HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-05-09 Tech Privacy Task Force Post Agenda Packet City of Chula Vista
Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force
**POST-MEETING AGENDA**
Date:Monday, May 9, 2022
Time:6:00 p.m.
Location:Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA
Meeting Agenda
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER
2.ROLL CALL
3.PUBLIC COMMENTS - ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 3
Any individual may address the task force on any matter within the subject area
of the task force that is not on the agenda. Speakers will have a maximum of
two minutes to provide their comments. A maximum of 20 minutes will be
provided for public comment at this time. Speakers will be called in the order in
which their requests to speak are received. If, after 20 minutes, there are still
individuals in the queue to speak, they will be provided an opportunity to speak
after the business items have concluded.
4.BUSINESS ITEMS
4.1.Presentation on existing state and federal law 6
The Chula Vista City Attorney's Office will provide an overview of existing
state and federal laws that govern the use of technology and privacy at
the local government level.
4.2.Presentation on privacy in other California cities 21
Madaffer Enterprises will provide an introductory overview of how other
California cities have approached privacy and technology advice and
oversight.
4.3.Discussion of public outreach plan 42
Madaffer Enterprises will engage task force members in a discussion of
the timing, location, audiences, format, and content of public outreach
events to gather community input to guide task force policy
recommendations.
5.PUBLIC COMMENTS - ITEMS ON THE AGENDA
Any individual may address the task force on any matter on the agenda.
Speakers will have a maximum of three minutes to provide their comments.
Speakers will be called in the order in which their requests to speak are
received.
6.STAFF COMMENTS
7.TASK FORCE MEMBER COMMENTS
8.ADJOURNMENT
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 2 of 42
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 3 of 42
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 4 of 42
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 5 of 42
5/9/2022
1
Overview of Data and Technology Laws
May 9, 2022
Simon Silva, Deputy City Attorney
1
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 6 of 42
5/9/2022
2
Overview of Data and Technology Laws
AGENDA
Purpose of presentation
Overview of types of data City collects
Relevant laws related to use of City data
Other relevant laws
2
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 7 of 42
5/9/2022
3
Overview of Data and Technology Laws
Issues to consider:
Right to Privacy vs. Public’s Right to Know (Public Records Act)
Records retention laws
Not all data protected by law.
Storage/security- look to industry standard and best practices
3
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 8 of 42
5/9/2022
4
Right to Privacy
Sources to a right to privacy include:
4TH Amendment
“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and
effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated and
no Warrants shall be issued, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or
affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched and the
person or things to be seized.”
California Constitution (Article 1, Section 1):
“All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable
rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty,
acquiring possessing, and protecting property, and pursing and
obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.”
Statutory rights
4
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 9 of 42
5/9/2022
5
Personal Information
Civil Code 1798.80(e)
Information that can be linked to identify a person
Name/signature
Physical characteristics
Address/phone number (email/IP address)
CDL, government ID Cards, passport, SSN, and insurance numbers
Employment and education history
Bank information, credit/debit card number, or other financial
information
Medical and health insurance information
5
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 10 of 42
5/9/2022
6
DATA-DATA-DATA
The City collects different types of data in its
operations:
It does so as an employer
Daily operations-Finance, DSD, Library, Recreation, Police, and Fire
Grant/Program reporting requirements
Technology it uses
6
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 11 of 42
5/9/2022
7
DATA-DATA-DATA
TYPES
Employer
•Job Applications
•Background checks
•Criminal History
•Medical
•Social Media
•Personnel Records
•Pay records, leave usage,
evaluations/discipline
documents
Daily Operations
•Financial Records
•DSD Permit Applications
•Library Records
•Police
•911 calls
•Criminal Histories
