Economic Development, Technology & City Light Committee 2/22/23

you

Good morning, everyone.

The February 22nd, 2023 meeting of the Economic Development Technology and City Light Meeting is about to come to order.

It is 9.32.

I'm Sarah Nelson, Chair of the Committee.

Council President Juarez has asked to be excused, and Council Member Sawant Staff emailed and said they cannot be here either, so she's excused as well.

Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Strauss?

Present.

Council Member Herbold.

Here.

Chair Nelson.

Present.

Three present, two excused.

Okay, everyone, there are 15 items on today's agenda.

Briefing and discussion and vote on six appointments and three reappointments to Seattle's Community Technology Advisory Board, or CTAB.

which addresses issues of community-wide interest relating to information and communications technology.

And then we have a briefing discussion and possible vote on six group B surveillance impact reports for technologies or devices that the Seattle Police Department currently uses.

These include camera systems for images or non-auditory video recordings, Vehicle crash data retrieval tools, computer, cell phone, and mobile device data extraction tools, geotime software, remotely operated vehicles, not including aerial drones, and tracking devices.

Are there any objections to the agenda?

Seeing none, the agenda is adopted.

With that, we'll now move into public comment on the items listed on the agenda, and you may roll the video, please.

Hello, Seattle.

We are the Emerald City, the City of Flowers and the City of Goodwill, built on indigenous land, the traditional territory of the Coast Salish peoples.

The Seattle City Council welcomes remote public comment and is eager to hear from residents of our city.

If you would like to be a speaker and provide a verbal public comment, you may register two hours prior to the meeting via the Seattle City Council website.

Here's some information about the public comment proceedings.

Speakers are called upon in the order in which they registered on the council's website.

Each speaker must call in from the phone number provided when they registered online and used the meeting ID and passcode that was emailed upon confirmation.

If you did not receive an email confirmation, please check your spam or junk mail folders.

A reminder, the speaker meeting ID is different from the general listen line meeting ID provided on the agenda.

Once a speaker's name is called, the speaker's microphone will be unmuted and an automatic prompt will say, the host would like you to unmute your microphone.

That is your cue that it's your turn to speak.

At that time, you must press star six.

You will then hear a prompt of, you are unmuted.

Be sure your phone is unmuted on your end so that you will be heard.

As a speaker, you should begin by stating your name and the item that you are addressing.

A chime will sound when 10 seconds are left in your allotted time as a gentle reminder to wrap up your public comments.

At the end of the allotted time, your microphone will be muted.

and the next speaker registered will be called.

Once speakers have completed providing public comment, please disconnect from the public comment line and join us by following the meeting via Seattle Channel Broadcast or through the listening line option listed on the agenda.

the council reserves the right to eliminate public comment if the system is being abused or if the process impedes the council's ability to conduct its business on behalf of residents of the city.

Any offensive language that is disruptive to these proceedings or that is not focused on an appropriate topic as specified in council rules may lead to the speaker being muted by the presiding officer.

Our hope is to provide an opportunity for productive discussions that will assist our orderly consideration of issues before the council.

The public comment period is now open, and we will begin with the first speaker on the list.

Please remember to press star six after you hear the prompt of, you have been unmuted.

Thank you, Seattle.

All right, we have no one here in chambers to speak publicly, and there's one person signed up online.

So we'll proceed with our one online commenter, and you will have two minutes, and I will now call Cynthia Spies.

Go ahead, please.

Hi, I'm Cynthia Spies.

My comments are regarding all six surveillance technologies.

Thank you, Council Member Herbold, for proposing amendments.

I support all of them.

To other committee members, please also propose amendments since the majority of both mine and the working group's recommendations have not yet been incorporated.

Many of these technologies are highly privacy invasive, and as such, their use should at least be prohibited for misdemeanor offenses.

The use of these tools should not be purely based on SPD's fluctuating staffing.

Their use should be proportional to the crime.

While the proposed amendments number two are a bolstering of the Youth Rights Act, the situation remains that these tools are too powerful and risk, of course, of consent too great to allow anyone of any age to consent to such a search without legal counsel.

This is especially true for the computer, cell phone, and mobile device extraction tools because it's been consistently shown that the general public is not aware of the deep and vast nature of the data on their phones, nor the ramifications for SPD's long-term storage and sharing of this private information.

A random person would simply not have the technical understanding in such a situation to accurately judge the risk and assert their rights.

As such, legal counsel should be required for all consent-based searches using these tools, regardless of the person's age.

Across the board, there should also be a ban on both predictive policing and biometric tools, such as face, gait, or voice analysis, using any of these systems or their data.

For both the undercover cameras and location trackers, council members should add an explicit provision that the use of these, except pursuant to that defined in the final SIR, exposes the individual to criminal or civil liability.

There's a potential for domestic violence situations where an unethical SPD employee uses these for personal use.

The Seattle Surveillance Ordinance doesn't address individual city employees acting outside the scope of the ordinance.

Additionally, SPD is using at least one tool that is from a company, Celebrate, which is linked to human rights abuses in multiple authoritarian countries.

Please require the divestment from Celebrate.

I urge council members to review the emails I sent, which have detailed recommendations.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

That's it for public comment.

It's now closed.

