Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Daniel James
Wednesday, October 7, 2026 11:49 AM
PublicComment-AutoResponse Public comment on Municipal Sen/ices Committee, October 7, 2026, agenda item 3 [ A] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button (PAB). For more information about the PAB view article "KB0011474" on the DolT portal.
Committee,
I am writing to express deep concern with the proposal to acquire and deploy cameras with ambiguous Al-powered systems designed for compliance and enforcement, and which are explicitly designed to capture photos and video of residential neighborhoods.
The presentation materials included in the October 7, 2026 Municipal Services Committee agenda notes a number of concerningthings:
"Captures photos or video with Locations added" "Videos and data upload automatically to the [cloud]" "Cameras only capture what is visible from public areas; not viewing into homes or collecting resident account data"
By capturing photos and video from the vantage point of refuse trucks, the City is compiling an entirely new level of surveillance material at a residential level. This information—like the surveillanceinformation the City already collects through its Flock and Motorola ALPRs-is uploaded to third-party vendors' systems with dubious protections about the use of this data.
We have already heard the line from the City that "cameras only capture what is visible from the public areas" for justifying other surveillance systems. The truth is that cameras positioned in this way do not selectively focus only on trash. Viewing into homes happens frequently with every form of "Street View"- style surveillance—whether intended or not.
"Automatically detects overloaded or contamination in containers" "Flags contaminants for [compliance] with photos or video" "Al detects unsafe actions and alerts the driver instantly" The presentation makes no note of any specific testing or validation done to ensure that what the "At" flags as an overloaded, contaminated, out-of-compliance situation, or "unsafe action" is accurate or vetted against any other standards.
"Live streaming is available for real-time monitoring" "Only authorized personnel can access footage and event clips" 1 The presentation makes no mention of policy regarding the access to or use of this surveillance system, including its live streaming functionality. It is ambiguous who is authorized to access such a system. For example, will the Police Department or Parking Enforcement have access to this system? "Footage may be requested as public record, but personal identifying details (faces, license plates) are blurred for privacy"
Who is responsible for identifying and "blurring" personal identifying details? Is this another responsibility of an unnamed A] process, or is there a human involved in reviewing and manuallyredacting information. If public records are requested, is the City able to fulfill such requests within the state-mandated timelines?
Further, from the images used in the presentation, it appears the City may already intend to obtain asurveillance system from 3rd Eye (a Terex company). Has the City already published a request forproposals for this service? How far along is procurement for this system, and have other vendors been considered?Overall, this proposal for an cloud-connected, Al-powered mobile surveillance system intended for deployment in Pasadena's residential neighborhoods is unacceptable. The nominal driver safetyfeatures like "bird's eye view" and incident recording are commercially available without cloudconnected, Al-powered surveillance technology, and I urge the Committee to seek such minimallyinvasive alternatives.
DanielJames (he/him)
2 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:To:
Subject:
Attachments:
humaira
Wednesday, October 7, 2026 1:03 PM PublicComment-AutoResponse Municipal Services 10/7/26 Item 3 trash truck camera comment.pdf [ s) ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button (PAB). For more information about the PAB view article "KB0011474" on the DotT portal.
The attached written public comment is for item 3 - refuse fleet cameras Humaira
Pasadena District 7
Sent with Proton Mail secure email.
1 Item 3: Refuse Truck Camera Policy
Municipal Services Committee, 10/7/2026
When the Public Works Department included $210,000 for Refuse Fleet Cameras as part oftheirenhancement requests duringthe budget process earlier this year, multiple community members raised concerns about privacy and data security. In response,Councilmember Lyon asked staff to provide additional information regarding data privacy implications and cameras installed on refuse collection vehicles (5/12/26 meetingminutes), hlowever, "privacy" and "security" do not appear a single time in the staff presentation for today's meeting! There is also no actual policy presented nor is there anyindication that DPW plans to prepare a policy. The DPW presentation neglects to even attempt to address the very legitimate privacy, security, and other concerns. I urge theCommittee to send a very strong message to DPW that it will not even consider supporting a request for fleet cameras until staff return with a much more thoughtful and detailed presentation and a policy that fully addresses community concerns about privacy, data security, and function creep.
Data sets frequently end up getting used in ways not originally intended, and we end up with function creep that harms people or leads to higher costs. There is tremendous potential for the type of video and data collected by a refuse fleet camera system to be used in ways that no one has yet contemplated and that are not approved when such asystem is initially adopted. Any use of cameras on refuse trucks whatsoever must specifically detail all allowed uses and prohibit new or secondary uses without public engagement and discussion and Council approval.
I am also concerned about the use of these Al-powered cameras to initiate tickets for code violations or for assigning blight scores. The use of these cameras as virtual code inspectors in cities such as Dallas has functioned as a tax that disproportionately affectslower income residents. The City should instead invest resources in empowering residents to collectively address property issues impacting the quality of life in their neighborhood and providing resources to residents who may need help with the upkeep of their homes.