•Reports
•Evidence
•Fire –Call history/ Medical
Information
•Reporting Requirements
Technology
•Drones
•Face Recognition
•ALRP
•BWC
•Street cameras/traffic
•Medical EKG/Monitoring
devices
•Cell phones
•Computer systems
•Software
7
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 12 of 42
5/9/2022
8
Employer Data
Laws
Applications-NEOGOV
Background checks
Criminal History/Livescan
Federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)-notice of adverse action/copy of report relied upon, and right to dispute contents of report with report originator
California Consumer Credit Reporting Act (CCRA; Civil Code 1785.1 et. seq.)-State version of the FCRA
AB 1008 (“Ban the Box”)-describes when and how prior convictions can be used
Medical Records
HIPPA-to the extent they are “covered entities”-medical provider
California Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA)-waiver/release required
Social Media
AB 1844 (Cannot require disclosure of password/no shoulder peek)
8
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 13 of 42
5/9/2022
9
EMPLOYER
Personnel Records/Payroll
Names of employees and their salaries and benefits are public records
Labor Code 1198.5 -Right to review personnel record)
POBOR (Government Code section 3300 et. seq. )-adverse comments
FOBOR (Government Code section 3250 et. seq.)-adverse comments
Disclosure of specified Police Records
Penal Code 832.5 and Evidence Code 1043 (Pitchess)
SB 1421, SB 16, and SB 3
Collectively increased the types of police records that can be released under the CPRA
Incidents involving GBI/Death
Excessive Force
Dishonesty
Sexual assault
9
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 14 of 42
5/9/2022
10
Daily Operations
Laws
Finance-Billing records confidential per Government Code sections 6254.16 and
6255
Permit records-Public Records
Library Records- Confidential pursuant to Government Code 6254(j) and 6267
and Reader Privacy Act (Civil Code 1798.90(c))-shall not disclose information
regarding a book service or book
•Fire –Call history/medical treatment and billing- CPRA/HIPPA/CMIA
•Reporting requirements
•Grants have reporting requirements, including regarding demographics of persons
served
•Privacy Act of 1974-Requires HUD to allow persons whose records they have to see the
records, correct records, why gathered, and who has access. HUD policy requires
local agencies to protect the confidentiality of information.
•Software used
10
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 15 of 42
5/9/2022
11
Technology
•Drones
•4th Amendment
•Use of Facial Recognition or Biometric Surveillance technology prohibited. Sunsets 2023.
•Penal Code section 832.19(b)
•SB 1038-lifts sunset clause
•ALRP
•VC 2413-CHP requirements
•Civil Code sections 1798.29 and 1798.90.5
•Requires ALPR operator to have reasonable security procedures and practices that protects against unauthorized access, destruction, mutilation, use, or disclosure
•ALPR operator shall not share or sell ALPR information except to another public agency
•BWC
•Public Records Act GC 6254(f)(4) requires video of a critical incident be released within 45 days, subject to exceptions. A critical incident involves the discharge of firearm or use of force with GBI or death
11
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 16 of 42
5/9/2022
12
Technology
•Street/traffic cameras
•Medical EKG/Monitoring devices
•HIPPA and CMIA
•Cell phones
•San Jose Case
•Computer systems
•Best practices
•Software
Contractual
12
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 17 of 42
5/9/2022
13
Other Laws
Data Breach Notice (Civil Code section 1798.29)
Immediately following discovery disclose breach in conspicuous text-unless law enforcement investigation
Information about breach
Credit reporting agency contact info
California Online Privacy Protection Act of 2003 (CalOPPA) requires commercial websites to post privacy policy and include the following: kinds of info it gathers, how it will be shared, and mechanism to correct
California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018/Consumer Privacy Act Proposition 24 (effective 2023) (CCPA)
Requires businesses to post/provide policies regarding their data practices, consumer may require business to delete confidential information, and permits consumers to opt out of data sale/sharing. Requires reasonable measures.
13
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 18 of 42
5/9/2022
14
Other laws
CCPA continued: Adopted CIS security measures:
https://www.cisecurity.org/controls/cis-controls-list
Data Broker Registry
Civil Code 1998.99.80 (AB 1202) requires a data broker to register with California AG’s Office, which will the make information publicly available. A data broker is an entity that gathers and sells to a 3rd party consumer personal information.