Will the clerk please read items one through nine into the record, because we have six appointments and three reappointments, and so we'll just all read them in all at once.

Agenda item number one, appointment 02474, appointment of Aisha Bomani as member of the Community Technology Advisory Board for a term to December 31st, 2024. Agenda item number two, appointment 02470, Appointment of Coleman R. Entringer as member of the Community Technology Advisory Board for a term to December 31st, 2023. Agenda item number three, appointment 02475. Appointment of Philip Meng as member of the Community Technology Advisory Board for a term to December 31st, 2024. Agenda item number four, appointment 02476. Appointment of Meryl Miller as member of the Community Technology Advisory Board for a term to December 31st, 2024. agenda item number five appointment 02473 appointment of isabel j rodriguez as member of the community technology advisory board for a term to december 31st 2023 agenda item number six appointment 02477 appointment of omari stringer as member of the community technology advisory board for a term to december 31st 2024 Agenda item number seven, appointment 02478, reappointment of Femi Adebayo as member of the Community Technology Advisory Board for a term to December 31st, 2024. Agenda item number eight, appointment 02471, reappointment of Dr. Tyrone Grandison as member of the Community Technology Advisory Board for a term to December 31st, 2023. Agenda item number nine, appointment 02472, reappointment of Camille Malonzo as member of the Community Technology Advisory Board for a term to December 31st, 2023. All nine items up for briefing discussion and possible vote.

Thank you very much.

We've got John Morrison-Winters, the Digital Equity Program and Broadband Manager from Seattle IT, who is coming to the table to present on these appointments and reappointments.

And I must say, thank you very much for being here in person.

I appreciate it.

And we've also got Vin on the line from Seattle IT as well, and Eleanor Bounds and Sarah Carrier as presenters from the department as well.

Okay, so the way this will go is you will present, John, the purpose of CTAB, and then we'll proceed with some introductions of the folks that are our new appointments.

Go ahead.

Very good.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Committee Chair Nelson and committee members for inviting me to join you today.

I'm John Morrison-Winters, the Digital Equity Program and Broadband Manager at Seattle IT.

On behalf of Seattle IT and the mayor's office, I'm pleased to present to council the appointment files for six new members to the Community Technology Advisory Board, or CTAB as we like to call it.

CTAB is a 10-member board that was established in 1995 and revised in 2015. Six members are appointed by the mayor and four are appointed by the council.

CTAB's function is to help guide city strategies on technology issues and promote access to technology.

CTAB advises Seattle IT, the mayor, and the city council on a range of issues, including online city services, privacy and surveillance, broadband policy, community engagement, small cell wireless deployment, and access to technology for students, families, and underserved residents.

At the end of 2022, due to some members departing early and other members completing their second terms, we had six openings to fill.

So in November, we promoted the board openings and asked the public to apply to CTAB.

In total, we received over 20 applications, and among that pool, we conducted 12 interviews.

The interview panel included staff from Council Member Nelson's office, the mayor's office, Seattle IT, and current CTAB members.

The interview panel considered each appointee's area of expertise, skills, and willingness to commit their time to the board.

We also considered diversity of viewpoint and representation.

Seattle IT is really excited about this incredible group of new appointees, and we look forward to working with the new board.

Thank you for the opportunity to present them to you today.

Thank you, John.

Just a question.

After today, will all the positions be filled?

Yeah, that's correct.

We'll have a full contingency after today.

Thank you very much.

That is a lot of work to keep a commission full.

So good work with that list last year.

Okay, here's how we'll go.

I'm going to ask each person to introduce themselves briefly.

And I'm going to start with Coleman, because of your time constraints.

So why don't you tell us a little bit about yourself, Coleman?

Yeah.

Hi, everyone.

I'm Coleman Entringer.

So just brief introduction of myself.

So I've had the pleasure of serving with CTAB on a more informal basis for the past two years as a co-chair of the Digital Equity Committee.

So digital equity is a topic that's very near and dear to my heart.

In my professional life, I'm a corporate strategy consultant where I primarily serve large tech companies based on the West Coast across a range of issues.

primarily accessibility of technology products, the accessibility and access of technology in developing countries, as well as pipeline equity as far as technology company staffing.

I'm really excited to potentially join CTAB and have the opportunity to continue to promote the use of technology to improve the lives of the residents of Seattle.

So happy to be here.

Thank you very much and thank you very much for your willingness to serve and for your past work as co-chair on a volunteer basis as well.

All right, Aisha, are you here and would you like to introduce yourself briefly?

Hello.

Good morning.

Yes, my name is Aisha Bomani.

I'm really excited for this appointment.

I work with Seattle Public Schools.

I'm the Digital Equity Program Manager there.

So I've been doing this work for about three years now.

That program came out of COVID-19 with the need to serve our students and families with more expedited tech support and equity to make sure that all families are having access to technology, especially during that time when we were all on a screen, right?

Other than that, I'm born and raised here in Seattle, really looking forward to serving my community in a more wider sense, not just with the schools.

And I've been working with David Keyes since my, for about three years now.

So I'm really excited to work with him on this level.

And yeah, happy to be here.

Thank you very much.

That must have been difficult working during that time period.

All right.

Thank you very much for your willingness to serve as well.

And Phillip.

