From: Margaret Baker <
Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 9: 34 AM
To: Kerry Bigelow < KBigelow@chulavistaca. gov>
Subject: Urging Incorporation of Proposed Amendments into Privacy Protection and Technology Ordinance
WARNING - This email originated from outside the City of Chula Vista. Do not click any links and do not open attachments unless you can confirm the sender.
PLEASE REPORT SUSPICIOUS EMAILS BY USING THE PHISH ALERT REPORT BUTTON or to reportphishing@chulavistaca. gov
To: Chula Vista City Council
From: South Bay People Power
RE: Urging Incorporation of Proposed Amendments into Privacy Protection and Technology Ordinance We are writing to ask you to pull Agenda Item 5.5 from the consent calendar at Tuesday’ s Council meeting in order to incorporate several critically important amendments into the Privacy Protection and Technology Advisory Commission Ordinance (" the Ordinance”) BEFORE enacting it. These amendments cannot wait a year for any potential revision process to the ordinance. They are essential to initial formation of a commission that:
Aligns with the Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy (“ the Privacy Policy”) already adopted by the City Council,
Builds on the extensive knowledge and deliberations of community experts on the Privacy and Technology Advisory Task Force (" the Privacy Task Force”), and Addresses the serious concerns and carefully- researched proposals from the community and demands for change, and
Most importantly, enables the Commission to fulfill its advisory role to the City Council by setting clear purposes, functions, membership qualifications, meeting frequency & schedule.
Chula Vista needs to enact REAL CHANGE! For too many years, Chula Vista has been acquiring and using technologies without needed guardrails. We are calling ON YOU, as our elected leader, to take control of the decision- making process and provide independent oversight. We need YOU to make informed and independent decisions regarding acquisition and of use surveillance technologies, set binding policies, require and review reporting, and provide informed oversight. In order to perform these important tasks, YOU must become more knowledgeable about the risks to civil liberties, and the current and emerging technologies that our city departments are employing and proposing. The key step now is to set up an advisory commission that can advise and inform you so that you drive the oversight process and do not merely rubber- stamp proposals made by City department heads who are committed to acquiring and using the technologies.
If the Ordinance is left as is, the Commission will not be able to fulfill its much- needed role to help YOU make responsible and well- informed decisions regarding the city’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. If you fail to amend the ordinance now, Chula Vista will face ongoing confusion, scrutiny, potential liabilities and criticism, and you and your constituents will not have an advisory and oversight body that we can rely on. Unfortunately, we also predict you will encounter difficulty recruiting local experts who will commit to serving on a commission that lacks clear purposes, functions and processes.
You don' t often get email from Learn why this is important Item5.5 - WrittenCommunications - Baker
Here are the most critical amendments you need to make at Tuesday’ s meeting:
Purpose and intent
o AMENDMENT:
Delete the language that reads “… the City Council priorities of improving sensitive personal information management, security, and privacy” and substitute ” the purposes set forth in the City’s Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy ( Council Policy 112- 04)."
o RATIONALE:
The proposed ordinance does NOT accurately and fully lay out the purposes of the Commission. It mistakenly limits the purpose to improving “ sensitive personal information management, security, and privacy.” We question WHY it uses this restricted language and lacks documented reference as to its source. It doesn’ t build on existing City Council policy and priorities, reflect the work of the Privacy Task Force, nor does it address the concerns of the community.
Instead, the Ordinance should directly refer to and reinforce the Purposes and Intent set forth in the City’s Privacy Policy adopted on Nov 1, 2022. The seven purposes enumerated in the City’s Privacy Policy DO explicitly establish the full set of City Council’ s priorities. The Commission should address these same purposes to address data sharing, access, privacy and other civil rights and civil liberties, inclusion of expert advice and community input in decision- making involving the acquisition and use of technology, waste of taxpayer funds, and transparency and public trust.