California Values Act (SB 54)-law enforcement, subject to exceptions, shall not
Inquire on immigration status
Detain on basis of immigration hold
Provide info on release date (unless public record or specified criteria met)
Provide home address/work address
Participate in service of civil immigration warrants
Use as interpreters
Perform functions of immigration authorities
Allow office space to immigration authorities
Use jail facilities to house federal detainees
14
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 19 of 42
5/9/2022
15
Question?
15
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 20 of 42
1
Report on City Privacy Advisory Groups
January 31, 2022
Introduction
In January 2022, the City of Chula Vista established a new Technology and Privacy Oversight Task
Force. Members of this group are charged with developing recommendations for a comprehensive
technology and privacy oversight policy to the City Council by the end of 2022. This report is intended to
provide guidance and perspective from other cities across the U.S. that have appointed similar community
advisory groups.
In the past five years, a handful of cities have asked citizens to join task forces and commissions to advise
city officials on technology, innovation, and privacy in local government. Each of these cities has
implemented or considered a variety of new “smart city” technologies and encountered significant interest
among community members about how such powerful technologies are being used and managed.
Most of the task forces, boards and committees dedicated to reviewing city technology have been
established in California, but a few examples can be found in other states as well. This report focuses on
advisory groups in the following California cities: Long Beach, San Jose, Foster City, San Ramon,
Vallejo, Oakland, and Berkeley; as well as out-of-state groups in Seattle, Washington; and Portland,
Oregon.
Each group is borne out of city officials’ desire to craft policy and provide oversight with the assistance of
community members who have expertise and perspectives on the complex and evolving nature of new
technologies. The approach in each jurisdiction, however, has varied significantly in terms of the exact
purpose of the committee, its format, its membership, its powers, and whether it is permanent or
temporary.
Examples from other cities can be divided into three categories: privacy advisory bodies, which provide
policy recommendations specific to privacy policies; general advisory bodies, which provide a broad
range of advice and ideas to city officials; and surveillance oversight bodies, which focus on determining
policies for specific technologies and reviewing compliance with these policies.
Privacy advisory bodies
The cities of San Jose and Oakland have each hosted advisory committees or task forces intended to
provide specific feedback on the development of privacy-related policies.
The City of San Jose took a similar approach to the City of Chula Vista when it established a Digital
Privacy Advisory Taskforce in November 2018. The taskforce acts as a community advisory body to the
City’s Privacy Working Group, a group of key City staff with subject matter expertise on technology and
privacy. The taskforce is charged with validating and providing input on the City’s privacy policy and on
specific technological use cases.
The taskforce is composed of up to 10 members, including three members representing non-profit
advocacy groups such as ACLU and NAACP, two members representing the technology industry (such as
Cisco), two members from academia, two members with a law enforcement background, and one member
from another agency with an established and effective privacy program.
The San Jose taskforce originally met quarterly, but since the City Council adopted a privacy policy in
2020, the Taskforce’s meeting frequency has slowed to one to two meetings per year.
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 21 of 42
2
Similarly, the City of Oakland in 2014 established an ad hoc advisory committee for the specific purpose
of developing a privacy policy to govern the Domain Awareness Center, a security project that would
gather and share information between the City of Oakland and the Port of Oakland. The ad hoc advisory
committee completed its work of developing a policy for the Domain Awareness Center and also
developed a set of additional recommendations to the City Council, which included a recommendation
that the City Council create a permanent commission to advise the City on privacy-related issues. The
resulting permanent Privacy Advisory Commission was established in 2016; its role and function is
discussed later in this report.
General advisory bodies
The cities of Long Beach, San Ramon, and Foster City all have or had community groups dedicated to
providing general advice and feedback on the City’s use of technology.
In Long Beach, the Technology and Innovation Commission was established by ordinance in 2014. The
commission comprises seven members, with at least five members being residents of the City of Long
Beach. The commission includes one member with experience with technology startups/innovation; one
member with experience with mobile/app technology; one member with experience in technology and
education; and one member with experience in networking, servers or databases. The commission also
includes three at-large members. Members are limited to four consecutive two-year terms.
