Santa Clara County may be the first in the nation to implement a transparency ordinance controlling the purchase and use of all spying equipment in the county.

Update: Still in process. Here is some  video coverage by the Electronic Frontier Foundation of the process.

The ordinance, developed by the ACLU-Northern California and Restore the Fourth, focuses on public oversight and accountability for both the purchase and use of surveillance equipment. Supervisor Joe Simitian has been the driving force in moving forward the potential adoption of the ordinance (which is also under consideration by the City of Oakland) and may have the honor of being the first municipality in the country to adopt it. One of many to come.

Below and Attached is the community letter of support. The next discussion of the ordinance will be November 23rd at the board’s finance committee and then it is expected to move on to the full Board of Supervisors in December.

Potentially a great Christmas present for the county and everyone in the Bay Area and nationwide looking for oversight of the ever-expanding roster of these devices being used to watch and track us everywhere we go.

**

Supervisor Cindy Chavez, Supervisor Dave Cortese, Supervisor Joe Simitian, Supervisor Mike Wasserman Supervisor Ken Yeager, Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors, 70 West Hedding, 10th Floor, San Jose, California 95110

Re: Support Ordinance Securing Community Participation, Transparency, Oversight and Accountability for Surveillance

We are a broad coalition of organizations from Santa Clara County. We strongly urge the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors to bring to a vote and adopt the surveillance and community safety ordinance introduced by Supervisor Simitian in the spring of this year. This ordinance mandates community participation, transparency, oversight, and accountability wherever surveillance technology is proposed or used. It protects our civil rights and privacy, limits unnecessary costs or waste of public resources, and strengthens our community.

We were heartened by the Board’s decision this past February to require a use policy be in place as a condition of the purchase of a controversial cell phone surveillance device known as a Stingray. We were further encouraged when we learned that the county would not move forward with the Stingray purchase after it was unable to come to an agreement with the device’s manufacturer about its use.

Technologies like these not only pose a threat to our civil liberties, their invasive nature risks harm to the community’s trust of law enforcement. As community advocates, surveillance can chill our First Amendment rights, and our ability to work towards progress. For example, we know police in Michigan sought “information on all the cell phones that were congregating in an area where a labor-union protest was expected.” That’s why such technology should only be adopted with community input and used with caution under the purview of an enforceable use-policy to protect our civil rights. Currently, state or federal law is not clear on when warrants are required for use of many surveillance technologies, putting our community at risk of misused surveillance programs such as the one in Michigan.

While federal grant dollars make the acquisition of many of these technologies appear free at the onset, upkeep, maintenance, data storage, and staffing costs can add up. In its 2014 report, “Making Smart Decisions About Surveillance,” the ACLU of California found that despite spending $65 million to obtain surveillance technologies, not a single California community did a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis prior to acquisition. This has consequences for both taxpayers and community rights. A city audit of Oakland revealed that $2 million was squandered on hardly-used police technology between 2006 and 2011. And the misuse of license plate readers not only led to the violation of a San Francisco resident’s civil rights, but also a multi-year costly lawsuit against the City. It is imperative that our county protects itself from unintended costs that could waste public tax dollars otherwise used for the social services we need.

Like Santa Clara County, communities across California are increasingly grappling with decisions about surveillance technologies. However, very few communities are making these decisions in a transparent manner that includes community conversation, a cost-benefit analysis, or even a vote by elected officials before moving forward. In San Jose, many of us were outraged when we learned that the police department had purchased a drone without any public debate. Our local democratic process requires more. We have a right to know what types of technologies are being used in our communities and to meaningfully weigh in on how they should be used to accomplish community goals. Without oversight, abuse and overreach happens, such as the case of NYPD positioning automatic license plate readers and other surveillance to “target mosques and their congregations with tactics normally reserved for criminal organizations.”

The ordinance introduced in Santa Clara County should formalize as policy the following key public process principles:

o Informed Public Debate at the Earliest Stage of Process: Public notice, production and distribution of a Surveillance Impact Report and other information about the proposal as well as public debate prior to seeking funding or otherwise moving forward with surveillance technology proposals or using existing technology in a manner or in a location not previously approved by civilian-elected officials.

o Determination that Benefits Outweigh Costs and Concerns: Local leaders, after facilitating a meaningful and informed public debate, expressly consider costs (fiscal and civil liberties) and determine whether surveillance technology is appropriate before moving forward.

o Thorough Surveillance Use Policy: With community member input, the transparent crafting of a legally enforceable Surveillance Use Policy with robust civil liberties, civil rights, and security safeguards approved by the Board of Supervisors.

o Ongoing Oversight & Accountability: Proper oversight of surveillance technology use and accountability through annual reporting, review and enforcement mechanisms.

The input of all community members must be considered when technologies that can invade civil liberties and erode civil rights are proposed or used. An ordinance that formalizes the above principles is sound policy and a sensible solution that will allow communities to make smart decisions about surveillance.

Sincerely,

Nicole Ozer, Technology & Civil Liberties Policy Director ACLU of Northern California, Yaman Salahi Staff Attorney, National Security and Civil Rights Program Asian Americans Advancing Justice – Asian Law Caucus, Richard Konda, Executive Director, Asian Law Alliance, Zahra Billoo, Executive Director, Council on American-Islamic Relations, San Francisco Bay Area Chapter, Annie Paradise, Center for Convivial Research and Autonomy, Monica Limas, Director, Center for Employment Training – Immigration and Citizenship Program, Steven Renderos, National Organizer, Center for Media Justice, Richard Konda, Chairperson, Coalition for Justice and Accountability, Dan Mayfield, President, Collins Foundation, Brandi Collins, Media Justice Director, Color of Change, Tom Oshidari, Co-President,JACL – Japanese American Citizens League San Jose Chapter, La Donna Yumori-Kaku, President, JACL – Japanese American Citizens League, Sequoia Chapter, Jeffrey L. Yoshioka President JACL – Japanese American Citizens League Silicon Valley Chapter 5, James Zahradka Supervising Attorney, Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, Cassie Blume, Program Coordinator, LGBTQ Youth Space, Tracy Rosenberg, Executive Director, Media Alliance, Rev. Jethroe Moore, President, NAACP San Jose/Silicon Valley, Reiko Nakayama, Chair, NOC – Nihonmachi Outreach Committee, Paul George, Executive Director, Peninsula Peace and Justice Center, Zaki Manian, Restore the 4th, Poncho Guevara, Executive Director Sacred Heart Community Service, Charlotte Casey, Board Member, San Jose Peace and Justice Center, Raj Jayadev, Founder, Silicon Valley De-Bug, Maricela Gutiérrez, Executive Director Services, Immigrant Rights & Education Network (SIREN), Bassam Kassab, Co-chair, SWANABAQ – Southwest Asian and North African Bay Area Queers , Ana Montes, Organizing Director, TURN – The Utility Ratepayer Network, Lois Fiedler Women’s International League for Peace & Freedom San Jose Branch, Dereck Mehrens, Executive Director, Working Partnerships USA

Community Letter Urging Support for Surveillance Ordinance_Chavez-Sept 2…-1