Functions and Duties
o AMENDMENT:
Change Paragraph D to read as follows: “ Review and advise the City Council on the procurement standards for and actual contracts and data- sharing agreements involving Sensitive or Surveillance Technology, as described in the Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy ( Council Policy 112- 04)." o RATIONALE:
The list of functions and duties of the Commission should be laid out explicitly in the Ordinance, and items the Commission will evaluate should be specified. The City’s Privacy Task Force intended for the Commission to review actual contracts, NOT just review and advise on " procurement standards." The Task Force felt that the Commissioners should review and make recommendations on the speci fic terms of these “ agreements” so that the City Council can oversee and make informed decisions about acquisitions and use of surveillance technology. [ See attached file for more specific reasons and background on this issue.] Membership
o AMENDMENT:
Delete or modify the provision regarding nonresidents in order to remove the preference for nonresidents who “ own and operate a business and/ or property.” Instead the provision should state positively that the Commission membership include representatives of often- marginalized communities and those historically- targeted by police surveillance.
o RATIONALE:
The current qualifying factor of ownership skews the composition of the Commission toward nonresidents with higher socioeconomic status by excluding other nonresidents who may work or study or have other significant connection to Item5.5 - WrittenCommunications - Baker
Chula Vista. This provision contradicts the City’s JEDI goals to be more inclusive. As currently worded, t his membership provision works to the detriment of the goal to include re presentatives of often- marginalized communities and those historically targeted by police surveillance such as immigrants, people of color, LGBTQ, religious minorities, and political activists.
Meeting frequency and schedule
o AMENDMENT:
Substitute the following language for the current provision: " The Commission’ s meeting schedule shall include at least one regular meeting per month, at the day, time, and location established by written resolution of the Commission. ( Ord. 3435 § 1, 2018).”
o RATIONALE:
The City’s Privacy Policy sets a 60 -day deadline for the Commission to provide its recommendations to the City Council, making it essential that the Commission hold regular monthly meetings, at a minimum.
Our recommended language is taken wor d- for- word from the ordinance that formed the Human Relations Commission.
o AMENDMENT:
Add the following provision: “ The Commission shall set a schedule that prioritizes surveillance technologies for review, allowing time for informed consideration of policies and proposals, and for proper public notification and engagement, in order to fulfill its independent oversight and advisory role for the City Council.” o RATIONALE:
The timeline and process for proper notification of the Commission and the general public for proposed acquisitions, uses, policies, and reports must also be made explicit.
This Ordinance needs to structure the Commission so that it can function as an effective advisory body with sufficient time to evaluate City staff proposals and reports, consider community input, and make informed recommendations on ALL surveillance technology. The current proposed design that sets limits on Commission meetings and the ability of the Commission to set its own agenda is fatally flawed and will likely perpetuate the rubber - stamp- type voting by the City Council. Correct this NOW!
We are NOT comfortable with the Ordinance as it stands, and are counting on you to use our proposed language in formulating changes to the ordinance PRIOR to the vote on Tuesday. Attached below is the more complete list of amendments we feel are needed.
Respectfully,
South Bay People Power
July 11, 2023
To: Chula Vista City Council
Item5.5 - WrittenCommunications - Baker
From: South Bay People Power
Re: Public Comment on Agenda Item 8.2 – Position Neutral pending Incorporation of Proposed Amendments South Bay People Power supports formation of a commission to advise our City Council about surveillance technology & privacy protections. We appreciate our councilmembers’ support & efforts for improvements to the original ordinance, but feel more work is needed to correct critical omissions & language & to clarify specific processes for oversight and decision- making. We have studied this second version carefully & prepared an overview of some of the amendments we feel are essential & a document that shows precisely more completely what critical changes are still needed.
Chula Vista needs an ordinance that:
1) Empowers the Commission with the time, access, & authority to advise the City Council to make fiscal & policy decisions regarding privacy protection & surveillance technology; 2) Enables the Commission to fulfill its advisory role to the City Council by setting clear purposes, functions, membership qualifications, meeting frequency & schedule; & 3) Strengthens community engagement, independent expert advice, & the City Council’ s fiscal & policy- making role regarding technology acquisition, use & oversight.
We cannot emphasize strongly enough how important it is to set explicit & unambiguous provisions in the ordinance that establishes the commission. Every word matters. Therefore, we encourage you to take the time to seriously review & incorporate our carefully- worded proposed amendments into a revised Ordinance Version 3 for consideration at your next meeting.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Maggi
Margaret A. Baker, DrPH
South Bay People Power promotes social justice through nonpartisan civic engagement.