In San Ramon, the Innovation and Technology Advisory Committee was established by City Council
resolution in 2019. The committee is charged with providing recommendations and policy guidance on
smart city issues such as digital inclusion, mobility, economic growth and public safety. Committee
members include four representatives who work in the technology industry and three at-large members, as
well as two alternates. All members must either reside or work in the City of S an Ramon.
In Foster City, the Information Technology Advisory Committee met from 2017 to 2019 and provided a
general forum for the discussion of the role of technology in the city government. In a report summarizing
the committee’s first year of work, members noted that they struggled to establish a direction for the
committee because the City Council had not provided a clear mandate for the committee. “Having a
clearer direction or purpose in the beginning would have likely helped here,” the committee wrote.
The City of Portland, Oregon, established a Technology Oversight Committee in 2011 that serves in an
advisory capacity to the city’s Chief Administrative Officer. This independent committee includes five
members, each appointed by one member of the City Council. City departments are required to report
technology projects to the committee in the early conceptual and design phases if the project is likely to
have a widespread impact and present significant risk to the City’s financial and operational practices.
The committee is charged with making recommendations to City staff regarding potential issues of
proprietary data, copyright, security measures, business records, and other matters that may arise as a
result of a given technology project.
The City of Seattle, Washington established the Community Technology Advisory Board by ordinance
in 2015. The board reviews and makes recommendations to City officials. The 10-member board includes
one member representing public access to information technology, one member representing education,
one young adult member, and seven at-large members. Members must live or work in the City of Seattle.
The board includes a Privacy & Cybersecurity Committee whose mission is to ensure that residents’
personal data is protected by “sensible information security policies” and that residents are “free from
unchecked surveillance.”
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 22 of 42
3
Surveillance oversight bodies
The cities of Oakland, Berkeley, and Vallejo each have a body with formal duties delineated in the City
Charter or City Municipal Code. Each of these bodies is specifically focused on surveillance technology,
and each body has a formal role in approving the use of surveillance technology.
In the City of Berkeley, the Police Accountability Board is responsible for overseeing and approving the
City’s use of surveillance technology as defined in the Municipal Code. The City Council in 2018
adopted an ordinance governing the City’s acquisition and use of surveillance technology that requires the
City Council to approve any use, acquisition, data sharing or policy related to surveillance technology as
defined in the ordinance. Prior to City Council consideration, City staff must present a Surveillance
Acquisition Report and Surveillance Use Policy for each type of surveillance technology to the Police
Accountability Board. The role and function of the Police Accountability Board were modified by a City
Charter Amendment in 2020. The board includes nine members selected by the Mayor and City Council;
each member must be a resident of the City, may not be an employee of the City, and may not be a sworn
police officer of any agency. Board members serve four-year terms.
The City of Vallejo is in the process of establishing a new Surveillance Advisory Board. The board will
comprise seven members, each appointed by a member of the City Council and residing in that
councilmember’s district. The board member’s term will coincide with the term of the appointing
councilmember. The Surveillance Advisory Board is charged with reviewing surveillance technology as
defined in the Municipal Code, gathering public input on the use of technology, consulting with experts in
the field, and providing recommendations to the City Council on the purchase, borrowing, or use of the
technology. City departments are required to seek review by the Surveillance Advisory Board at least 45
days prior to finalizing the decision to acquire, borrow, or adopt a policy relating to the use of
surveillance technology, except in emergency situations.
The City of Oakland established the Privacy Advisory Commission in 2016. The commission is charged
with submitting reports and recommendations to the City Council regarding the City’s surveillance
ordinance, the City’s use of surveillance equipment, and the need for new or modified privacy and data
retention policies for new surveillance equipment. The commission consists of nine members, at least six
of whom must be Oakland residents. Members are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by a vote of at
least five members of the City Council. Members must demonstrate an interest in privacy rights through
work experience, civic participation, or political advocacy. Members should meet at least one of the
following criteria: attorney or activist; law enforcement; auditor or CPA; hardware, software or
encryption security professional; membership in an organization advocating government transparency and
openness. Members serve three-year terms.
