AGENDA
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, December 12, 2023
5:30 PM
Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California 94561.
Unless stated otherwise on the agenda, every item on the agenda is exempt from CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060(c), 15061(b)(3), 15273, 15378, 15301, 15323 and/or Public Resources Code Section 21065.
MISSION STATEMENT: The City of Oakley will create a resilient future that fosters and attracts a vibrant and evolving community that welcomes and values all people.
VISION STATEMENT: The City of Oakley celebrates our unique Delta lifestyle and small-town feel where we Live in a safe, dynamic community, Work together to build the future, and Play in our own backyard.
Agendas are posted in Oakley at Oakley City Hall-3231 Main Street, outside the gym at Delta Vista Middle School-4901 Frank Hengel Way and outside the Library at Freedom High School-1050 Neroly Road.
Agendas are also posted on the City’s Internet Website www.ci.oakley.ca.us.
A complete packet of information containing staff reports and exhibits related to each item is available for public review prior to an Oakley City Council and/or City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority meeting at Oakley City Hall, 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561. Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Oakley City Council, Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency or Oakley Public Financing Authority regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection, during regular business hours, at the front counter in the Main Lobby of the Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561. Agendas may be picked up at the Oakley City Hall located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, CA 94561 for no charge. To request information regarding placement on the City’s agenda e-mail distribution list, please contact us at (925) 625-7000.
The City of Oakley provides social media options to stay connected to City Hall through Facebook, Twitter, Next Door and Instagram. Other opportunities to connect with City Hall include Engage In Oakley, Oakley OnDemand on the City's website, and by emailing [email protected].
If you have a physically challenging condition and require special accommodations, please call the City Clerk’s office at (925) 625-7000.
Please keep cell phones/electronic devices turned off during the meeting. Please be advised that City Council meetings are video recorded and attendees may appear on video.
1 Information Regarding Public Comment
Members of the public may address the Council on items of interest that are within the City’s jurisdiction. In compliance with State law, the council may not take actionor have discussion on any item that is not specifically listed on the agenda. Public comment on items not listed on the agenda will be heard under the Public Comments section of the agenda. Public comments on items listed on the agenda will be heard as the Mayor calls the items. In compliance with State law, the Council may not take action on an item that is not specifically listed on the agenda. If you would like to speak on any agenda item, please fill out a public speaker card available in the lobby and submit it to the City Clerk seated in the Council Chamber prior to the agenda item being called. The Mayor will call you by name to the podium to hear your comment.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES. Online public comments are accepted until 5 p.m. the day of the meeting and can be submitted at
https://www.ci.oakley.ca.us/online-public-comment-card/.
1.OPENING MATTERS
1.1 Call to Order and Roll Call of the Oakley City Council
1.2 Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag (Pixel, Hadley and Sloan Williams)
2.CLOSED SESSION
2.1 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL-ANTICIPATED LITIGATION-INITIATION
OF LITIGATION
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(2). One potential case.
2.2 CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9: One Potential Case (letter from ACLU/EFF dated May 25, 2023 and email dated November 2, 2023)
1. Letter Re: License Plate Reader Data
2. Electronic Frontier Foundation Email
3.PUBLIC COMMENTS
At this time, the public is permitted to address the Oakley City Council/Oakley City Council Acting as the Successor Agency to the Oakley Redevelopment Agency/Oakley Public Financing Authority on non-agendized items.
2 4.PRESENTATIONS
4.1 Presentations to Mayor Meadows
Suggested Action: 1. Office of Congressman Mark Desaulnier
2. District Representative Claire Alaura, Office of Senator Steve Glazer
3. District Director Tiffanee Jones, Office of Assemblymember Lori D. Wilson
4. Supervisor Diane Burgis and Communications Director Peter Myers, Contra Costa Board of Supervisors
5. City Staff
4.2 Comments by Mayor Meadows
5.REORGANIZATION OF THE OAKLEY CITY COUNCIL
5.1 Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor
Suggested Action: a) Overview of Selection Process (Derek Cole, City Attorney) b) Selection of Mayor and Vice Mayor
5.2 Administration of Oaths of Office to Newly Appointed Mayor and Vice Mayor (Libby Vreonis, City Clerk)
5.3 Comments by Newly Appointed Mayor
6.ADJOURN
3 Oakley
VIA EMAIL
Derek Cole
City Attorney's Office
City of Oakley
2281 Lava Ridge Court
Suite 300
Roseville, CA 95661
[email protected]