I also urge MSCto require that any future request for fleet cameras include:
• Data-based and/or peer reviewed analyses showing that truck mounted cameras improve drive and public safety and improve driver efficiency and performance (reminder: anecdotal evidence or vendor marketing materials don't count) Data-based discussion of how truck mounted cameras would work better and be more cost effective than other approaches.
Data on current on the current level of claims (valid and "false") and how cameras would reduce liability and costs. We are told that the cameras would reduce claims, but no information is provided about the actual liability claims and costs that the City is currently paying
Just say NO to turning our garbage trucks into roving mass surveillance platforms.
HumairaPasadena resident (D7)From 5/12/26 Municipal Services Committee meeting minutes:
Councilmember Lyon asked staff to provide additional information regarding data privacy implications and cameras installed on refuse collection vehicles.
From 5/12/26 Public Works presentation:
^
f\Enhancement Requests - Non-Personnel
Public Works Department
?.^L5iyi5i?T! ?^?!?^ 19^?-u5'.e.nc.e.- l^rr'(.ount. Pes.crtP?'on 'RRR 406 One-ftne
RRR 406 One-Fime
RRR
"ft":
RRRRRRRRR
216 One-Tlme406 One-Tlnie
yi'i«6 One-nne
406 On-Going
RRR On-Going
$3.928.276 Stoe loader Trucks (7)
$300.000 Additional Refuse
Containers
$45,000$42,000$18,000$105,000$45.000
Grant Funded Vehicle(1)
Refuse Fleet CamerasResidential
Refuse Fleet Cameras -
Commercial
•Wi^M/SS
Justification
Purchase 7 Side Loader RefuseTiucks
Purchase of additional refusecontainers due to customerrequests S. to replenish availableInventory AQMD grant funded vehicle fornew Code Compltance OfficerPurchase o( Refuse vehteleCameras & Installation - Residential
Purchase of Refuse Fleet Cameras
& Installation - Commerctal
Annual Monitoring Cost Annual Monitoring Costs for Refuse - Residential Vehicle Mounted Cameras -
Residential
Annual Morutoring Cost Annual Monltoilng Costs for
- Commerctal Refuse Vehicle Mounted Cameras
- Commerckal
11 39
Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Trina Chen <-
Wednesday, October 7, 2026 1:33 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponse
Item 3: Refuse Truck Camera Policy
Some people who received this message don't often get email from Leamjwhv this is important [,ii] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you fcnowthe content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button (PAB). For more information about the PAB view article "KB0011474" on the DolTportal.
Municipal Services Committee:
Pasadena does not need garbage truck surveillance! We need a city-wide policy and guidelines to protect residents' privacy. The rush to deploy Al assisted surveillance and data collection is irresponsible, especially in Light of the numerous data breaches by hackers, bad actors, and escapedrogue Al agents that targeted vulnerable data.
Further, is there a problem here that even needs to be fixed. Padadena residents are quite adept at reporting trash and other code violations. Surveillance technology is unnecessary and dangerous.
Protect our privacy!
Trina Chen
District 2 resident
Yahoo Mail: Search. Organize. Conquer
1 Sabha, Tamer
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Yadi
Wednesday, October 7, 2026 2:49 PM
PublicComment-AutoResponsePublic comment - Pasadena Municipal Services Committee - 10/07/26 Public Comment - Pasadena Municipal Services Committee 10-07-26 Cameras.pdf [ -I ] CAUTION: This email was delivered from the Internet. Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe. Report phish using the Phish Alert Button (PAB). For more information about the PAB view article "KB0011474" on the DolTportal.
Hi,
Please find attached my public comment for the October 7, 2026 Pasadena Municipal Services Committee meeting, agenda item 3. Refuse Truck Surveillance Camera Policy.
Thanks,
Yadi
(Attachments: 1)
1 3. Refuse Truck Surveillance Camera Policy
Thank you to Public Works for your work to improve the City and provide excellent services to residents and visitors alike.
Lask that we focus on improvements and solutions that prioritize non-tech solutions and resources in collaboration with communities. We must maintain mindfulness and steer clear of using surveillance technologies that will inevitably perpetuate the same discriminatory practices of the past that hit lower income and communities of color the hardest. We should avoid tech solutions that are heavy handed, excess and punitive. And protect worker's rights.
TurninQ City Refuse Trucks into rovina surveillance is totally unnecessary and harms our communities^
In fact, It's quite stunning that the City would pay a private company to collect massive quantities of data of residents.
Of the few cities who tried to roll this out, a coupe have already rolled it back after publicbacklash like Cape Coral, Florida and Huntsville, Alabama.
