Speaker 1: Thank you. The bill past chair will sign it. Please read the report of the Gender Equity Safe Communities and New Americans Committee and you can read the short title.
Speaker 5: The report The Gender Equity Safe Communities and Americans Committee Jeanette and one Constable 118 930 Wellington City Sales Acquisition and Use of Surveillance Technologies Committee recommends the bill passes amended.
Speaker 1: Custom and Gonzales.
Speaker 4: Thank you. We have a couple of amendments. Amendment one, an amendment to a. So I'll go through those first and then talk about the substance of the bill once we have an amended version before us for discussion. So I will go ahead and start off with moving for the adoption of Amendment One aid to substitute Council Bill 118930.
Speaker 6: Second.
Speaker 1: Clinton moved in. Second, seconded to amend the base legislation with amended one eight. Comments on that one. Casper Gonzalez.
Speaker 4: Yes. If approved, this amendment would make the following changes to the base ordinance that was passed out of committee. It would require that the annual equity impact assessment in any annual city auditor or I.G. Review will be posted to the city's website. There was also a suite of technical cleanups, including deleting an obsolete reference to maintaining a list of council exemptions and the and other legal and grammatical wordsmithing at its very good.
Speaker 1: Any further questions just on Amendment one? All those in favor of a minute. One please vote i. I oppose. The ayes have it and one is passed.
Speaker 4: Okay. I now move for the adoption of Amendment two aid to Council Bill 118930.
Speaker 1: Second, it's been moved in second to pass Amendment two a comments on that one. Councilman Gonzalez.
Speaker 4: Yes. If approve this amendment, which is co-sponsored by myself and Councilmember Burgess, would make the following changes to the subject to the base ordinance passed out of committee. It makes amendments in two areas one with regard to the ITO quarterly list. And second, with retrospective approval of surveillance technologies on the CTO quarterly list, it would require that a CTO quarterly list of technologies be provided a council and the amendments clarify that the following must be included in that quarterly list. First, that all surveillance technology determinations made by an executive process, including both those determined to be surveillance technology and those determined not to be, would need to be included in this list. And the second would be a citation to all surveillance technology determinations for the previous 12 months. And then lastly, with regard to the CTO quarterly list of the Council changes of the designation of technology on the list, meaning if we move it from one category to another, that action needs to be filed with the clerk and the quarterly list needs to be updated accordingly with regard to retrospective approval of technologies. These amendments reflect the order in which our requests for existing technologies will be brought to the Council and requires that they be identified by the executive with the ability of council to revise that order. And instead of and this is in place of of the process which was originally in the base ordinance, which would require review of those technologies in order from highest privacy impact to least this amendment also includes modifies the deadline for the first surveillance impact report submittals to be by the end of the first quarter in 2018, rather than 30 days after that middle of the executive's list of existing technologies. And in addition to the proposed amendments listed into a we would like to make a technical amendment to Section two to read under the section letters accordingly.
Speaker 1: Thank you very much, says Amendment two. A Councilman Gonzalez described any questions on Amendment two. A All those in favor of a minute to a vote. I. I oppose. The ayes have it. So now we have an amended piece of the base legislation been amended. And Councilman Gonzalez, you can speak to the amended legislation.
Speaker 4: Yes. So I will move for the adoption of Council Bill 118930 as amended.
Speaker 1: Second, further comments from his office.
Speaker 4: I want to say a lot of words. Okay, here we go. This legislation repeals and replaces Chapter 1418 of the Seattle Municipal Code with the new Chapter 1418. The intent of the legislation is to govern. The city's acquisition and use of surveillance technology require a publicly transparent and accountable process for procurement and operation of surveillance technology, and establish protocols for city departments to mitigate civil liberties concerns and incorporate racial equity principles into such protocols. Key components of the legislation include but are not limited to the following requiring city departments intending to acquire surveillance technology to obtain council ordinance approval of the acquisition and an accompanying surveillance impact report requiring city departments to complete one or more community meetings related to the technology prior to requesting Council approval. Requiring departments to submit surveillance impact reports for each technology. Requesting Council approval requiring an annual equity impact assessment. Requesting annual reviews by the City Auditor and Future Inspector General for public safety. It creates a private right of action and it. That existing surveillance technologies must receive council approval over time, and it directs the creation of a work group to make recommendations on how to utilize community expertize for the purposes of advising this Council on future acquisitions of surveillance technology. So that's the basic aspects of the substance of the bill. And if there are no questions on that, then I would provide other council members an opportunity to chime in and then I would like to make closing remarks.
Speaker 1: Very good. Any further comments on this ordinance dealing with surveillance technology?
Speaker 6: Councilmember Burgess. Thank you. President Harrell. Thank you, Councilmember Gonzales, for your leadership over the last almost a year of carefully reviewing this legislation and making sure that it reflects not only our values but our intent to protect privacy, but also to allow the city to use appropriate technologies to deliver city services and maintain peace and safety in our neighborhoods. I think we've accomplished that purpose here. And I know that you've also spoken for work that you're going to take up next year. Good luck at that.
Speaker 3: And.
Speaker 4: We'll bring you back.
Speaker 6: Here. Easier said than done. On data. And how do we manage and regulate the use of data, which I think would be a good exercise to go through as well. So thank you.
Speaker 1: Any further comments, concerns one.