Paul Beard
Chief of Police
Oakley Police Department
3231 Main St.
Oakley, CA 94561
[email protected]
May 25, 2023
Re: Oakley Police Department’s Violations of State Law for Sharing License Plate Reader Data
Dear Mr. Cole and Mr. Beard,
We write regarding records obtained by our offices in response to a California Public Records Act Request (“PRA Records”),1 which state that the Oakley Police Department (“the Department”) shares automated license plate reader (“ALPR”) information, including the locations of drivers, with out-of-state law enforcement agencies. This sharing violates two state laws that prohibit sharing of information with out-of-state entities about the provision of abortion care, Cal. Penal Code § 13778.2, and sharing of information collected by ALPR systems. Cal Civ. Code § 1798.90.55(b). We are particularly concerned that anti-abortion states may seek to exploit this information to track, locate, and prosecute abortion seekers and providers.
Regardless of your Department’s intent, this act of sharing poses a risk to people and violates state law. We therefore urge that you immediately investigate any sharing relationship with these 1 https://www.muckrock.com/foi/oakley-3351/automated-license-plate-readers-oakley-police-department136087/ 4
agencies, prohibit the Department from sharing in this fashion again, and reconsider the Department’s use of ALPR technology.
I. ALPR Surveillance of Oakley Drivers’ Locations Violates Their Civil Liberties and Civil Rights and Could be Used to Prosecute Out-of-State Abortion Seekers.
ALPR technology is a powerful surveillance system that can be used to invade the privacy of individuals and violate the rights of entire communities. ALPR systems collect and store location information about drivers whose cars pass through ALPR cameras’ fields of view, which, along with the date and time of capture, can be built into a database that reveals sensitive details about where individuals work, live, associate, worship, seek medical care, and travel.2 Much of this information has traditionally been unavailable to law enforcement without a search warrant. Further, ALPR systems are easily misused to harm marginalized communities.3 As with other surveillance technologies, police often deploy license plate readers in poor and historically overpoliced areas, regardless of crime rates.4
Additionally, and particularly since the Supreme Court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization,
5 which overturned Roe v. Wade,6 ALPR technology and the 2 See, e.g., Automatic License Plate Readers, ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUND., March 29, 2023, https://www.eff.org/sls/tech/automated-license-plate-readers; You Are Being Tracked: How License Plate Readers Are Being Used to Record Americans’ Movements, AM. CIV. LIBERTIES UNION, July 2013, https://www.aclu.org/other/you-are-being-tracked-how-license-plate-readers-are-being-used-record-americansmovements. 3 See, e.g., Angel Diaz & Rachel Levinson-Waldman, Automatic License Plate Readers: Legal Status and Policy Recommendations for Law Enforcement Use, BRENNAN CTR. FOR JUST., Sept. 10, 2020, https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/automatic-license-plate-readers-legal-status-and-policyrecommendations; Christine Hauser, Aurora Police Chief Apologizes After Officers Handcuff Children on the Ground, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 5, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/us/aurora-police-black-family.html (ALPR falsely flagged a Black family’s SUV as stolen, leading to a stop during which entire family, including four children, was forced to lie on the ground during the stop); Vasudha Talla, Records Reveal ICE Agents Run Thousands of License Plate Queries a Month in Massive Location Database, ACLU OF NORTHERN CAL., June 2019, https://www.aclunc.org/blog/records-reveal-ice-agents-run-thousands-license-plate-queries-month-massive-locationdatabase; Matt Cagle, San Francisco – Paying the Price for Surveillance Without Safeguards, ACLU OF NORTHERN CAL., May 22, 2014, https://www.aclunc.org/blog/san-francisco-paying-price-surveillance-without-safeguards; Adam Goldman and Matt Apuzzo, With Cameras, Informants, NYPD Eyed Mosques, ASSOCIATED PRESS, Feb. 23, 2012, https://www.ap.org/ap-in-the-news/2012/with-cameras-informants-nypd-eyed-mosques. 4 Dave Maass and Jeremy Gillula, What You Can Learn from Oakland’s Raw ALPR Data, ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUND., Jan. 21, 2015, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2015/01/what-we-learned-oakland-raw-alpr-data; Barton Gellman and Sam Adler-Bell, The Disparate Impact of Surveillance, THE CENTURY FOUND., Dec. 21, 2017, https://production-tcf.imgix.net/app/uploads/2017/12/03151009/the-disparate-impact-of-surveillance.pdf; see also, e.g., Kaveh Waddell, How License-Plate Readers Have Helped Police and Lenders Target the Poor, THE ATLANTIC, Apr. 22, 2016 https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/04/how-license-plate-readers-have-helpedpolice-and-lenders-target-the-poor/479436/ (summarizing data indicating that Oakland Police Department deployed ALPRs “disproportionately often in low-income areas and in neighborhoods with high concentrations of AfricanAmerican and Latino residents”). 5 142 S. Ct. 2228 (2022).