Public Works Excels at addressing
illegal dumping
According to the Pasadena City Service
Center (CSC),
llleflal dumping /Abandoned
Items and Bulky Item Pick Up were
ranked as the
2nd and 4th most requested
services in 2026.
^>aS
^^e^"
MOST REQUESTED SERVICES
2026 FISCAL YEAR
1 Parking Enforcement
—>
——.————————•^
Q Bulky Item Pick Up
Graffiti Removal
Abandoned Items
Code Enforcement
6.471
5,927
5,565
5,262
2,854
@ Missed Trash Pick-Up 2,497
Streetlight Repairs
3. Refuse Truck Surveillance Camera Policy
Here's what residents say about the Pasadena City Service Center (CSC):
&&? coolranchpuffs • '1mo ai
Mi?
I use this app quite a bit and the city is very responsive. It's kind of magical Graffiti is usually dealt with in a day. Abandoned junk items in two days. Cross walk buttons that don't work in two days.
G 0 65 o o Rsp'y Q' Award (^ Share
^r-r., Lathryus • 4mo ago
S Too 1% Commenter
Amen, the app is really responsive. The UX of the app is meh, but the response is 10/10 no notes. <?> 11 0 0 Reply Q- Award ^ St- are
r^ douggoldn • 4mo ago^ SPasadenS'
I use this app for dead streetlights in my neighborhood. They're usually fixed within a few days. Great app.
0 23 <> Q Reply ^ Award ^ Shaare
spitandbite • 4mo ago • Edited 4mo ago
a^ Top 1% Commenter
I use it often to report tagging. It's usually taken down a couple days later. •0s 17 '0' 0 ReP'y ^ Award ^ Share
ShustOne • 4mo acic
Seriously a great app and service. I report potholes and broken things and they seem to get addressedquickly. Seems like a really smart way for them to prioritize quick wins for residents.
Q ^ s. ^ 0 Reply 0- Award irf> Share
Dandroid009 • 4mo ago
Yup. Occasionally we get vehicles dumped on our street, and they can sit for weeks until reported thenthey're gone fast. Same with large piles of junk, broken mirrors, etc.I always assume someone else will report them or they'll get ticketed for blocking the street sweepers, butthey'll just sit until reported.
Q 0 4 ^}» 0 ReP'y Q Award ^> Share
3. Refuse Truck Surveillance Camera Policy
welostmagic • 4
You can use the website to do the same thing if you don't want to install yet another app. The servicecenter is indeed very useful - I report every dead streetlight and pothole within a 2-block radius and havebeen doing so for years; one time they told me they fixed 17 potholes in the area when I only reported the one in my intersection, which I found hard to believe but they really did go and fill in all of them. My car could feel the difference, lol.
-Source: Reddit, in re CSC App and sen/ices
Workers Rights and Consent
At the May discussion, it was stated that the workers were asked if they were OK with having surveillance on the refuse trucks, and it was relayed to the committee and the public that workers were OK with it.
The reality is that employee consent to workplace surveillance is rarely fully voluntary and consent is essentially made under duress as there's no real option to opt out.
I hope we can understand the asymmetrical power dynamic between employer and worker, the economic leverage that bosses hold, the effects on worker conditions and the lack of meaningful consent and opt-in.
We must understand that surveillance can diminish employee morale, dignity, and autonomy and increase stress. I believe in treating all workers with dignity and respect and the privacy rights of all.
Pasadena Needs a Privacy Officer
Again, the City needs to establish a simple codified mechanism to procure technology and create policies in which the following are addressed:
Where is the Council and community input?L/W?e/-e are the safety controls? The transparency? The Oversight? l4//?e/'e /s the facial recognition ban?
Where is the weaponization ban?l4//7ere /s the protection of workers at risk of displacement by these tools? Where is the protection of our information from being used to train Al?Where are the pilots and studies? The research on efficacy?Where is the auditing and reporting requirements?Where is the transparency, the public trust and the PSA? Other Cities responsibly govern technology San Francisco has an At policy with human accountability, public disclosures, and guardrails.
3. Refuse Truck Surveillance Camera Policy
Austin has a resolution for the ethical use ofAI, with transparency and worker protections.
Seattle has an Al policy with guidelines for piloting Al programs.Boston's CIO says; "The city reviews all technologies for alignment with Massachusetts statelaw, Boston's local ordinances, and our own security and privacy policies," Garces said. "Boston has a surveillance technology policy that governs how the city plans, procures andevaluates the use of technologies that have an impact on privacy." The state of California had a moratorium on the use of facial recognition on body worn cameras, and when it expired, it did not follow that with any legislation that essentially greenlight the use of facial recognition in the state.
Even Columbia, South Carolina tested these proposed technologies, as did Stockton with a short pilot.
Yadi
Pasadena Municipal Services Committee
October 7, 2026
3. Refuse Truck Surveillance Camera Policy