Good morning.

Good morning.

Thank you, Chair Nelson.

Thank you, Council Members.

My name is Phil Vang.

I study Information Systems, Finance, and Global and Regional Studies at the University of Washington, and I currently work as a Young Global Professional at the Atlantic Council.

I'm really grateful to be considered for the Community Technology Advisory Board.

I had first become involved with CTAB as a community member on its Digital Equity Committee.

So as part of the committee last year, I built a compilation of digital equity resources based on our telecom forum, evaluating grants for the technology matching funds.

And if confirmed to the board, I really hope to continue this focus on access to technology and digital equity.

To the board, I hope to bring perspective as a student and a young Seattleite, as well as some industry and policy experience in this space.

I previously worked at Qualtrics, interned at the Boston Consulting Group, and researched some technology policy issues like cryptocurrencies as an intern at the Bipartisan Policy Center.

So I appreciate your time and consideration today.

Thank you very much.

I noticed that you will be graduating this year with a triple major in information systems, finance, and global and regional studies from UW.

The mouthful.

Congratulations in advance.

Thank you.

And so far, the folks that we've been introducing are mayoral appointments.

Meryl, you are our first council appointment.

Would you please introduce yourself?

Hello.

Thank you.

My name is Meryl Miller.

I am born and raised in the Seattle area and have returned recently after some years on the East coast.

I am currently head of business operation for Google's cybersecurity action team, uh, whose mission is to secure our cloud customers and the world.

Um, so I'm excited to bring my strategy program and project management and cybersecurity expertise to the board.

Thank you.

You caught my attention because you've done security is in every line of your past professional work at Gemini, Goldman Sachs, et cetera.

So I appreciate that focus that you bring to the committee.

Thank you to the commission.

Thank you for your willingness to serve.

And Isabel, please introduce yourself.

You are a mayoral appointment.

Hi, and thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning.

My name is Isabel Rodriguez, pronouns are they, them, and I'm a research analyst and communications professional who works at the intersection of technology and society.

I received both my bachelor's and master's in physics and I currently work in the nonprofit space.

When I first came across CTAB in the summer of 2022, I was really looking for initiatives in Seattle that value community engagement and that leverage the voices of its residents to influence technical decision making at the level of government.

And so after attending meetings just as a community member, at the end of the year, I stepped into a co-chair role for CTAB's Privacy and Cybersecurity Subcommittee.

Coming into CTAB proper, I'd be doing so with an interest to explore algorithms and AI, particularly through the lens of privacy and surveillance.

And I look forward to supporting the development of white papers and expanding our outreach efforts.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And let's see.

Finally, Omari, you look familiar.

Just kidding.

You are the other council appointee And can you please introduce yourself?

Hi, folks.

I'm Mark Stringer.

As you mentioned, I might be a familiar face to some of you.

I got exposed actually to CTAB primarily as an employee of the Seattle IT Department.

So it's kind of nice to be on the other side of it now that I've left the city for employment and certainly wanted to continue participating in kind of the civic technology space and contributing my skills to you know, Seattle at large.

And so I'm very excited for this opportunity and this appointment.

And, you know, continuing bringing some of the experience I'm learning from the private sector into, you know, advising, you know, the public sector, Seattle IT Council, and the mayor on issues, specifically relating to privacy and surveillance.

And then we have some SIRs up for review, this committee meeting.

It's kind of funny, I might sit down and listen to it as a member of the public instead of being on the other side presenting the service.

But I just want to give a shout out to my Seattle IT colleagues and appreciate the great work that you guys do.

And looking forward to continuing to work with you.

Thank you, Omari.

I was being sarcastic.

Of course, you have staffed the the review process of the surveillance impact reports for years, and I'm sure that we all miss you.

I know I certainly do.

And that will be the second part of our committee meeting today.

So thank you very much for your willingness to continue serving the city of Seattle.

Do my colleagues have any questions or comments of our appointments?

Okay.

Thank you again, everyone.

This is, oh, excuse me.

I just want to echo your thanks to the appointees.

Really appreciate everybody's willingness to serve.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Yeah, you are volunteers and you give of your time and expertise.

And so thank you very much.

All right.

We also have three appointments.

Let's just, they are not here today.

So just a reminder that those names are Femi, Adebayo, Dr. Tyrone Grandison, excuse me, and Camille Malonzo.

And we will now proceed to moving these appointments.

I move that the committee recommends confirmation of appointments 02470, 02471, 02472, 02473, 02474, 02475, 02476, 02477 and 02478. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you very much.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend confirmation of the appointments and will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendations to confirm the appointments.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council Member Herbold.

Yes.

Chair Nelson.

Aye.

Three in favor, zero opposed.

All right, the motion carries, and the committee recommendation that the appointments be confirmed will be forwarded to the city council for final consideration on February 28th.

You are not required to attend the meeting, but if you do, I will recognize you, and thank you again.

Congratulations.

All right, thank you, and thank you, John, for being here.

Okay, we will now move to consider the six surveillance impact reports or SIRs.

I just want to make sure that all of our presenters are present.

Okay, I see Brian there as well.

Okay, so for some background, per the 2017 surveillance ordinance, city departments are required to obtain advanced council approval for the acquisition of technology that may have surveillance capacity.

such as binoculars that City Light uses to read meters in locations that could put a worker at risk.