6 410 U.S. 113 (1972).
5
information it collects is vulnerable to exploitation against people seeking, providing, and facilitating access to abortion.7 Law enforcement officers in anti-abortion jurisdictions who receive the locations of drivers collected by California-based ALPRs may seek to use that information to monitor abortion clinics and the vehicles seen around them and closely track the movements of abortion seekers and providers.8 This threatens even those obtaining or providing abortions in California, since several anti-abortion states plan to criminalize and prosecute those who seek or assist in out-of-state abortions.9
II. The Department Shares Local Drivers’ Data with Out-of-State Agencies, including Agencies in Anti-Abortion States.
The PRA Records obtained by our office state that the Department shares ALPR information with law enforcement agencies across the country, including with at least one agency in a state where abortion is banned or highly restricted. The Department lists out-of-state agencies as sharing partners with the ability to search your Department’s local ALPR information, including scans of license plates and the location of the scanned plate. These out-ofstate agencies have the ability to search sensitive local ALPR information but are not subject to the important privacy protections imposed by the California state legislature.
III. Sharing of ALPR Information with Out-of-State Agencies Violates State Law and Undermines California’s Protections for Reproductive Health Privacy.
Any sharing of ALPR information with out-of-state agencies violates state law and the only way to prevent these violations, and the harm caused by exposing sensitive driver information to out-of-state agencies, is to cease such sharing. Under the California Civil Code, as amended by Senate Bill No. 34, “[a] public agency shall not sell, share, or transfer ALPR information, except to another public agency, and only as otherwise permitted by law.” Civ.
Code § 1798.90.55(b). A “public agency” is defined as “the state, any city, county, or city and county, or any agency or political subdivision of the state.” See Civ. Code § 1798.90.5(f) (emphasis added). The Civil Code, therefore, prohibits an agency from sharing or transferring ALPR information with or to out-of-state agencies, including those listed in the PRA Records.
In addition, sharing ALPR information with law enforcement in states that criminalize abortion undermines California’s extensive efforts to protect reproductive health privacy. Since 7 Johana Bhuiyan, How expanding web of license plate readers could be ‘weaponized’ against abortion, THE GUARDIAN, Oct. 6, 2022, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/oct/06/how-expanding-web-of-licenseplate-readers-could-be-weaponized-against-abortion. 8 Dave Maass, Automated License Plate Readers Threaten Abortion Access. Here’s How Policymakers Can Mitigate the Risk, ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUND., Sept. 28, 2022, https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/09/automated-license-plate-readers-threaten-abortion-access-heres-howpolicymakers. 9 See, e.g., Caroline Kitchener and Devlin Barrett, Antiabortion lawmakers want to block patients from crossing state lines, WASHINGTON POST, June 30, 2022,
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/06/29/abortion-state-lines/; Josh Moon, Alabama AG: state may prosecute those who assist in out-of-state abortions, ALABAMA POLITICAL REPORTER, Sept. 15, 2022, https://www.alreporter.com/2022/09/15/alabama-ag-state-may-prosecute-those-who-assist-in-out-of-state-abortions/. 6
last summer when the Supreme Court decided Dobbs, the Legislature has passed more than a dozen laws to protect reproductive freedom, including laws that prohibit law enforcement from cooperating with out-of-state entities regarding abortions that are lawful in California.10 As shown in the PRA Records, the Department shares ALPR information with at least one law enforcement agency in an anti-abortion state. Sharing ALPR information with these agencies raises concerns in light of the recently enacted Assembly Bill No. 1242, which prohibits state and local public agencies from “cooperat[ing] with or provid[ing] information” to out-ofstate agencies “regarding an abortion that is lawful under the laws of this state and that is performed in this state.” Cal. Penal Code § 13778.2.