Attachment: Overview of Proposed Amendments to the “ Alternate” Ordinance Item5.5 - WrittenCommunications - Baker
July 11, 2023
To: Chula Vista City Council
From: South Bay People Power
Re: Public Comment on Agenda Item 8.2 – Position Neutral pending Incorporation of Proposed Amendments
South Bay People Power supports formation of a commission to advise our City Council about surveillance technology & privacy protections. We appreciate our councilmembers’ support & efforts for improvements to the original ordinance, but feel more work is needed to correct critical omissions & language & to clarify specific processes for oversight and decision-making. We have studied this second version carefully & prepared an overview of some of the amendments we feel are essential & a document that shows precisely & more completely what critical changes are still needed.
Chula Vista needs an ordinance that:
1) Empowers the Commission with the time, access, & authority to advise the City Council to make fiscal & policy decisions regarding privacy protection & surveillance technology;
2) Enables the Commission to fulfill its advisory role to the City Council by setting clear purposes, functions, membership qualifications, meeting frequency & schedule; &
3) Strengthens community engagement, independent expert advice, & the City Council’s fiscal & policy-making role regarding technology acquisition, use & oversight.
We cannot emphasize strongly enough how important it is to set explicit & unambiguous provisions in the ordinance that establishes the commission. Every word matters. Therefore, we encourage you to take the time to seriously review & incorporate our carefully-worded proposed amendments into a revised Ordinance Version 3 for consideration at your next meeting.
Attachment: Overview of Proposed Amendments to the “Alternate” Ordinance
OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE “ALTERNATE” ORDINANCE:
Preamble: Need to include the role of community in raising surveillance privacy issues and policy proposals/ordinances. Current preamble misrepresents the history that led us to this ordinance. Also, the current preamble presents very limited objectives - which is part of the problem with the City's approach to technology. It fails to acknowledge other important Chula Vista goals and objectives like the Welcoming America Standards for immigrant protections and increased community engagement, which were adopted PRIOR to this Sept 2017 Action Plan when Council voted to join the Welcoming America Network and become a Certified Welcoming City in April 2017.
• Reword the following WHEREAS clauses as follows:
o "WHEREAS, this effort involves ensuring that decisions are made by elected officials regarding adoption, procurement, or and use of citywide technology, and that sensitive public personal data, and identifiable information collected is managed and utilized in a secure, transparent, and safe way; and”
o WHEREAS, the Policy aims to enhances City operations through establishment of explicit acquisition, use and impact policies and procedures to protect privacy and other civil liberties, a more reliable, secure, and safe city network and data management process, increased reporting and oversight of citywide technology systems used by the City, and in order to improved accountability, transparency and increased public trust; and
• Insert after 4th WHEREAS clause:
o "WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista has an obligation to protect the privacy and civil liberties of its diverse communities as it acquires technologies that establish it as a “smart city;” and
o "WHEREAS, in prior years, the City of Chula Vista Police Department had transgressed on its responsibility to protect immigrant community members when it shared sensitive data with
immigration enforcement authorities while using a surveillance technology, in violation of its Welcoming City status and the spirit of the California Values Act, which damaged community trust of city officials; and"
• Insert before last WHEREAS clause:
o "WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista Resolution 2022 -238 that established the City’s Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy w as adopted with an amendment 'to reflect in the Purpose section of the policy and the recitals of the resolution that the City’s concerns with access to sensitive personal data were heightened by valid community concerns regarding City practices that invol ved sharing personal information through the use of technology with the potential for adverse impacts on civil liberties.’”
• Make other corrections to wording: For example, delete some uses of “citywide”, change “sensitive public data” to “sensitive private information or data”, etc.
Purpose and intent: Need for explicit statement of the purpose and intent, including clarity that this Commission shall work to advance the same purposes specified in the City's Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Po licy.
These purposes stated in the Privacy Policy are:
• To respond to valid community concerns regarding sharing of personal information through the use of technology that has the potential for adverse impacts on civil liberties;
• To safeguard the security, accuracy, and control of access to City data and technology systems;
• To protect the civil rights and civil liberties of Chula Vista community members and visitors, including rights to privacy;
• To ensure that expert advice and community input is included as part of City decision -making involving the acquisition and use of privacy - impacting technology;
• To protect against the waste of taxpayer funds;
• To promote transparency in the acquisition and use of privacy - impacting technology by the City; and
• To build and maintain public trust in the City and its use of technology to deliver public services.