And departments must request retroactive approval if those technologies had already been in use before the law took effect, which is what we're talking about today.

Specifically, these six bills would approve the Seattle Police Department's continued use of those technologies and accept the surveillance impact report, SIRs, and an executive overview for each technology.

At our meeting on February 8th, we had a joint presentation from Seattle Information Technology and SPD that went over the process for reviewing surveillance technologies, including those already in use when the surveillance ordinance was passed in 2017, a description of the technologies, in other words, how they work, the related laws and policies that authorize SPD's use of them, and existing laws and policies that limit SPD's use of them.

And central staff, Lisa Kay is here with us today, had presented a memorandum on each of the six SIRs.

They are still attached to the agenda.

Each memo describes the respective technology or tool at issue, as well as related laws and policies examines the degree to which each respective addresses input from the surveillance advisory working group provides relevant feedback from the city's chief technology officer to the work groups recommendation and proposes policy considerations.

that could inform amendments to the legislation.

All right, and I understand that you had offered, Lisa, briefings to all council, to all committee members before that meeting in case they had any other questions.

And I believe that you will also offer that as well going into the full council vote if people who aren't members of this committee have questions.

Certainly.

Okay, thank you very much.

And so today we will discuss and possibly vote on 15 amendments proposed by council members as well as possibly vote the bills out of committee.

And I mentioned this when we were going through the group for a technologies last May, but I just want to remind folks that I.

I bring a perspective to this process, which is an acknowledgment that as a council member in fulfillment of my duty to protect the health and safety of my constituents and ensure the provision of essential city services, I need to balance the civil liberties of individuals and groups of individuals with the protection and health and safety of all my constituents.

And I also must do so within the realities of today, which which include rising rates of gun violence and other crime, fatal fentanyl overdoses, as well as SPD's severe staffing shortage.

And on top of all that, the quick pace of technological change and innovation.

So with that as a table setting, here's how this will work.

As we go through the SIRs, I will first move the bill, then turn it over to Lisa Kay from central staff.

And I do make that distinction because we've got another person with a similar sounding first name here.

to introduce the amendment before the sponsor speaks to it.

And then Brian Maxey from SPD and Sarah Carrier and Eleanor with Seattle IT are also here to answer any questions as needed.

So let's get started, shall we?

Will the clerk please read agenda item 10 into the record?

Agenda item number 10, Council Bill 120499, an ordinance relating to surveillance technology implementation, authorizing approval of uses and accepting the 2022 surveillance impact report and 2022 executive overview for the Seattle Police Department's use of camera systems, images, or non-auditory video recordings.

I move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120499. Is there a second?

Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

There are 2 amendments to this bill.

Lisa, could you please present the 1st amendment?

Thank you madam chair.

Yes, if you'll bear with me, I will share my screen here so that.

You will see the amendments as I speak to them is that that looks like that's working for you then.

Yes, oh, good.

Okay.

So, I would think I am Lisa K council staff, as you mentioned, I would mention as I begin to walk through these amendments that.

For each of these 6 bills, you'll see that amendments 1 and 2 are identical.

Both of these are sponsored by council member herbal.

So I will explain them.

At 1 to 1 time, basically, and then turn them over 1 at a time to council member herbal to speak to.

As we go through amendments or the subsequent bills, I may not be repeating myself for these two.

So we'll start with Amendment 1 to Council Bill 120-499.

This would ask the Police Department to work with the Office of Inspector General to develop equity metrics for the Chief Technology Officer's annual equity assessments of these camera systems.

It also asked the police department and OIG to work together to develop an audit log that considers these metrics in order to support OIG's identification of potential disproportionate impacts from the technology as part of its annual usage review of the camera systems.

With that, I will turn it over to Sponsor Councilmember Herbold.

Council Member Herbold, you are recognized to move the First Amendment.

Thank you so much.

I move Amendment 1 to, am I moving it just to the single bill?

We're going through each one individually?

That's what I, that has to be the process.

Yes.

Thank you.

I move Amendment 1 to Council Bill 120499. Second.

Thank you so much.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 1 as presented on the agenda.

Council Member Herbold is sponsored.

You're recognized to address it.

Thank you so much.

So for each of the surveillance technologies before the committee today, I have proposed an equity metrics amendment as has been my practice for previous surveillance technologies as recognized by SPD in our last committee meeting.

Appreciate that the backlog surveillance technologies have been, the SIRs have been approved with inclusion of these equity metrics in the past.

This time to the equity metrics amendment, I have included an audit log element.

These amendments request SPD to collaborate with the Office of the Inspector General to both, one, name the metrics that will be used in the required annual equity assessments concerning the use of these technologies, and they also request SPD to work with OIG to develop the audit log with consideration of those equity metrics to support the OIG's annual surveillance technology usage review.

The amendment itself does not presuppose the data to be captured in the audit log.

So I just hope no one is concerned about the content of the audit log because I'm really confident that SPD and OIG will not co-create an audit log that SPD themselves don't support.

They're equal partners in creating the audit log and It's not as if it's coming back to us for our approval or disapproval.

It's just homework that the council is asking them to collaborate to do together.

