pages: CityCouncil/2021-12-21.pdf, 13
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2021-12-21 | 13 | Councilmember Knox White stated Council policy direction requires a personal privacy analysis report; he does not see the report; inquired whether the evaluation has been done. The Assistant City Attorney responded that he has reviewed the privacy policy resolution, which did not require an analysis; if Council wants to have a written analysis, it can be provided. Councilmember Knox White stated there is Council direction which was used on a prior matter involving ALPRs for the Ferry Terminal parking; staff is aware of the policy. The City Manager stated that he initially forwarded the email request from Councilmember Knox White to the Police Chief and the Assistant City Attorney; staff will look into the privacy policy further. Councilmember Knox White stated part of the Council direction about bringing the ALPR matter back to Council included bringing studies of effectiveness; he does not see any studies which show an effective drop in crime; inquired whether or not ALPRs have an impact on crime. The Police Chief responded a study was attached; stated not many studies look at ALPRs; cases which have been cleared or closed do not indicate that the closure is directly due to ALPR; ALPR is a tool; the study looked at any words associated with ALPR to see whether there was a connection; similarly, solving a case is not due to the surveillance video itself, but to all evidence; many researchers have found challenges when looking for success rates associated with ALPRs; he is looking at the matter as qualitative and quantitative; it has been difficult to find quantitative data; qualitative data shows strong support from agencies utilizing ALPRs; many agencies are looking to expand ALPR programs and find value in the equipment; he has seen value in the technology and in the ability to identify specific vehicles, rather than having a vague description. Councilmember Herrera Spencer stated that she is unsure of when the direction for written analysis of privacy was given; inquired whether the work done by City staff satisfies the prior Council's direction. Mayor Ezzy Ashcraft requested clarification about the privacy analysis. The Assistant City Attorney stated that he has reviewed the Council-adopted resolution from December 2019 that sets forth a number of overall privacy principles; the resolution contained three components: a list of general principals, the internal or administrative rules adopted by the City Manager regarding privacy of information technology that does not apply to uses consistent with legitimate law enforcement purpose and a final component related to facial recognition technology; he did not see anything in his review that appeared inconsistent with Council's general direction of allowing limited retention of certain materials that could impact privacy, as long as it is used consistent with a law enforcement purpose and not in conjunction with facial recognition technology. Councilmember Herrera Spencer inquired whether the City Attorney's opinion is that Council may proceed with the matter. Regular Meeting Alameda City Council December 21, 2021 | CityCouncil/2021-12-21.pdf |