• Replace current paragraph which proposes a very limited “purpose” with this statement based in the City’s Privacy Policy:
o "It is the purpose and intent of the City Council in establishing the Commission to create an advisory body to advise and make recommendations to the City Council to advance the purposes set forth in the City’s Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy (Council Policy 112-04).”
• Add the following to further clarify the intent of this ordinance:
o "The City Council establishes the Privacy Commission as an independent civilian body of representatives with expertise and experience in technology, privacy, and surveillance. The commission will serve as an advisory body to the Mayor and City Council on policies and issues related to privacy and surveillance.
The commission will prov ide advice intended to ensure
transparency, accountability, and public deliberation in the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology. Members of the Privacy Commission will provide informed recommendations to city decision-makers, work to educa te the public about privacy and surveillance issues, and serve as a resource for individuals and organizations who might have concerns about the City’s use of surveillance technology."
Definitions: Need to clarify terms (e.g., “agreements”, “standards”); and use correct terms consistently throughout (e.g., “Sensitive Public Data” should read “Sensitive Personal Information"). Note that the City’s Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy does set forth definitions for all important terms.
Also, we do not endorse all of the definitions in the City’s Privacy Policy which unfortunately do not align with definitions in our community-proposed ordinances or the Privacy Task Force recommendations. So there is a need to review, add and modify definitions in that policy, but for now we recommend clarifying key terms used in this ordinance.
• Delete the term “Sensitive Public Data" and substitute and consistently use the term “Sensitive Personal Information” throughout the ordinance. • Add a “Definitions” section and/or refer to the Council Policy 112-04 when using key terms such as “Sensitive Personal Information”.
Functions and duties: Need to refer to and affirm the purpose set forth in the City’s new Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy, rather than invent new language that would limit the scope and diminish the function and role of this important new and permanent commission. The list of functions and items the Commission will evaluate needs to be specific and explicit. For example, the Task Force intended for the Commission to review actual contracts, NOT just review and advise on "procurement standards" (as proposed in Item G). The Task Force felt that the Commissioners should review and make reco mmendations on the specific terms of these "agreements" - because City staff proposing these agreements are/have not been privacy/tech experts, and in any case, need oversight. The perfect example of the importance of this is the City's ALPR contracts with Vigilant Solutions that allowed data -sharing with federal immigration authorities - for over 3 years, and even after the CVPD thought they had stopped sharing but didn't have enough knowledge or curiosity to figure out which agencies were ICE agencies (e.g., HSI). Also, we (and legal settlements elsewhere in CA support our assertion) assert that Chula Vista's contract/data -sharing agreement was in violation of state law AB 34. It was clearly in conflict with our City's own Welcoming City standard (as was v alidated in communication from Welcoming America) and violated the community's efforts to attain our City Council's resolution in support of SB 54. So the Privacy Commission needs to provide its expert advice to City Council before solicitation and authori zation as a regular part of the review process for all surveillance -related contracts. • Within former Paragraph C (now Paragraph F), after the words “City Council”:
o delete “on the”
o and insert: "prior to adoption of new uses or solicitation or”. • Change for mer Paragraph D (now Paragraph G) to read as follows:
o “G. Review and advise the City Council on the procurement standards for and actual contracts and data-sharing agreements involving Sensitive or Surveillance Technology, as described in the Privacy Protection and Technology Transparency Policy (Council Policy 112-04)."
• Add the following provisions to Functions and duties:
o "A. The Commission shall access and review an up-to-date inventory of all surveillance technologies being used by City departments, and be informed of any proposed surveillance technologies or new uses prior to solicitation of funds and proposals or adoption." o "B. The Commission shall work with City staff to set a schedule that prioritizes the surveillance technologies to be reviewed, allowing time for informed consideration of policies, agreements, reports and proposals, and for proper public notification and engagement, in order to fulfill its independent oversight and advisory role for the City Council."
o "C. The Commission shall evaluate all existing surveillance technologies, new acquisitions, technology-related contracts, uses, impacts, policies, data-sharing agreements, and reports, and shall recommend approval, disapproval, or revisions."