The surveillance ordinance exists to protect civil liberties and to find and prevent disproportionate uses of surveillance technology while also supporting the basic underpinnings of the surveillance technologies use in fulfilling the police department's efforts in public safety, and this amendment is a critical accountability element for our surveillance technology log.

Further concerns about collecting data that will be subject to public disclosure, compromising investigations, or SPD's ability to use these technologies doesn't Again, I don't believe that the Office of the Inspector General will co-create with SPD an audit log that would have those vulnerabilities.

And our public disclosure laws and SPD's policies allow the department to redact sensitive information, particularly information which is essential to effective law enforcement or the protection of people's rights to privacy.

And so that this means that in completing a public disclosure request SPD could redact information that would compromise and active open investigation.

So again, as we expect the OIG and SPD to collaborate to name the kinds of metrics that they need to track for an equity audit, we expect them to collect and retain only the information relevant to the goals of determining proportionate and appropriate use of the technologies.

So in essence, if there is a problem with disproportionate use of technologies, we can't correct it if we don't find it.

And so this data collection and the audit log is how we discover, prevent, and correct an issue with a deployment of this technology if one, in fact, does exist.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

I support the request to develop the equity metrics because that's required of all departments by the surveillance ordinance anyway, and we included this amendment in.

in the SARs for group 4A last May.

I did, as I was going through these, have questions that I mentioned to you yesterday about the disclosable nature of this information and how an audit log could or could not interfere with investigations or, worse, help people Figure out how to how to commit crimes with impunity if they have a better understanding of this technology, et cetera, how it's deployed, et cetera, et cetera.

And I, I ended up last night having a conversation with Inspector General Lisa judge as well as.

Brian Maxey, who is here with us today.

And so I understand that they are both in support or have no concerns about this, but I would like you, Brian, to expand on your comments.

So go ahead, please.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Yeah, no, SPD has no objection to these amendments.

These are consistent with what we've done in prior SIRs, and we are fully optimistic of our ability to work with the Inspector General to develop the equity metrics and the logging for auditing purposes, so we have no objection and fully support this.

Excellent.

Okay.

Pardon me?

No, there's.

So colleagues, do you have, does anyone else have?

Oh, was that, you said you see.

Hey, Eric, you're on mute.

I think it was a large one, I think.

Eric, Eric Depuisoy.

Is there a malfunction, Steven?

No, I. Okay.

I don't know who was last speaking, Eric or Council Member Strauss?

Okay, seeing no questions, I believe we are prepared to proceed.

If my questions have no, if my colleagues have no further comments, will the clerk please call the roll on adoption of Amendment 1?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three votes in favor, zero opposed.

Okay, the motion carries.

Amendment one is adopted and the amended bill is before the council.

Lisa, would you please walk through amendment two?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Amendment two is also sponsored by Council Member Herbold.

This amendment would ask the police department to develop a policy no later than the end of this year, specific to a youth's consent for use of these camera systems.

Reflecting these policies would reflect the provisions of the city's ordinance 126132, which requires SPD officers to make legal counsel available for any youth that would be questioned or searched in certain situations.

We'll turn it over to Council Member Herbold.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

As mentioned, Amendment 2 is an amendment that we will see for all of these individual SIRs for these different technologies.

Again, the concept was discussed in committee last time we met.

It simply is designed to ensure that the technologies that require the use of a warrant or consent of an individual is implemented in a way that is consistent with Council Bill 119840, the My Chance Dunlap-Gittins Youth Rights Ordinance, and just make sure that the department has policies in place to ensure that legal counsel for any youth that would be questioned or searched in the use of these particular technologies have the opportunity to have legal counsel made available to them.

Thank you.

Would you please move the amendment?

Thank you.

I move Amendment 2 to Council Bill 12-0499.

Second.

Much appreciated.

All right, so I had a question about the amendment.

As the text notes, SPD already is subject to city and state law that requires them to provide counsel to youth who receive a Miranda warning or who are asked to give consent to a search.

And as we heard during discussion on February 8th, they already have the policy.

They already have policy to that effect.

Can you explain how this expands or changes what is already in effect?

Sure.

So the policies as I understand them that are compliant with the legislation that the council passed and subsequent to the council passing this legislation, state law was also changed to reflect similar intent.

But as I understand it, those policies are focused on person-to-person searches and consent.

And so this is really about the use of the technology and making sure that the policies that SPD has created also incorporates the use of the technologies.

Okay, thank you for that.

Are there any other questions or comments from my colleagues or from the presenters?

Okay, seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 2.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council Member Herbold.

Yes.

Chair Nelson.

Aye.

Three in favor, zero opposed.

All right, the motion carries and amendment two is adopted.

The amended bill is now before council.

And if there are no further comments, I'm not seeing any.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation that the bill pass as amended.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council Member Herbold.

Yes.

Chair Nelson.

Aye.

Three in favor.

Thank you for that.

The motion carries and the committee recommendation that the bill pass will be forwarded to the City Council for consideration on February 28th.

And because these two amendments are attached to each technology, I will not have comments on them at each time, except for there are a couple of points when the Youth Council does I have questions about the specific technology, but in general, just letting folks know that my questions were addressed in the in the in Amendment one, and I don't need to speak to those further going forward.

