras such as on traffic poles, police drones, or body worn cameras that take lots of video.
Otro aspecto está relacionado con los videos. Por ejemplo, las imágenes que captan las cámaras ubicadas en los postes de tráfico, los drones policiales y las cámaras corporales.
Does anyone believe that certain groups are singled out more than they should be by the police? How about certain ethnic groups? Do you think Latinos in Chula Vista are disproportionately singled out?
¿Alguno de ustedes cree que la policía enfoca estas prácticas más de lo debido en ciertos grupos? Y, ¿creen que se centran en ciertos grupos étnicos más que en otros? ¿Consideran que enfocan estas prácticas de manera desproporcionada en la comunidad latina de Chula Vista?
Group 5 Examples & Policies
En la ciudad de Seattle, las políticas relacionadas con la privacidad se publican en la página de internet de la ciudad con todos los detalles sobre la información que los ciudadanos proporcionan a la Ciudad de manera voluntaria y cómo se utiliza esta información.
En la ciudad de Berkeley, se prohíbe el uso de tecnologías de reconocimiento facial. Los líderes de la Ciudad advierten que los sistemas de reconocimiento facial a veces se equivocan e identifican erróneamente a personas como delincuentes. Señalan que la inteligencia artificial que forma la base de dicha tecnología podría estar sujeta a prejuicios.
En la ciudad de Oakland, se ha establecido una Comisión Asesora de Privacidad, comprendida por ciudadanos, que hace recomendaciones a la Ciudad sobre las tecnologías de vigilancia. Los departamentos municipales que desean utilizar un equipo nuevo de vigilancia tienen que presentar un informe a este grupo, que – a su vez – hace recomendaciones al Consejo Municipal.
Límites de tiempo para la retención de datos
Bajo esta política, se requeriría que la Ciudad borrara toda información personal después de un año. Guardar información por solo un año y borrarlo después del año reduciría la posibilidad del robo o mal uso de los datos personales.
Por otra parte, guardar la información durante más tiempo podría proporcionar mayores beneficios, por ejemplo, en caso de la investigación de un delito o la presentación de una denuncia de una persona perdida después del año.
Capacitación
Esta política exigiría la capacitación anual relativa a la privacidad para todo el personal de la Ciudad que trabaja con sistemas tecnológicos sobre cómo reconocer posibles problemas de violación de derechos de privacidad a la hora de considerar la compra de un sistema o programa informático nuevo. Los abogados de la Ciudad asistirían a una capacitación legal para ampliar su experiencia y pericia en materia de las leyes y decisiones jurídicas más recientes sobre la privacidad, la recolección de datos, etc.
Implicaría costos adicionales considerables para la Ciudad.
Implementación Equitativa de Tecnología
Esta política prohibiría el uso de tecnologías de manera que pudiera afectar a determinados vecindarios o grupos. Por ejemplo, se obligaría al personal de la Ciudad a buscar alternativas a un sistema tecnológico que pudiera impactar de manera desproporcionada a mujeres, a residentes afroamericanos o a personas que no hablan inglés.
Por otra parte, es possible que no existan alternativas efectivas para determinadas tecnologías y, en caso de que se trate de una tecnología imperfecta, la ley protegerá a los inocentes.
Reducción en Recopilación de Datos
Esta política requeriría que el personal que trabaja para la Ciudad redujera la recolección de datos personales. De acuerdo a esta política, de no ser indispensable, la Ciudad no tendría que recopilar datos personales.
Dicha norma resultaría en menos información a disposición de la Ciudad para que ésta tome decisiones y podría ser imposible saber cuáles datos son cruciales para que realicen su labor.
.
Anonimización de Datos
Esta regla exigiría que el personal de la Ciudad quitara información personal identificable de los datos recopilados cuando sea posible. Al borrar los datos identificables, esta norma reduciría la posibilidad de robo o uso inapropiado de información personal.
Por otra parte, puede haber una situación en la que el saber quién presenta una denuncia, por ejemplo, podría ayudar a la Ciudad a resolver un problema.
Group 6 Examples & Policies
En la ciudad de Seattle, las políticas relacionadas con la privacidad se publican en la página de internet de la ciudad con todos los detalles sobre la información que los ciudadanos proporcionan a la Ciudad de manera voluntaria y cómo se utiliza esta información.
En la ciudad de Berkeley, se prohíbe el uso de tecnologías de reconocimiento facial. Los líderes de la Ciudad advierten que los sistemas de reconocimiento facial a veces se equivocan e identifican erróneamente a personas como delincuentes. Señalan que la inteligencia artificial que forma la base de dicha tecnología podría estar sujeta a prejuicios.
Oakland has established a Privacy Advisory Board made up of citizens who formally advise the City about surveillance technology. City departments that want to start using a new surveillance tool must write a report and present supporting information to the group, which then makes a recommendation to the City Council.
Auditorías Regulares
Esta norma obligaría a la Ciudad a contratar una empresa de auditoría de privacidad para que esta revisara quién tiene acceso a los datos recopilados por la Ciudad y evaluara qué datos han sido observados, descargados o compartidos y por parte de quién. El objetivo es ayudar a la Ciudad a identificar, de manera proactiva, si se ha violado o si se podrían violar los derechos de privacidad.
Esta ley supondría costos adicionales considerables para la Ciudad.
Director de Privacidad
La ciudad contrataría a un Director de Privacidad (CPO, por sus siglas en inglés) que sería responsable de supervisar todos los esfuerzos de la Ciudad en materia de privacidad. Dicho director sería el experto interno encargado de proteger los derechos de privacidad; recopilaría las perspectivas o recomendaciones de los miembros de la comunidad sobre tecnología y privacidad, se mantendría al día acerca de los avances más recientes, colaboraría con el personal de la Ciudad y ayudaría a redactar reglas sobre el buen uso de la tecnología.
Dicho director sería nombrado por y respondería al Jefe de la Administración Municipal, recibiría un sueldo de $170,000 y tendría dos asistentes.
Compartimiento de Datos
Este reglamento limitaría la capacidad de Chula Vista de compartir con terceros la información personal que ha recopilado la Ciudad.
Dicha norma limita el compartimiento de datos relacionados con las placas de autos con departamentos de policía en otras ciudades.
Significaría que no se resolverían algunos delitos cometidos en otras ciudades Consejo de Supervisión
Bajo esta política, se establecería una Comisión de voluntarios de la comunidad que analizaría el uso de tecnología de la Ciudad y presentaría informes, desde su perspectiva, sobre la efectividad de las protecciones de privacidad. Dicha comisión haría recomendaciones ante el Consejo Municipal sobre los costos, el valor y los posibles riesgos del uso de ciertas tecnologías.
Los miembros tendrían que ser expertos en la materia de tecnología y cuestiones de privacidad.
Más vigilancia por parte del Consejo Municipal
Esta norma obligaría al Consejo Municipal a revisar todas las adquisiciones/compras de los sistemas que recopilan datos personales. En la actualidad, el Consejo sólo revisa las compras de cientos de miles de dólares y los empleados de la Ciudad pueden comprar equipo nuevo de menor costo sin previa aprobación del Consejo.
Esta regla significaría que el Consejo Municipal revisaría compras que tienen un impacto relativamente menor en el presupuesto.