o "H. Expand opportunities for public engagement regarding surveillance policies, reports and proposed acquisition and uses through regularly-scheduled meetings and other public forums announced with proper notification to provide information and gather public input."
o "I. Submit an annual report and recommendations to the City Council regarding new or revised surveillance use, privacy protections, data retention, other policies or reports, and any relevant federal, state, local legislation or emerging studies and best practices." o "J. Work with City staff and community members to draft language for consideration by the City Council for a surveillance ordinance based on best practices and the Chula Vista Privacy and Technology Advisory Task Force proposals to provide clear, enforceable privacy protections, procedures, and other rules to govern surveillance technology acquisition and use in Chula Vista."
Membership:
• Delete or modify original provision B regarding nonresidents to remove preference for high socioeconomic status nonresidents vs other nonresidents who work or study in Chula Vista but may not be property or business owners. As currently worded, t his membership provision works to the detriment of the goal to include representatives of often - marginaliz ed communities and those targeted by police surveillance such as immigrants, people of color, LGBTQ, religious minorities, political activists.
• Add the following regarding Qualifications - new provision C:
o “Selections to the Board should reflect the City’s diversity, in particular to include members of groups historically subject to disproportionate surveillance, including communities of color, immigrant communities, religious minorities, and groups concerned with privacy and protest."
• Add the following regarding Qualifications - new provision D:
o “All members of the Privacy Advisory Commission shall be persons who have a demonstrated commitment to civil rights and/or privacy protections through work experience, civic participation and/or advocacy.”
• Modify wording of revised provision E.1 (former provision C.1) - Change “sensitive public information” to “Sensitive personal Information/Data” (as per Task Force definitions/proposed policies).
• Delete last sentence in revised provision E (former provision C):
“Notwithstanding the foregoing….” - Why include this loophole before there is any problem in finding members to fill the positions? • Add the following regarding potential Conflicts of Interest - to create a new provision F:
o “Member qualifications and eligibility shall be in accordance with CV Charter Article VI, Sect 602, & CVCM Sect. 2.25.030. No member shall have a state law-prohibited financial interest, employment, or policy- making position in any commercial or for-profit facility, research center, or other organization that sells data products, surveillance equipment, or otherwise profits from recommendations made by the Privacy Protection and Technology Advisory Commission.” • Delete provision G (former provision D). - regarding review of applications by City Manager; instead use a community panel as per Task Force recommendations, and to democratize the process to ensure that non- profit community groups and the Human Relations Commission have the opportunity to nominate experts/community members with credibility working to ensure civil liberties and privacy protections.
Meeting frequency and schedule. Need to structure the Commission so that it can function as genuine advisory body with ample time to evaluate City staff proposals and make informed recommendations on ALL surveillance technology. The current proposed design that sets limits on Commission meetings and the ability of the Commission to set its own agenda is fatally flawed, and will likely perpetuate the current rubber -stamp-type voting by the Council. The Commission must meet on a regular and frequent basis in order to review all existing surveillance technologies, policies and reports, as well as to consider with time for proper notification of public meetings all futur e proposals to acquire or add new uses for city surveillance technologies. With its focus on technology and public engagement, the Commission should maximize participation by arranging for “hybrid” virtual as well as in -person participation in its meetings .
• Substitute the following statement as provision A (which is taken word - for-word from ordinance that formed the Human Relations Commission) and delete the statement in the current Alternate Ordinance:
o "The Commission’s meeting schedule shall include at le ast one regular meeting per month, at the day, time, and location established by written resolution of the Commission. (Ord. 3435 § 1, 2018).”
• Add this provision B:
o Additionally, the Commission, with its focus on technology, will seek to maximize participation by both Commissioners and the general public by arranging for “hybrid” virtual as well as in-person participation, however possible, to accommodate those who cannot or prefer not to attend in-person meetings.
• Add this provision C:
o “The Commission shall set a schedule that prioritizes surveillance technologies for review, allowing time for informed consideration of policies and proposals, and for proper public notification and engagement, in order to fulfill its independent oversight and advisory role for the City Council.”
ACCESS Our PROPOSED AMENDMENTS to the “Alternate Ordinance" in a modified “tracking” mode which shows all our proposed
additions/deletions/changes and includes some comments in this Google doc.