All right, well, the clerk, please call item 11 into the agent into the record.

Agenda item number 11 Council bill 120500 an ordinance relating to surveillance technology implementation authorizing approval of uses and accepting the 2022 surveillance impact report and 2022 executive overview for the Seattle Police Department's use of crash data retrieval tools.

Thank you, I move the committee recommends passage of Council bill 120500 is there a second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded and recommended to recommend passage of the bill.

As I said, there are two amendments.

Lisa, how would you like to proceed going forward?

I will ask you each time if you would like to present.

Looking for your...

If it works with you, Council Member, you could just skip me completely and just ask Council Member Herbold if she wishes to move each amendment.

Okay.

And add any comments.

Thank you very much.

All right.

Would you, do you care to move the amendment?

Thank you.

I will indeed move the amendment.

I move amendment one to, let's see, we're on council bill 120500. Yes.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

Oops, sorry about that.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 1 as presented on the agenda.

And do you have specific comments on this?

Okay, thank you very much.

Any other comments or questions?

Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 1.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Councilmember Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

Thank you very much.

The motion carries.

Amendment one is adopted and the amended bill is before council.

Would you please move amendment two?

I move amendment two to council bill 120500. Second.

All right, it's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 2 as presented on the agenda.

I did have a question about this.

This is regarding crash data retrieval tools.

Because they pull data directly from the systems on the vehicle, can you please explain, Brian, how this policy will play out in real life if youth are involved?

Thank you, Councilmember.

So my understanding is this is really applying the ordinance to youth's consent in this particular circumstance.

My guess would that be that that would be when a juvenile was driving a vehicle and we wanted to get the crash data out of that vehicle.

I think our current policy would not allow us to get a get consent from the juvenile given the capacity issue and that we would go to a parent, guardian or council.

This simply states that if, as I read it, that if we were to ask a juvenile for consent to pull the crash data information, they would need to have counsel available to assist them with that decision.

So I don't think this would actually change our current practice in any way, but it is a great backstop to ensure that juveniles are not giving consent without legal counsel.

That answers my question, thank you very much.

Will the clerk please call the roll on adoption of amendment two?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

The motion carries, amendment two is adopted and the amended bill is before the council.

Will the clerk please call the roll on committee recommendation that the bill pass as amended?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

The motion carries and committee recommendation that the bill pass again will be forwarded to full council for consideration on February 28th.

Let's move on to agenda item 12, please.

Agenda item number 12 Council Bill 120501 an ordinance relating to surveillance technology implementation authorizing approval of uses and accepting the 2022 surveillance impact report and 2022 executive overview for the Seattle Police Department's use of computer cell phone and mobile device extraction tools.

Thank you, I move that committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120501. Is there a second?

Thank you very much.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

Again, there are two amendments to this bill.

And would you please move Amendment 1.

Thank you.

I move Amendment 1 to Council Bill 12-0501.

Second.

It's been moved and seconded.

And to move amendment, to adopt amendment one is presented on the agenda.

And if there are no comments, I will proceed to a vote.

Seeing none, go ahead, please, with the roll call.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council Member Herbold.

Yes.

Chair Nelson.

Aye.

Three in favor.

Thank you.

The motion carries.

Amendment one is adopted.

You are free to move Amendment 2.

Thank you.

I move Amendment 2 to Council Bill 120501. Second.

Okay.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 2?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

Amendment 2 is adopted.

And last call, any last questions on this bill before we proceed to a vote?

Seeing none, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation that the bill pass as amended?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor?

The motion carries, and the committee recommendation that the bill pass will be forwarded to the City Council for final consideration.

Item 14, please, or 13, please.

Agenda item number 13 Council bill 120502 an ordinance relating to surveillance technology implementation authorizing approval of uses and accepting the 2022 surveillance impact report and 2022 executive overview for the Seattle Police Department's use of geo time.

I move that the committee recommend passage of Council bill 120502 is there a second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

Would you please move Amendment 1?

I move Amendment 1 to Council Bill 120502. Second.

Okay.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 1. Would the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor?

The motion carries and Amendment 1 is adopted.

You are free to move Amendment 2.

Thank you.

I'd like to move Amendment 2 to Council Bill 120502. Second.

All right, it's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 2 as presented on the agenda.

I do have a question about this one because it's a different technology.

Again, GeoTime is a tool that analyzes data that SPD has already gathered.

Can you please, if there are no youth juveniles present at the moment, can you please just walk us through, Brian, again, how this will be applied?

I'm sorry, Council Member, was that to me?

Yes, it is.

Again, this is...

My apologies.

Go ahead.

So I actually do not know how GeoTime would be used to question or search juvenile.

It is simply a back-end compilation of already existing data.

That being said, there's no reason we could not draft a policy consistent with the limitations in the ordinance.

I am unsure how it would actually apply, but I do not see that this would impair our efforts in any way.

Go ahead, Council Member Herbold.

I'll just give it a shot here.

And Lisa, if there's filling in here, I would certainly appreciate it.

But I think there's an outstanding question about whether or not data can be manually input into geotime and whether or not data that is manually input into geotime can actually be obtained without a warrant and based on two-party consent alone.