In 2018, the Oakland City Council passed a surveillance oversight ordinance that requires City staff to
provide annual reports, impact reports, and use policies to the Privacy Advisory Commission and City
Council regarding new and existing surveillance technologies. The ordinance requires City staff to notify
the commission and obtain City Council approval prior to accepting state or federal funds or in-kind
donations for surveillance technology, prior to acquiring surveillance technology, prior to using new or
existing surveillance technology that has not previously been approved, and prior to sharing surveillance
data outside of the city government.
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 23 of 42
5/9/2022
1
CHULA VISTA, CA
Technology and Privacy Advisory Groups:
Examples from Other Cities
May 9, 2022
1
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 24 of 42
5/9/2022
2
CHULA VISTA, CA
Three Types of Groups
1. General Technology Advice
2. Privacy Advice
3. Surveillance Oversight
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 2
2
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 25 of 42
5/9/2022
3
CHULA VISTA, CA
Three Types of Groups
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 3
General Technology
Advisory
•Long Beach
•San Ramon
•Foster City
•Portland, OR
•Seattle, WA
Privacy Advisory
•San Jose
•Oakland
Surveillance
Oversight
•Oakland
•Berkeley
•Vallejo
3
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 26 of 42
5/9/2022
4
CHULA VISTA, CA
General Technology Advisory
•Long Beach: Technology and Innovation Commission
•San Ramon: Innovation and Technology Advisory Committee
•Foster City: Information Technology Advisory Committee
•Portland, Oregon: Technology Oversight Committee
•Seattle, Washington: Community Technology Advisory Board
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 4
4
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 27 of 42
5/9/2022
5
CHULA VISTA, CA
Long Beach
Technology and Innovation Commission
Key features:
•Appointed by Mayor and
reporting to the City Council
•Explore issues at the request of
the City Council
•No independent authority
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 5
5
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 28 of 42
5/9/2022
6
CHULA VISTA, CA
Long Beach
Technology and Innovation Commission
Membership:
•1 with experience in tech startups / innovation
•1 with experience in mobile / app technology
•1 with experience in technology / education
•1 with experience in networking
•3 at-large
Five of seven members must be Long Beach residents
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 6
6
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 29 of 42
5/9/2022
7
CHULA VISTA, CA
Long Beach
Technology and Innovation Commission
Recent projects:
•Equitable Data Collection Toolkit
•Data Privacy Guidelines Implementation
•Facial Recognition analysis and policy recommendations
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 7
7
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 30 of 42
5/9/2022
8
CHULA VISTA, CA
Three Types of Groups
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 8
General Technology
Advisory
•Long Beach
•San Ramon
•Foster City
•Portland, OR
•Seattle, WA
Privacy Advisory
•San Jose
•Oakland
Surveillance
Oversight
•Oakland
•Berkeley
•Vallejo
8
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 31 of 42
5/9/2022
9
CHULA VISTA, CA
Privacy Advisory
•San Jose: Digital Privacy Advisory Task Force
•Oakland: Ad Hoc Committee re Domain Awareness Center
•Chula Vista: Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 9
9
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 32 of 42
5/9/2022
10
CHULA VISTA, CA
San Jose
Digital Privacy Advisory Task Force
Key features:
•Reports to City staff
•City’s Digital Privacy Officer
•Digital Privacy Working Group
•Review and validate work of city staff
•No independent authority
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 10
10
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 33 of 42
5/9/2022
11
CHULA VISTA, CA
San Jose
Digital Privacy Advisory Task Force
Membership:
•3 from privacy advocacy organizations
•2 from technology industry
•2 from academia
•2 with law enforcement background
•1 from another public agency
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 11
11
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 34 of 42
5/9/2022
12
CHULA VISTA, CA
San Jose
Digital Privacy Advisory Task Force
Recent topics:
•Implementation of City privacy policy
•Privacy implications of traffic monitoring and traffic safety tech
•Privacy implications of San Jose PD public-facing crime dashboard