The sharing of ALPR information is harmful because it exposes the sensitive location information of drivers to misuse in states without California’s privacy protections. The only way to prevent these harms and address these violations of the law is the terminate the out-of-state sharing.
Additionally, sharing ALPR information with out-of-state agencies undermines the California Constitution’s long-standing protections for reproductive rights11 and the values guiding state law, as set out in the legislative findings and declarations of the Reproductive Privacy Act:
“The Legislature finds and declares that every individual possesses a fundamental right of privacy with respect to personal reproductive decisions. Accordingly, it is the public policy of the State of California that . . . [e]very woman has the fundamental right to choose to bear a child or to choose and to obtain an abortion . . . [and t]he state shall not deny or interfere with a woman’s fundamental right to choose to bear a child or to choose to obtain an abortion[.]”
Cal. Health & Safety Code § 123462. These declared rights are undermined by Oakley sending ALPR information to out-of-state law enforcement agencies that may use it to investigate and punish people who seek abortion.
IV. The Department Should End the Illegal Sharing of ALPR Information and Any Further Use of ALPRs.
10 See Joe Garofoli, Newsom signs California abortion protections into law following GOP push for a nationwide ban, SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICAL, Sept. 27, 2022, https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Newsom-signs-California-abortion-protections-into-17470927.php; New Protections for People Who Need Abortion Care and Birth Control, OFFICE OF GOVERNOR GAVIN NEWSOM, Sept. 27, 2022, https://www.gov.ca.gov/2022/09/27/new-protections-for-people-who-need-abortion-care-and-birthcontrol/. 11 See People v. Belous (1969) 71 Cal. 2d 954. The California Constitution was recently amended to expressly enumerate these long-standing protections. See Cal. Const. Art. 1, § 1.1 (“The state shall not deny or interfere with an individual’s reproductive freedom in their most intimate decisions, which includes their fundamental right to choose to have an abortion[.]”) (added Nov. 8, 2022, by Prop. 1. Res. Ch. 97, 2022. Effective Dec. 21, 2022).
7
We urge the Department to investigate—and end—the sharing documented above. We ask that you provide proof in writing that such sharing has ended and any record reflecting the same. Cal. Const., art. I, § 3(b)(2); Gov’t Code §§ 7920 et seq.
Further, the risks to civil liberties and civil rights that ALPR technology creates are welldocumented. Even if the Department takes steps to prevent the formal sharing of data with outof-state agencies, the risk of informal sharing with these same agencies will remain. Thus, the best way to ensure that Oakley’s residents and visitors are safe from unnecessary intrusion into their personal lives is to reject the use of ALPR technology altogether.
We look forward to your prompt action and response by June 15, 2023. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to Jennifer Pinsof at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Jennifer Pinsof
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
Matt Cagle
Senior Staff Attorney
ACLU Foundation of
Northern California
Mohammad Tajsar
Senior Staff Attorney
ACLU Foundation of
Southern California
cc: Attorney General Rob Bonta
Office of the Attorney General
California Department of Justice
1300 “I” Street
Sacramento, CA 95814-291
8 From: ALPR
To: Derek Cole; info
Subject: Legal mail about ALPRs follow up
Date: Thursday, November 2, 2023 9:58:01 AM
Attachments: Oakley.pdf
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of Cole Huber LLP. Please do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Hello,
We write to follow up on the attached May 25, 2023 letter sent by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, ACLU of Northern California, and ACLU of Southern California concerning your jurisdiction’s automated license plate reader (ALPR) information disclosure practices. The letter noted that public records show your agency is sharing ALPR information with out-ofstate, federal, and/or private entities in violation of California law.
As you may know, the California Office of the Attorney General recently published an Information Bulletin (No. 2023-DLE-06) confirming that “SB 34 does not permit California [law enforcement agencies] to share ALPR information with private entities or out-of-state or federal agencies, including out-of-state and federal law enforcement agencies.” The Attorney General’s Information Bulletin is clear. Your agency is violating California Civil Code § 1798.90.55(b) when it shares ALPR information with out-of-state or federal agencies.
Please confirm that you have stopped sharing ALPR information with out-of-state and federal agencies and private entitites. Also, pursuant to the California Public Records Act, please send a copy of your agency’s current “Data Sharing Report.” We look forward to your prompt response by November 16, 2023.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Pinsof
Staff Attorney
Electronic Frontier Foundation
[email protected]
This email has been scanned for spam and viruses by Proofpoint Essentials. Click here to report this email as spam.
9