And so this is, again, as COO Maxey described, a backstop to address the instance in which that data that is put into GeoTime in those cases where it is necessary to use a warrant or two-party consent to obtain that information, it's for those particular instances.

Lisa, do you have anything to add?

Council Member Herbold nailed it.

Wow, I thought that was like clear as mud, so thank you.

Okay, so I'm assuming that everyone is on board with this, and I will just ask that if there are difficulties after the committee with the application of this, please let us know, but I am planning on supporting this today.

Any other comments?

Okay, will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of amendment two?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

The motion carries, amendment two is adopted and the amended bill is now before council.

Would you please call the roll on the committee recommendation that the bill pass as amended?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Councilmember Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

The motion carries.

We will consider this on February 28th.

Thank you very much.

Let's proceed now to agenda item 14.

Agenda item number 14, Council Bill 120503. and ordinance relating to surveillance technology implementation, authorizing approval of uses, and accepting the 2022 surveillance impact report and 2022 executive overview for the Seattle Police Department's use of remotely operated vehicles.

All right, I move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120503. Is there a second?

Thank you very much.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

And there are five amendments to this.

And Lisa, please present the first amendment.

Well, I will, I'll hold on that.

We can skip the first and second presentations and just go straight into the votes on those.

And then we will have you present on the third.

All right.

Council Member Herbold, you're free to move.

Thank you.

I move amendment one to council bill 120503. Second.

All right, it's been moved and seconded to adopt Amendment 1. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

Thank you.

Motion carries.

Amendment 1 is adopted.

Let's move on to 2.

I move Amendment 2 to Council Bill 120503. Second.

Okay, it's been moved and seconded.

Seeing no questions, would the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

Okay.

Now, we're about to move.

I do have, so, I'm not going to ask that question.

All right, let's call the roll on the bill.

I think this one has three.

Oh, excuse me.

I'm sorry about that.

Lisa, could you please introduce Amendment 3 and then we will move it formally.

Yes, Council Member.

Amendment 3 is sponsored by Council Member Herbold.

It will ask the Police Department to develop a policy by the end of this year.

requiring that data collected by a remotely operated vehicle that's not needed for an investigation be deleted immediately following the 90 day retention period, which is set by the state records retention schedule.

Thank you.

Go ahead.

Thank you so much.

So an earlier draft of the amendment requested a policy requiring the immediate deletion of data.

But we found out after consulting with the clerk's office that there's a mandatory 90 day retention period.

So this amendment requests the policy requiring the deletion of any data collected by our bees after that mandatory retention period.

of course, pursuant to all state laws and city laws and as approved by the City Law Department.

The executive overview for this, this, sir, confirms that the images and data are not currently stored or retained.

And this just makes sure that if those policies were to change, that SPD maintains these current procedures.

Got it.

So how is how is information deemed not to be necessary or of value for an investigation?

Or I think that's a question that we will not be in the driver's seat, thankfully, of determining, but SPD will be.

That is one of the questions that I have is if this is deleted after 90 days, at what point is there a an issue that that information could be needed at a later point in the investigation or in trials going forward, either by the prosecution or the defendant.

I am asking you, Brian, if there are any questions or concerns about about this policy.

So this thank you, Councilman, this is a it's a policy choice, I Typically, we retain information for longer than a 90 day period in case there was something like an OPA complaint or a lawsuit that was filed.

But in terms of determining what is necessary for an investigation, that's in part and parcel of what we do here.

I would assume that would include an administrative investigation if this were part of a current OPA investigation or investigation into any use of force.

Not that we anticipate that with the remotely operated vehicles, but certainly their systems could have recorded something that we need to further that investigation.

But all of that would fall into the investigation I guess my only question would be with subsequent lawsuits that fell outside of the 90-day retention period for something that we deemed not necessary for an investigation and purged, what the city response would be to the inability to provide that.

But again, operationally, I do not see this as a burden in any way.

Thank you.

Are there any additional comments or concerns.

Okay.

I am going to decline my support on this one because of the potential that that information is needed in the future for future lawsuits.

And thank you for understanding that position.

Okay.

Will the clerk please call the roll on the adoption of Amendment 3?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Nay.

Two in favor, one opposed.

The motion carries and amendment three is adopted.

And Lisa, could you please present amendment four?

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Amendment four is sponsored by Council Member Herbold.

This would ask the police department to develop a policy by the end of the year prohibiting the use of any cell phones to record the live stream on the projection display of a remotely operated vehicle.

Okay.

Council Member Herbold.

Thank you.

I move amendment four.

Yes.

Second.

Thank you.

And just if I could just have a couple words.

Sure, sure.

So as Lisa Kay explained, the amendment would require SPD to develop policies prohibiting the use of cell phones to record the live stream on the remotely operated vehicle display.

As explained earlier for the previous amendment, the ROVs used by SWAT and the arson bomb units do not store or retain images and data.

And so this amendment closes a potential roundabout way to record the images captured by the RVs and was recommended by the technology working group.

All right.

Well, this seems like a no-brainer to me.

So would you please call the roll?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor?

Thank you very much.

The motion carries.

Amendment 4 is adopted.

Let's move on to Amendment 5.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

This is the last of the five amendments for this bill.

This is sponsored by Councilmember Herbold.