•Automated License Plate Reader data usage policies
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 12
12
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 35 of 42
5/9/2022
13
CHULA VISTA, CA
Three Types of Groups
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 13
General Technology
Advisory
•Long Beach
•San Ramon
•Foster City
•Portland, OR
•Seattle, WA
Privacy Advisory
•San Jose
•Oakland
Surveillance
Oversight
•Oakland
•Berkeley
•Vallejo
13
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 36 of 42
5/9/2022
14
CHULA VISTA, CA
Surveillance Oversight
Oakland: Privacy Advisory Commission
Berkeley: Police Accountability Board
Vallejo: Surveillance Advisory Board
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 14
14
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 37 of 42
5/9/2022
15
CHULA VISTA, CA
Oakland
Privacy Advisory Commission
Key features:
•Reports to City Council
•Implements Surveillance Technology Ordinance
•Use policies
•Impact assessments
•Annual reports
•Formal role in City management process
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 15
Photo Credit: Sanfranman59 / Wikipedia / CC BY-SA 3.0
15
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 38 of 42
5/9/2022
16
CHULA VISTA, CA
Oakland
Privacy Advisory Commission
Membership:
•Each councilmember nominates, Mayor appoints
•Nine members, with no more than two from each category:
•Attorney, legal scholar or activist in privacy
•Current or former law enforcement agent
•Auditor or CPA
•Hardware, software, or encryption security professional
•Advocate of open and transparent government
•Six of nine must be Oakland residents
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 16
16
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 39 of 42
5/9/2022
17
CHULA VISTA, CA
Oakland
Privacy Advisory Commission
Recent work:
•Review of security camera grant program
•Review use of Automated License Plate Readers by Oakland Department of
Transportation
•Review use of drones by Oakland Department of Transportation
May 9, 2022 Advisory Groups: Examples 17
17
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 40 of 42
5/9/2022
18
CHULA VISTA, CA
Questions and Discussion
18
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 41 of 42
Technology and Privacy Advisory Task Force
Community Outreach Discussion
May 9, 2022 - Agenda Item 4.3
The task force comprises 12 members representing diverse backgrounds and areas of expertise,
but there are many more perspectives that need to be considered in this city of 275,000 residents.
Madaffer Enterprises has been contracted to assist in the planning and execution of two to three
community outreach events to gather community feedback to assist task force members in their
work. These community outreach events are intended to supplement the other methods by which
the City is gathering feedback, including the public opinion survey, focus groups, accepting
written comments, and allowing live public comment at task force meetings.
The purpose of the community meetings is both to provide information about the issues of
privacy and technology in local government, as well as receive information about what is
important to residents in forthcoming policy recommendations.
In contrast to public comment at task force meetings, where members of the public must come to
City Hall and are limited to a couple minutes each, the vision for the community outreach events
is to provide a more informal and open-ended dialogue where residents have ample time to ask
questions and formulate ideas.
Madaffer Enterprises staff will facilitate the presentation and discussions at these meetings. Task
force members are welcome but not required to attend the community outreach meetings.
Madaffer Enterprises will take detailed notes and provide a thorough written summary to task
force members following the community meetings.
Task force members are asked to provide feedback and direction to Madaffer Enterprises on the
specifics of these community meetings. Some questions to consider:
• What days of the week and time of day should these meetings be held to ensure good
participation from a representative group of residents?
• Are there particular demographic groups or neighborhoods we should focus on?
• Should we partner with community organizations to help promote attendance and
engagement? If so, with whom should we partner, and how?
• Where should these meetings be held?
• Should we offer an online-only event?
• At what point in the process should these meetings be held?
DATE Technology & Privacy Advisory Task Force Agenda Page 42 of 42