Speaker 0: Thank you, President Howell. I will be voting in favor of this ordinance because it is a step in the right direction. But I think we have to be clear, as several members of the community and organizations have spoken in public testimony today, that the ordinance, as will be voted on today, will not actually protect the privacy of Seattle from warrantless surveillance. The and I strongly agree with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the American Civil Liberties Union, the City of Seattle, Human Rights Commission, and others who spoke in public comment and who have written in the past that surveillance data should be included in a strong ordinance. And I know the Council has talked about it, but I think the point that was made is really important, that we need it, need it in an expedited fashion. What I find most concerning is that even though the logic of the committee discussions was towards including surveillance data, it seemed that subsequent to strong objections by the Seattle Police Department, surveillance data was removed from the bill. And that I think that needs to be addressed very carefully. Just to give an example of why this is important. Seattle claims to be a sanctuary city, so the Seattle Police Department is not allowed to share immigration status with ICE. However, if we don't have a strong position, you know, a law on surveillance data, then there's nothing to stop Seattle police from sharing personal data, hypothetically, like images of tattoos, of, you know, of individuals and something that's gathered by a convenience store security camera. There's nothing to stop the SBT from sharing such images from any number of law enforcement agencies around the country that are willing to share that information with ICE. And I think with the chilling messages that have been sent by the Trump administration, we should be doubly anxious to pass this person an ordinance that covers surveillance data. So this is an example of a consequence of omission from this bill. So I will be supporting this bill, but I really strongly support community members and organizations who have said that we need to move with all haste to close the loopholes.
Speaker 1: Thank you. Comes from a swamp. Any further comments? I'd like to just thank publicly Councilman Gonzales again and her committee for this leadership. I think we're at a time where clearly technology has gotten in front of some of our policies. We have been and I've been proposing, as many have done, proposing technological solutions to areas of transportation and public safety, environmental sustainability and education. And last week, I visited with a delegation from Kobe, Japan, a microsoft cybersecurity campus, to look at all of what's sort of going on in the world of hacking. I think Shankar talked a little bit about the the hackers conference in I and I study that and just to know how sort of scary it is some of this is state sponsored, by the way, in different countries. And and so as as employees of the city of Seattle, I think our responsibilities are are heightened in terms of both not only the information we use, but the information we furnish. And so I heard loudly and clearly, councilmember. Czar is commitment to make sure that we continue this great policy works very complex because again we are we are the technology and the software and hardware are rapidly changing and becoming more sophisticated. So I welcome that work and we certainly work with her in that regard. Any further comments on the base legislation? Want to do some wrap up comments from booksellers?
Speaker 4: I will. I just I want to just first, I'm going to start off by thanking my committee colleagues, council member Bagshaw and Burgess for sticking sticking it out with me in this very complex subject, too. And I also want to thank all of the departments who provided us feedback, not just SBT, but we heard back from our Human Services Department, from our Parks Department, from every single department about how this ordinance might impact their business operations. I want to thank them all for being responsive and getting us the information that we needed. Our Seattle City office, the mayor's office, especially David Mendoza, our city budget office, Amy CI, and Brianna Thomas, of course. Last but not least, Amy Scott and Brianna Thomas, who put a lot of time into this. And so collectively, we have spent hundreds of hours over the past eight months to get us this far. And I just want to be really clear that like Councilmember Swan and others up here in this dais, I, I also agree with the ACLU of Washington and with CARE and with the Seattle Human Rights Commission and with the many other organizations who have articulated to us a need to tackle the questions of surveillance data that are generated by the city, by the city, or by people outside of the city that have a real impact in how our communities trust us and be, and how our communities are actually impacted by policing or by other types of consequences as a result of collection of that data. And I think we all share that deep concern. And my hope is that we acknowledge that this is a Phase one approach and that this is a good first step in the right direction. And and that we will venture down the path of having a phase two. And that in that phase two, we will we will eventually be able to struggle with these issues and hopefully become the first municipality in the country to actually tackle the complex issues related to surveillance data that are disconnected from surveillance technology that we acquire and that or that we ask others to operate on our on our behalf. But the reality is, is that no other city has tackled this yet. And just because it's complex doesn't mean that we shouldn't. In fact, those are the issues that we should be tackling. And I think I hope the advocates here from the dais appear that we're all committed to heading down that path and to really making sure that we stand up a process where we can take a look at those very serious issues that are not included in this bill. But that, my hope is, will be included in a future bill as soon as as soon as we can make that happen. So I want to thank you all for staying committed to having these tough conversations and for doing so in an incredibly respectful, thoughtful way. And I know that this is just our first adventure together in this area, and I look forward to working on the bigger issues as well.
Speaker 1: Very good. Okay. Please call the roll on the passage of the amended Bill Johnson Suarez.
Speaker 2: Sergeant Bagshaw, Burgess, Gonzales, I Herbold II President Harrell, i eight and favorite unopposed.
Speaker 1: Bill Pass and Chair of Senate. Please read the report of the Planning Land Use and Zoning Committee gene. And number two, you can read the short title.
AN ORDINANCE relating to The City of Seattle’s acquisition and use of surveillance technologies; repealing Chapter 14.18 of the Seattle Municipal Code (SMC), consisting of Sections 14.18.10, 14.18.20, 14.18.30, and 14.18.40 SMC; and adding a new Chapter 14.18 to the SMC, consisting of Sections 14.18.010, 14.18.020, 14.18.030, 14.18.040, 14.18.050, 14.18.060, 14.18.070, 14.18.080, and 14.18.090.