It asks the Police Department to develop a policy by the end of this year prohibiting the use of remotely operated vehicles that are described in this SIR to deploy weapons.

you're free to move the bill.

Thank you.

I move Amendment 5 to Council Bill 120503. Second.

I will address the amendment further.

Thank you, Lisa Kaye, for your assistance today as well as in developing these amendments.

As Lisa described, it prohibits the use of these remotely operated vehicles from deploying weapons.

As the technologies are being presented today, the design is specifically for developing only situational awareness and completing some simple manual tasks.

the, it's important that as we approve these surveillance technologies, we're doing what we can to ensure that they remain in use for the purpose that we are authorizing their use.

And so any future technologies acquired by SPD to surveil and remotely deploy weapons with this limitation that we're putting on it right now would require the technology to come back for a review.

Okay, the SIR and this entire process is about surveillance, but this amendment would go beyond that use that is reviewed by the public and both departments.

So how does a different use, in this case, tactical decisions in emergency situations, how is that, How would that be incorporated into this process?

I mean, is Lisa, could you speak to.

Could you speak to that, please?

Yes, to the extent that the department would have any...

I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

Go on.

It's all right.

Are you sure?

Okay.

To the extent that the department would have any vehicles, remotely operated vehicles that deploy weapons, those that are not these models that are approved in this bill, that would be a different question, a different policy issue.

This is basically saying this In essence, you're basically repeating what the SIR already says.

Since the SIR does not speak to weapons deployment as a use of this technology, it's already prohibited by the SIR.

So this is basically reinforcing that and saying you need a policy that says this surveillance technology cannot be used to deploy weapons.

If there is a kind of a technology, a remotely operated robot or something like that, that can deploy weapons, that's a whole different question.

And you couldn't amend this legislation to prevent that deployment.

Got it.

And I remember and Captain Britt did say last time, this is already not a practice, but I'm sorry that Council Member Herbold earlier, you began speaking in And Mr. Maxey, do you have any questions or comments about this?

Just a single comment.

Thank you, Council Member.

The Seattle Police Department has no intent to weaponize any of its remotely operated vehicles.

I just want to make that clear.

Thank you.

Okay.

Seeing no other comments or questions, would you please call the roll on Amendment 5?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor?

The motion carries, amendment five is adopted.

And we're now going to proceed to the vote on the whole bill unless there are further comments.

All right, will the clerk please call the roll on the committee recommendation that the bill pass as amended?

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

Okay, the committee recommendation that the bill pass will be forwarded to city council for final consideration.

And we are now on agenda item 15.

Agenda item number 15, council bill 120504, an ordinance relating to surveillance technology implementation, authorizing approval of uses and accepting the 2022 surveillance impact report and 2022 executive overview for the Seattle Police Department's use of tracking devices.

I move that the committee recommend passage of Council Bill 120504. Second.

Thank you.

It's been moved and seconded to recommend passage of the bill.

There are the two amendments before us.

Would you please move Amendment 1?

I move Amendment 1 to Council Bill 120504. Second.

Okay, let's proceed to a vote on Amendment 1.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Chair Nelson?

Aye.

Three in favor.

Thank you.

Amendment one is adopted.

Let's go to number two.

I move amendment two to council bill 120504.

Second.

All right.

It's been moved and seconded to adopt amendment two.

Let's call the roll.

Council Member Strauss?

Yes.

Yes.

Council Member Herbold?

Yes.

Council Member, Chair Nelson.

Aye, we're all.

Three in favor.

Thank you very much.

The motion carries.

Amendment two is adopted and the bill is before us now.

Will the clerk please call the roll if there are no further questions.

Council Member Strauss.

Yes.

Council Member Herbold.

Yes.

Chair Nelson.

Aye.

Three in favor.

Okay, the motion carries in the recommendation that the bill pass will be forward to to full Council on the 28th.

So.

Before we adjourn, I have some thank yous, but I need to also remind folks that with retroactive technologies, even if these do not pass on the 28th, the department can continue to use these and these technologies and the requests are requests and not directives.

So I just want to thank, this was a lot of work.

I mean, this went much more quickly than I anticipated today.

So I appreciate everybody's But before we got to today, there was a tremendous amount of staff work on the part of the Seattle Police Department and Seattle IT.

So thank you very much for leading the public outreach process, as well as staffing the work group meetings and answering questions.

And so I just want to say that that is, I do recognize that that is a lot of effort.

So thank you very much.

And Lisa, thank you so much for all the work that you did because you were there throughout the whole process as well.

And you did a lot of educating of me and my staff throughout this whole process.

And then finally, I do have to thank our clerk, Stephen, because this is an incredibly painstaking process to put items on the agenda.

There is a lot of mistakes that can be made along the way in the back end to make sure that these pieces of legislation and the amendments are fully accessible and not just appear on the agenda, but that they are accessible pretty much forever.

So thank you everyone for the teamwork.

And if there, I will open it up for, um, for additional business.

Okay.

All right, seeing none, this concludes the February 22nd meeting of the Economic Development Technology and City Light Committee.

Our next meeting is scheduled for Wednesday, March 8th, which is International Women's Day.

March 8th, 2023 at 9.30 a.m.

It is now 10.39.

This meeting is adjourned.